> iOS started out with side-loading

I don't recall sideloading ever being a thing iOS started out with. There was a trivial jailbreak and very easy third party app store install for jailbroken devices, but that was essentially a defect and not something iOS was designed for.

Yes, that's what I'm writing about. The feature existed (whether Apple wanted it, or in this case, not). Then they removed it.

They didn't remove the feature. They fixed the security bug.

You can sideload apps to your own device using a free developer account.

While acknowledging that most users are not a developer? Compare it with computer (desktop/laptop) market. Users can install any software they found in internet that they trust it is safe.

How well has the average consumer been able to ascertain the “safety” of apps on PCs over the last two decades?”

OK, but the usual counter-argument against the claim that there is genuine security benefit in the current situation, is that “nobody will use it”, “hide it several levels deep in settings”, or whatever.

You can’t have it both ways.

> While acknowledging that most users are not a developer?

You don't have to be "a developer" to install, for instance, the sort of retro-gaming emulator you use to play classic console games. You just need a free developer account Apple ID.

> Through an app called AltStore, you can install emulators onto your phone through a method called sideloading. If you're unfamiliar with the term, sideloading is installing software without using the App Store.

https://www.pocketgamer.com/next-level-gaming/how-to-install...

This is not at all comparable to proper sideloading/allowing third party access. For starters, unless you pay Apple 100 bucks a year for a developer certificate, you're going to need to renew the application every week and you're capped to 3 applications at most. AltStore does some fancy stuff (by which I mean that you need to run a separate application on your PC which can handle the renewal requests - that's what AltServer is) to minimize the difficulty of this as much as possible, but that's still the rules Apple works with.

Secondly, Apple severely limits the capabilities of sideloaded applications - those emulators for example aren't allowed to make use of JIT, or Just-In-Time compilation, which is extremely important for decent emulation. This is also the main reason nobody has even tried to bring over a non-Safari browser using this method - you practically need it to have a browser that's decently usable.

It's practically useless outside of development purposes. AltStore is a pile of (very impressive) hacks to get around a system that's crippled by design.

Compare and contrast to Android, where the only difference between the Play Store and a regular application is that the Play Store doesn't get the regular installation window (something which is set to change in the next version of Android, so that alternate stores can also request this permission).

Either way - this doesn't matter. The Digital Services Act has already been passed in the EU, and Apple is going to have to offer third parties proper access to iOS without being allowed to gatekeep the App Store.

> This is not at all comparable to proper sideloading/allowing third party access.

This is goalpost moving. The original claim was that it was impossible to sideload apps.

It doesn't nullify the app permissions system, but it's definitely sideloading.

iOS didn't start with side-loading. Do you have a source for this ?

What mullingtover refers to.

The first App Store was Cydia. Technically side-loading with how Apple failed to predict the dedication of breaking the (trivial, at the time) security to add more native apps to the home screen. https://www.engadget.com/2008/02/28/debian-style-installatio...

Poor security wasn't a feature.

Did removing this "bug" make things any more secure than, say, welding the bios chip to a motherboard?

Genuinely, who do you think is convinced by your comment? You aren’t a lawyer making your case to a jury of dopes. You aren’t going to win everyone over with empty emotive language like “crushed”.

To argue that the existence of Cydia means that “Apple started out with side-loading” is intellectually dishonest. I know it, and I know that you know it. If you have a real argument, you shouldn’t need to resort to this.

> Genuinely, who do you think is convinced by your comment?

People like me who aren't programmers, or even power users anymore.

> I know it, and I know that you know it.

A long time ago I used to modify the Windows ME registry, and it genuinely created some features doing so. Then they removed this windows-altering ability from the particular feature I was modding and my mods were useless. Maybe the MS programmers saw this as a bug being fixed, but I saw it as a feature being removed. I basically haven't been a Windows power user since ME because of stuff like this.

-----

Nothing Apple is doing is materially different from what Microsoft was sued for in the 90s by anti-trust enforcers. In fact, it's a bit more, because it just isn't a default browser, it's control of every app. Apple's share of the US market is just slightly less than Microsoft's was at the time.