Does iOS have sideloading yet?

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Current State of iOS “Sideloading”

  • iOS technically allows installing custom apps via Xcode or a paid developer account.
  • Practical barriers: need a Mac, Xcode, developer skills, and dealing with signing hoops (7‑day expiry for free accounts, yearly for paid).
  • $99/year developer program is seen as not “real” sideloading, because:
    • It’s intended for App Store developers, not end users.
    • Certificates can be revoked; Apple remains in control.
  • AltStore “classic” can use the same mechanism; the EU AltStore variant is more restricted (Apple‑approved apps only).

Security vs Freedom / Walled Garden

  • Pro‑walled‑garden side:
    • Many explicitly choose iOS to protect non‑technical family from scams.
    • Real anecdotes of relatives being walked through installing fake banking apps on Android.
    • Fear that any simple “enable sideloading” toggle will be socially engineered (“tap OK three times”).
    • Some users say they actively want a locked‑down phone and less “tinkering.”
  • Pro‑sideloading side:
    • App Review is fallible; scam apps have made it through.
    • macOS/Windows already allow arbitrary installs; phones are just general‑purpose computers.
    • Suggestions: hide sideloading behind developer mode, scary warnings, device wipe, or parental/“old person mode” controls.
    • Argument that we shouldn’t restrict everyone’s device just to protect the least savvy.

Economics, 30% Cut, and Competition

  • Disagreement whether most users “care” about sideloading; some say if apps were ~30% cheaper, they would.
  • Some services already avoid in‑app purchases (Netflix, Spotify, YouTube) due to Apple’s cut.
  • Apple forbids steering users to cheaper web prices or offering discounts for paying outside the app; Epic’s Fortnite case cited.
  • Counterpoints:
    • Not all devs would pass on the 30% as lower prices.
    • Small developers pay 15% on the first $1M; actual uplift might be closer to ~18% for many.

Ownership, Regulation, and Market Power

  • “It’s their platform” vs “It’s my phone” is a core fault line.
  • Critics liken Apple to ISPs or carmakers who would be banned from locking out third‑party parts or sites.
  • Phones are argued to be de‑facto infrastructure: duopoly, strong network effects, unrealistic to “just build your own phone/OS.”
  • Some support EU‑style regulation (USB‑C precedent, DMA) to curb gatekeeping and oligopsony; others distrust regulators and prefer funding open competitors instead.

Demand and Developer Use Cases

  • Suggested latent demand: Fortnite, in‑app subscriptions in Netflix/Kindle, niche or open‑source tools that can’t justify App Store hurdles.
  • Hobbyists mention home automation controllers, terminal/emulator apps, and specialized tools (e.g., a lyrics translator) blocked or economically impossible under current rules.
  • $100/year is a recurring deterrent for hobby and open‑source projects; friction also discourages casual code modification and bazaar‑style collaboration.

Piracy, Malware, and Console Analogies

  • Anti‑sideloading arguments emphasize:
    • Direct IPA installs would make piracy trivial, mirroring high APK piracy rates on Android.
    • Expanded attack surface for spyware using private APIs.
  • Pro‑sideloading replies:
    • Piracy has always existed; copy‑protection is a developer problem.
    • iOS sandboxing, encryption, notarization, and potential attestation can limit abuse.
  • Debate over whether phones should be treated more like consoles (locked, curated) or PCs (open, user‑controlled); several see Apple’s “console” framing as disingenuous given how central phones are to daily life.