Apple claims that by preventing users from sideloading apps, it is offering them a choice to choose a platform that’s right for their privacy needs.
As the debate around an iPhone user’s ability to download apps from third-party stores intensifies, Apple has made it clear that the company is actually providing users with choice by blocking sideloading. That choice is Android, which allows users to download apps from virtually any website or digital storefront on the internet. However, discussing the merits and demerits of sideloading is not as easy as it looks on the surface.
Earlier this month, Tim Cook said in an interview that allowing sideloading will destroy the security measures Apple has in place to ensure that apps are free from malicious content. The Apple chief is referring to the standard vetting protocol — a mix of machine and human review — that is strictly followed for all apps that are listed on the App Store. Apple claims that this stringent security policy is what makes iPhone a safer alternative to Android. Interestingly, the company allows sideloading of apps on macOS, but also admits that the level of malware on Mac platform is unacceptable.
In an interview with Fast Company, Apple’s head of user privacy, Erik Neuenschwander said, “Sideloading in this case is actually eliminating choice.” The clear indication being that Apple is actually providing choice by offering a platform that does not allow sideloading. The Apple executive added that, with the doors of sideloading closed, iPhone users know that they won’t end up downloading malicious apps from a third-party repository. However, this approach is also what has led to Apple being called a monopoly, due to its tight control over the app distribution channel.
Sideloading Robs Users Of A Safe Ecosystem
While Apple’s own human and automated checks are crucial, enforcing guidelines that make it mandatory for developers to disclose what data their apps are collecting and the permissions they have is equally important. These guidelines ensure that users are aware of an app’s actions, and they can choose to allow or revoke them if they so desire. Neuenschwander argued that apps downloaded from third-party stores lack Apple’s security checks and may trick users into allowing access to information, such as data, location, and the mic. Apple even published a 16-page report recently which provides a detailed explanation of how the company performs a multi-layer security check before an application is listed on the App Store. Citing a study, Apple also claims that Android phones are fifteen times more likely to harbor malware than an iPhone, and a key reason behind that is the freedom to download apps from third-party sources.
Just like Apple, Google also follows a strict vetting process to check apps for malware. Even though it recommends users to download apps only from the Play Store, it doesn’t prevent them from doing so, unlike Apple. From a user’s perspective, an iPhone provides a safer ecosystem where users can worry less about malicious apps infecting their phone and leading to scenarios like ransomware or ill-natured tracking. However, antitrust advocates argue that limiting app downloads to the App Store is a way of ensuring that Apple can continue to take its cut of revenue – which can be up to 30% – from all in-app payments. Apple is also facing allegations that its App Store rules are discriminatory in nature and stifle competition.
RELATED
Source: 24baze
Folow us on https://www.pinterest.com/links20319/