This has never been a secret.

Google literally spent most of a decade preaching that the "freedom" their platform afforded to sideload software was a major competitive advantage, and then attacked a developer who was making use of that freedom to make a large profit without giving Google a cut.

But you could still do it, you just get a lot of warnings that you probably shouldn't unless you know what you're doing. AFAIK I can't do that on my iPad at all.

Also, with Fortnite specifically, they proved the worries right immediately: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanwhitwam/2018/08/25/epic-gam...

Epic is obviously exaggerating. Android lets you enable local app installs in like 2 clicks including a safety message. Complaining about this is like complaining about windows UAT (I expect Epic will complain about that next).

There were a lot of complaints about UAT when it was first introduced, claiming it was too confusing for casual users. It was a factor in the huge unpopularity of Vista.

Anyone could get a developer account and compile the code and deploy it to their phone if the app owner released the source code.

This could be a crucial argument in that it distinguishes between the essential freedom of device owners to decide what software to run, and the freedom of device manufacturers to decide which apps to sell in their stores and at what terms (still subject to anti-trust laws).

Unfortunately, the $99 annual fee per developer account nullifies any possible mass-market sideloading possibilities. (Imagine what could happen if sideloading apps from source was free just highly impractical, and HEY turned their rage into a free Apple developer account management & sideloading SaaS offering.)

While there are restrictions, free developer accounts can support installation onto your own devices.

Jailbreaking the device is free, easily reversible, and allows you to run any software you like.

Makes sense for Apple to make developer accounts free while publishing to the store cost money.