Disappointed you’re jumping on this wagon. The concept that installing software from outside your system’s repository/store can be unwise, applies to Linux as well. The more third party repositories you have enabled, the higher the chance something will break. Elementary OS calls installing a .deb sideloading too. There is nothing wrong with the term.
iOS is the only system that can defend against schools and employers forcing their subjects to install spyware (this is probably what the EU is actually mad about). Until Linux has a solution to that, complaining about Apple’s solution is pointless.
"The more articles, blogs, tweets and videos use the term “sideloading” when talking about whether or not “installing software” is “dangerous”… the more people will begin to equate “sideloading” with “dangerous”."
An article / blog post with a title of "Sideloading is the DEVIL!" showing up in a list of internet search results seems like feeding the beast.
I believe both options should exist, but not for devices under an active support/organizational contract. Neither Google/Apple should be required to support apps that may violate specific behaviors/API/practices that are potentially malicious. With that said, if there is no support contract, the device is purchased outright, and the user wishes to waive their rights under the support contract, or the hw/sw is considered legacy and abandoned then you should be able to remove any security. Secure Enclave, Knox, or whatever else stands in the way without tripping an arbitrary "fuse". Especially in the last case where users have the power to continue using their devices rather than sending them to a landfill and creating even more e-waste.
The idea that software is more secure because it is delivered by a proprietary store controlled by a commercial entity is ridiculous. What exactly do you expect? Apple is code reviewing every App? *lol* Yes, they can block/delete an app from *your device* once they are made aware of an issue, but that's a property of signing software not the App Store.
@com.B of course one can install malicious software if not careful ... so the solution is to not be able to install software other then through the 'approved' channel? It's perfectly fine for you to decide you only want Apps from the App Store -- that is your choice. But your choice shouldn't mean that I CANNOT install whatever I want onto the device I own. Makes sense?
Disappointed you’re jumping on this wagon. The concept that installing software from outside your system’s repository/store can be unwise, applies to Linux as well. The more third party repositories you have enabled, the higher the chance something will break. Elementary OS calls installing a .deb sideloading too. There is nothing wrong with the term.
iOS is the only system that can defend against schools and employers forcing their subjects to install spyware (this is probably what the EU is actually mad about). Until Linux has a solution to that, complaining about Apple’s solution is pointless.
"The more articles, blogs, tweets and videos use the term “sideloading” when talking about whether or not “installing software” is “dangerous”… the more people will begin to equate “sideloading” with “dangerous”."
An article / blog post with a title of "Sideloading is the DEVIL!" showing up in a list of internet search results seems like feeding the beast.
Great stuff, Bryan.
I'm still using my 2013 iMac. When finances get a little more stable, I'm getting a Dell all-in-one and going full Penguin.
I believe both options should exist, but not for devices under an active support/organizational contract. Neither Google/Apple should be required to support apps that may violate specific behaviors/API/practices that are potentially malicious. With that said, if there is no support contract, the device is purchased outright, and the user wishes to waive their rights under the support contract, or the hw/sw is considered legacy and abandoned then you should be able to remove any security. Secure Enclave, Knox, or whatever else stands in the way without tripping an arbitrary "fuse". Especially in the last case where users have the power to continue using their devices rather than sending them to a landfill and creating even more e-waste.
The idea that software is more secure because it is delivered by a proprietary store controlled by a commercial entity is ridiculous. What exactly do you expect? Apple is code reviewing every App? *lol* Yes, they can block/delete an app from *your device* once they are made aware of an issue, but that's a property of signing software not the App Store.
@com.B of course one can install malicious software if not careful ... so the solution is to not be able to install software other then through the 'approved' channel? It's perfectly fine for you to decide you only want Apps from the App Store -- that is your choice. But your choice shouldn't mean that I CANNOT install whatever I want onto the device I own. Makes sense?