If developers do sign theirs Apps Apple have no issue with side loading as they’ll have a mean to nuke theses Apps via cert revocation if one of theses App turn out to be a malware.
Maybe it’s that middle ground that is currently missing from iOS.
However one could rightly argue that for the sake of overall system performance on a mobile device preemptive curation is a better choice. It’s would be perceived equally (if not more) harsh is Apple nuked side loaded signed Apps for the reason of "Impairing performance". On MacOS they’re resorted to nuke only for security reason which is more acceptable.
Is Apple's best interest something it's customers should be striving for, or is freedom (even to shoot yourself in the foot) the higher priority one?
It's not quite a non-issue, but it's a small one, mostly due to the small userbase and Apple's efforts to quickly blacklist malware.
> they have a clean slate to design a security model "the right way" for apps distributed outside of the App Store
Apple's solution is very clearly "don't distribute outside the App Store".
> If users willingly choose to give up their information in exchange for a $20 gift card, isn't that their choice? I wouldn't do it, and you wouldn't do it, but as long as they're adults, isn't that kind of their choice?
One argument that I have heard (and am presenting without attaching my views on its validity) is that if anything goes wrong with someone's iPhone, they will blame Apple for their messed-up device rather than themselves. So it's in Apple's best interest to prevent people from being able to do stupid things.