Thank you for writing this down and sharing it here!
I’ve been eager to read ever since the last thread.
I think it’s too much effort for too little gain in the context of sideloading: using a free account over WiFi doesn’t require any manual intervention after first setup, nor Apple to notarize and approve each dev’s app update. The biggest caveat with normal sideloading is the security hit as part of developer mode (reason for which I don’t use it on my phone, only an iPad that mostly stays home).
See AltStore for one normal sideloading option if you’re not familiar with them.
The balance will likely shift over time both for people living in the US given the political climate, and elsewhere, given what’s already in motion in the EU to force Apple to comply for real instead of the current bullshit.
Also shootout for creating DoesiOSHaveSideloadingYet.com!
It’s a good resource for technical people looking to learn about the current situation. I’ll recommend it and use it as a reference.
The site is mentioned in the article (I didn’t know of it before), and I wanted to comment about it here mostly for Lobsters’ visibility :)
You could mention sideloading is the default on most computers in the security section. And also in the explanation of sideloading. I usually say something along the lines of “it’s what you do on your computer to install something: go to the app’s website and download it!”
Thanks for your input! I probably should’ve posted the DIHSY site instead of the blog post tbh, since it probably enables more opportunities for discussion than the blog post does.
You could mention sideloading is the default on most computers in the security section. And also in the explanation of sideloading. I usually say something along the lines of “it’s what you do on your computer to install something: go to the app’s website and download it!”
Both good ideas.
I was wondering what you thought of the definition of sideloading provided in the “What would it mean for iOS to have sideloading?” section. It’s a very new word and it’s tricky to precisely define, especially with the existence of stuff like web apps and jailbreaking. The goal was to provide a definition that the community can largely agree on, based on the current implementation of sideloading on other devices, while also trying to be fair to Apple and not to demand more than would be reasonable from them.
People have brought up the fact that you can install apps using Xcode or AltStore. This is something that was already mentioned on the website, but I’d like to elaborate on why I don’t think it means that iOS “supports” sideloading. Considering that the pricing on the Apple Developer Program could change at any time, or the requirements for membership could change, and the fact that the program simply isn’t designed for the purpose of sideloading and Apple really only wants you to sign up if you’re uploading apps to the App Store, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that a device doesn’t support sideloading unless you can at least permanently install sideloaded apps. As it stands, you’re not really “installing” an app, but rather “test-driving” it for a short period before it will deactivate itself – and that aligns with the stated purpose of the Developer Program as explained on Apple’s website:
Join the Apple Developer Program to reach customers around the world on the App Store for all Apple platforms.
Anyway, I hope it’s clear that it’s a matter of freedom rather than a matter of saving money. I could easily afford the $100/yr, but not everyone can, and this requirement is antithetical to the development of a healthy FOSS ecosystem on iOS. In addition, I simply cannot justify the expenditure considering that unrestricted sideloading is available for $0 on almost every other computing device in existence. I’d think that most people feel the same way.
That being said: I’m still trying to decide whether or not I should leave in the “free of charge, or for a reasonable one-time fee” bit in the definition. I personally wouldn’t be too upset if the only thing Apple did was remove the 1 year expiration date from paid development certificates, and I would be inclined to change the “No” to a “Yes” in that case. You could write off the developer fee as a “subscription to Xcode”, which you would only have to pay if you’re actively updating your apps, and one that you aren’t locked in to forever. But I know that people will disagree.
Sorry for the late reply! I didn’t want to give you a half baked response :)
I was wondering what you thought of the definition of sideloading provided in the “What would it mean for iOS to have sideloading?” section.
Here’s how I’d rewrite the first sentence:
Sideloading support means end users can install apps developed and distributed without the involvement of the device manufacturer or distributor, with no limitations compared to apps distributed within the manufacturer’s walled garden.
That should cover nativity (if I can misuse that word lol), entitlements, time limits, and whatever other restrictions are imposed.
I’m not sure how to phrase “device manufacturer or distributor” nicely so it’s both short, obvious/understandable, and covers all cases (iOS where a single company does everything and Android/most computers where there’s more than one player).
This definition does exclude macOS, and likely other platforms I’m not as familiar with, based on notarization being involvement of the manufacturer. I think that’s fair since if Apple were to stop notarizing apps for any reason, non-sanctioned apps would no longer be viable.
So I’d call macOS’ sideloading limited/partial.
That being said: I’m still trying to decide whether or not I should leave in the “free of charge, or for a reasonable one-time fee” bit in the definition.
I’d personally not be totally closed to paying a reasonable one time fee, but I think in the grand scheme of things it’s not good to paywall what I think is an essential freedom every hardware owner should have.
Looking at the website again, maybe the “Sideloading in the EU” section could be closer to “Which countries are legislating sideloading?” so that the definition is first and immediately visible.
Also maybe split the history into its own section so the actual definition is clearly short and people don’t hesitate to read it.
Thanks again for the suggestions. I like the paragraph you provided, so I stole it.
This definition does exclude macOS
Notarization isn’t required on macOS, though it is highly recommended, and I personally think that’s fine. I’m not seeking to try and tell companies exactly how they should implement sideloading, and if they only want to make it available to powerusers who aren’t afraid of going through some steps to access it, that’s okay with me.
According to the reverse engineered documentation, iPhone Mirroring is indeed one of the features toggled by countryd, so you might be able to access it temporarily by following these instructions. However, there seems to be no grace period on this feature, so you’d probably lose access to it as soon as your iPhone realizes it’s not outside the EU (which might be immediately after you take it out of the faraday cage). And according to Apple’s documentation, it only works over Wi-Fi/Bluetooth and not over USB, so keeping Airplane Mode enabled before removing it from the cage wouldn’t work.
Thank you for writing this down and sharing it here!
I’ve been eager to read ever since the last thread.
I think it’s too much effort for too little gain in the context of sideloading: using a free account over WiFi doesn’t require any manual intervention after first setup, nor Apple to notarize and approve each dev’s app update. The biggest caveat with normal sideloading is the security hit as part of developer mode (reason for which I don’t use it on my phone, only an iPad that mostly stays home).
See AltStore for one normal sideloading option if you’re not familiar with them.
The balance will likely shift over time both for people living in the US given the political climate, and elsewhere, given what’s already in motion in the EU to force Apple to comply for real instead of the current bullshit.
Also shootout for creating DoesiOSHaveSideloadingYet.com!
It’s a good resource for technical people looking to learn about the current situation. I’ll recommend it and use it as a reference.
The site is mentioned in the article (I didn’t know of it before), and I wanted to comment about it here mostly for Lobsters’ visibility :)
You could mention sideloading is the default on most computers in the security section. And also in the explanation of sideloading. I usually say something along the lines of “it’s what you do on your computer to install something: go to the app’s website and download it!”
Thanks for your input! I probably should’ve posted the DIHSY site instead of the blog post tbh, since it probably enables more opportunities for discussion than the blog post does.
Both good ideas.
I was wondering what you thought of the definition of sideloading provided in the “What would it mean for iOS to have sideloading?” section. It’s a very new word and it’s tricky to precisely define, especially with the existence of stuff like web apps and jailbreaking. The goal was to provide a definition that the community can largely agree on, based on the current implementation of sideloading on other devices, while also trying to be fair to Apple and not to demand more than would be reasonable from them.
People have brought up the fact that you can install apps using Xcode or AltStore. This is something that was already mentioned on the website, but I’d like to elaborate on why I don’t think it means that iOS “supports” sideloading. Considering that the pricing on the Apple Developer Program could change at any time, or the requirements for membership could change, and the fact that the program simply isn’t designed for the purpose of sideloading and Apple really only wants you to sign up if you’re uploading apps to the App Store, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that a device doesn’t support sideloading unless you can at least permanently install sideloaded apps. As it stands, you’re not really “installing” an app, but rather “test-driving” it for a short period before it will deactivate itself – and that aligns with the stated purpose of the Developer Program as explained on Apple’s website:
Anyway, I hope it’s clear that it’s a matter of freedom rather than a matter of saving money. I could easily afford the $100/yr, but not everyone can, and this requirement is antithetical to the development of a healthy FOSS ecosystem on iOS. In addition, I simply cannot justify the expenditure considering that unrestricted sideloading is available for $0 on almost every other computing device in existence. I’d think that most people feel the same way.
That being said: I’m still trying to decide whether or not I should leave in the “free of charge, or for a reasonable one-time fee” bit in the definition. I personally wouldn’t be too upset if the only thing Apple did was remove the 1 year expiration date from paid development certificates, and I would be inclined to change the “No” to a “Yes” in that case. You could write off the developer fee as a “subscription to Xcode”, which you would only have to pay if you’re actively updating your apps, and one that you aren’t locked in to forever. But I know that people will disagree.
Sorry for the late reply! I didn’t want to give you a half baked response :)
Here’s how I’d rewrite the first sentence:
That should cover nativity (if I can misuse that word lol), entitlements, time limits, and whatever other restrictions are imposed.
I’m not sure how to phrase “device manufacturer or distributor” nicely so it’s both short, obvious/understandable, and covers all cases (iOS where a single company does everything and Android/most computers where there’s more than one player).
This definition does exclude macOS, and likely other platforms I’m not as familiar with, based on notarization being involvement of the manufacturer. I think that’s fair since if Apple were to stop notarizing apps for any reason, non-sanctioned apps would no longer be viable.
So I’d call macOS’ sideloading limited/partial.
I’d personally not be totally closed to paying a reasonable one time fee, but I think in the grand scheme of things it’s not good to paywall what I think is an essential freedom every hardware owner should have.
Looking at the website again, maybe the “Sideloading in the EU” section could be closer to “Which countries are legislating sideloading?” so that the definition is first and immediately visible.
Also maybe split the history into its own section so the actual definition is clearly short and people don’t hesitate to read it.
Thanks again for the suggestions. I like the paragraph you provided, so I stole it.
Notarization isn’t required on macOS, though it is highly recommended, and I personally think that’s fine. I’m not seeking to try and tell companies exactly how they should implement sideloading, and if they only want to make it available to powerusers who aren’t afraid of going through some steps to access it, that’s okay with me.
That’s downright nifty!
as a European, I’d be interested to access iphone mirroring, which for now is non-EU. would this work the other way around too?
According to the reverse engineered documentation, iPhone Mirroring is indeed one of the features toggled by
countryd, so you might be able to access it temporarily by following these instructions. However, there seems to be no grace period on this feature, so you’d probably lose access to it as soon as your iPhone realizes it’s not outside the EU (which might be immediately after you take it out of the faraday cage). And according to Apple’s documentation, it only works over Wi-Fi/Bluetooth and not over USB, so keeping Airplane Mode enabled before removing it from the cage wouldn’t work.