Hacker News Reader

Comment by jedberg | Hacker News Reader

Exactly. Imagine how much criticism Apple could avoid if they allowed side loading. Heck, make it complicated and require a Mac desktop/laptop.

Even then at least power users would be happy. At least I could load up apps that aren’t approved without having to jailbreak.

View on HN

Power users can use Android.

The problem with side loading us social engineering attacks.

Imagine how many iPhone users could be persuaded to sideload ‘corona 5g bioshield app detunes the software radio in your phone away from the harmful frequencies the NWO is trying to expose us to’.

> Power users can use Android.

I've tried Android, I don't like it. Apple has put a lot more thought into their UX. Also the Apple hardware is better.

Telling someone to use Android because they want control of their iPhone is a ridiculous argument because they aren't substitutes for each other.

> The problem with side loading us social engineering attacks.

Exactly, which is why I said to make it hard to side load. Require you to run an app on a Mac laptop and write some code to make it work. Make it so that there are so many steps that only the most dedicated are interested. But just make it possible.

And besides, somehow Android doesn't seem to have a widespread problem with this, despite allowing side loading.

Android has an enormous malware problem with million node botnets etc.

Exploiters don’t need to leverage side loading because the platform and store are insecure enough as it is.

As to making it into a huge pain to sideload, what you want is already available. You can install whatever you like by downloading XCode.

> You can install whatever you like by downloading XCode.

Only if the source is available. Or the creator is under their 100 user limit.

See my other answer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23227769

> Require you to run an app on a Mac laptop and write some code to make it work. Make it so that there are so many steps that only the most dedicated are interested. But just make it possible.

Can't you do exactly that with xcode?

> Can't you do exactly that with xcode?

Only if the source is available. Or the creator is under their 100 user limit.

There is no way for someone to make an iPhone app and put it up online and let anyone who wants to download it and install it.

Ok - but that’s not what you said. We’ve agreed that would lead to the problems already outlined.

The seven day certificate expiration duration also makes this largely impractical.

The parent said: “Make it so that there are so many steps that only the most dedicated are interested. But just make it possible.“

I consider ‘impractical’ (not practicable) to not rise to ‘possible’.

> Imagine how many iPhone users could be persuaded to sideload ‘corona 5g bioshield app detunes the software radio in your phone away from the harmful frequencies the NWO is trying to expose us to’.

Less than 0.5% of them, apparently.

But also, what do you care what idiots do? Nobody is forcing you to install it on your phone. Freedom of choice is not an obligation to choose poorly.

0.5% of 2.5 billion is 125 million. Is sideload malware irrelevant because “only” 125 million phones have flicked the sideloading switch?

I think there’s good reason for the sideload feature to be there, but your argument seems to be about it being unimportant because 0.5% isn’t a big percentage.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/7/18528297/google-io-2019-an...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com