> One store may allow some content while another may prohibit it.
Yes, that's a good thing.
> How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party stores?
This seems like a non-problem. Sandboxing is a local OS feature.
> e.g. what happens if a store starts writing malware?
The same thing that happens when the apple and google app stores do that. Reputation loss, or more likely: Nothing.
> How will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse?
Why does it have to be? Why can't the used give an app the permission to act as an app store and install apps? This permission exists in android but can only be granted by the phone vendor (or google)
> Controversial content like porn may still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling on such matters, rendering moot the freedom of third-party stores in what kind of apps they may offer.
It shouldn't be.
> iOS Parental Control and Screen Time restrictions may be ineffective on other stores (and browsers too if third-party rendering engines were allowed).
How so? Especially screen time restrictions is a non-issue for different stores. How is the rendering engine for a browser the restricting factor for content control?
All other points are questions of convenience.
Also many of these problems have the opposite too:
* What about content that is deemed inappropriate by apple, but users don't share that value judgement?
* What about web features that are not implemented by safari, but users might want?
* What about apps that are not implemented for iOS because the developers don't want to or can not abide by apples rules or got removed by apple for no clear reason?
> Yes, that's a good thing. re: One store may allow some content while another may prohibit it.
Please don't half-quote selectively: "Developers will no longer all play by the same rules."
> This seems like a non-problem. Sandboxing is a local OS feature. re: How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party stores?
For an app to be sandboxed it must be submitted to Apple and signed. Ergo: You would have to go through Apple anyway.
> The same thing that happens when the apple and google app stores do that. Reputation loss, or more likely: Nothing. re: what happens if a store starts writing malware?
There has been no cross-app malware on the iOS App Store.
> Why does it have to be? re: How will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse?
If a third-party store and/or the apps served by it contain malware, but users aren't aware of it (e.g. cryptocurrency mining, data harvesting, and other silent exploitation of users' devices), it's good to have someone who is able to remotely shut those apps down.
> It shouldn't be. re: Controversial content like porn may still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling...
...are you seriously saying porn and "adult" apps (like prostitution services and even more questionable material) should be allowed on Apple devices?
You're literally out to forcibly dismantle the entire value proposition of a company's products.
Are you going to force Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo to do the same for their consoles? Why only Apple? Just because they're too successful? They became this successful because of these restrictions. People want a curated platform.
> How so? Especially screen time restrictions is a non-issue for different stores. How is the rendering engine for a browser the restricting factor for content control? re: iOS Parental Control and Screen Time restrictions may be ineffective on other stores (and browsers too if third-party rendering engines were allowed).
They have to go through the official APIs to adhere to system-wide content restrictions set by a user, which requires reviewing and signing by Apple, otherwise they could just skip the official APIs and ignore any parental control settings etc.
> All other points are questions of convenience.
You haven't given any solutions to any of the questions, other than:
• Don't use it.
• It's not a problem.
The same answers apply to the status quo:
• Don't use Apple devices.
• A single App Store is not a problem for the majority of users:
Yes, that's a good thing.
> How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party stores?
This seems like a non-problem. Sandboxing is a local OS feature.
> e.g. what happens if a store starts writing malware?
The same thing that happens when the apple and google app stores do that. Reputation loss, or more likely: Nothing.
> How will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse?
Why does it have to be? Why can't the used give an app the permission to act as an app store and install apps? This permission exists in android but can only be granted by the phone vendor (or google)
> Controversial content like porn may still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling on such matters, rendering moot the freedom of third-party stores in what kind of apps they may offer.
It shouldn't be.
> iOS Parental Control and Screen Time restrictions may be ineffective on other stores (and browsers too if third-party rendering engines were allowed).
How so? Especially screen time restrictions is a non-issue for different stores. How is the rendering engine for a browser the restricting factor for content control?
All other points are questions of convenience.
Also many of these problems have the opposite too:
* What about content that is deemed inappropriate by apple, but users don't share that value judgement? * What about web features that are not implemented by safari, but users might want? * What about apps that are not implemented for iOS because the developers don't want to or can not abide by apples rules or got removed by apple for no clear reason?