But I still think they are wrong for blocking 3rd party apps. I understand they believe it is for my safety and security, but there needs to be a happy medium. They should have a way for experts to side load apps.
Only their own apps. You can't use that mechanism to distribute an app to other "experts", which makes it of limited use in practice. You can distribute as source and require them to build it, but then everybody who wants to install your app on their device also needs a Mac.
Possible arguments:
1. More security because of smaller attack surface for malware.
2. Higher average quality of apps because of curation.
But no. I have to buy a $1200 mini-computer and then accept the arbitrary whims of Apple on what code I can run when.
That's the clue: You don't _have_ to. Buy a Pixel if you want to root something.
I don't think it's controversial to say opening up ways to load apps outside of the app store will make it far, far harder for Apple to make any performance, security and stability guarantees about their devices. So if you choose to bypass Apple's ecosystem, you are on your own and can't blame Apple for anything that goes wrong.
> make it far, far harder for Apple to make any performance, security and stability guarantees about their devices.
You mean like my laptop? Somehow they manage to maintain guarantees despite the fact that I can load any software I want.
It would nice if I could just go to a web page, click a link, and say "load this app, I accept the performance/security risks this entails". Like I do with my laptop.
As I've mentioned in another reply, you want to use Cydia Impactor to resign apps.
I don't think that's true. I bet an iPhone is a lot more secure and stable than a Macbook Pro.
Why would this necessarily be the case? Apps on iOS are already pretty restricted as to what they can do - they can only access files they create (or have to ask for permission), they have to get permission to use the camera/microphone/etc, they're throttled pretty severly when they're in the background, and they can't modify any parts of the system UI. Even if you did install a malicious app, what would it be able to do?
So you support apps like this Research one being made available to teens ?
Because that's what side loading apps gets you. Only except Apple can't stop it.
The argument is whether Apple should be the arbiter of what is considered a proper use case for an app or whether an individual should be. This argument is as old as the hills. Should the government be able to dictate to me what the correct size of a soda at McDonald's is? This is roughly the same argument. Although in Apple's case I think the restrictions have more to do with creating a reputation for consistency and quality.
I can install most any software I want on my PC but because of that you could argue the overall experience on a PC is sub-optimal compared to an iOS device. It's all about what's important to you. Personally I think Apple should be able to enforce whatever restrictions it chooses for its apps and customers are free to pick a different device with fewer restrictions. The developers are the ones who don't have a choice in this because they have to make apps for iOS if they want to get the largest possible user base so they have to abide by Apple's rules. I think the antitrust case for developers against Apple is pretty strong at this point, but I think the argument that I should be able to install what I want because it's my device is pretty weak.
I 110% support that. Freedom is good. Hopefully their parents are involved enough in their lives to have explained the dangers of such things to them. Or perhaps Apple provides a parental control to allow that, but at least it would be possible for the parent to allow.
This is not something that apps can generally do.
“I want to live without all the hoops of death”
I want a way for a 16 year old kid to make an awesome app and then distribute it to whoever wants it. Like back in the shareware days.
FWIW, I have a few ssh clients on my iPhone (Termius, Prompt, iTerminal) that came from the App Store. Termius even offers mosh. Why wouldn't they be approved?
Why is that even remotely important?
The only thing I can think of that would be a problem for that 16 year old kid (or alternatively, a sneaky black hat) is permissions. Maybe a color coded permissions model where green means can only access the most basic systems, yellow means could access some personal data, red being can access very important or practically all your data, you must trust them implicitly before installing.
Different companies will risk-assess that differently.
Let's not kid ourselves though, this is mainly about preserving the huge app store profits.