Legally, the distinction is totally arbitrary. None of this is being decided on any kind of broader principles, because you're exactly right -- there's zero good answer as to why iPhones should be forced to allow sideloading but not PS5's. In fact, I'd go so far as to say there's something quite unfair about it all, precisely because there's no consistent moral or legal principle whatsoever being applied here.

But in practice, it's simply because for whatever reason, restricting apps on a phone bothers people more than restricting games on a console. We live in democracies, and laws get passed because people want them, not because they're consistent or make sense. Maybe because people think of phones as deriving from computers and you can install whatever you want on a computer, while game consoles have been locked down since basically the beginning, so it's just a question of what people are used to.

People sometimes use the argument that game consoles are sold at a loss and therefore require being locked down, but that's irrelevant. In the same way Europe (and now Japan) are forcing Apple to change its business model, they could easily force Sony to change its business model as well, so it would be forced to sell consoles at full price.

This is of course cynical, but naturally they wouldn't want to allow sideloading on Japanese platforms which hurt Japanese companies.

I've recently been playing around with Switch Homebrew and sideloading - mostly so I could extract my savegames to play games I own on PC instead using the Yuzu emulator (4K 60fps is more fun). Apparently Nintendo is quite good at detecting modified software on the Switch and will permanently ban and brick your hardware, so you need to go through great lengths not to connect to Nintendo servers when booting the modified or sideloaded software.

They should allow sideloading too, but phones have more scale and reach and create an effective monopoly for getting apps onto customer's devices.

Primarily, it's just because game consoles are not general purpose computing devices, customers don't expect that kind of software support in the first place. But even if we wanted to change that, the consoles are all priced around this lock in. Generally speaking, consoles are sold at a loss during their first few years in production, under the assumption they will make money on software sales. If you no longer have to buy software the manufacturer gets a cut of, it no longer makes sense to subsidize the cost of the hardware. If this were to change, consoles would have to be more expensive in general. This is not the case in the smartphone market, Apple is making healthy profits on every iPhone sold.

> Is there a reason this is more important than say on consoles? Why does no one push for sideloading on Switch and PS5, what's the difference?

Every single member of homebrew communities is pushing for that, why are you claiming they don't exist?

Phones and tablets just get priority because they affect multiple markets and massive chunk of economy (pretty much all B2C and a lot of B2B software) due to popularity of pocket computers and their critical position in everyones lives.

Sony doesn't dictate what kind of software Japanese banks can build for their customers, US Apple/Google corporation however do and thus control big parts of their economies. OF COURSE that's what they're prioritize over video games.

Consoles are single purpose devices, phones are general purpose ones.

Far more phones than consoles.

Phones are much more useful and integrated.

Consoles are sold at a loss which complicates things.

Btw - I totally support the idea of homebrew and sideloading on consoles. But the phones are the elephant in the room.

Some consoles are sold at a loss to be made up by software, so sideloading if it allows warez in would totally break the model.

I suppose you could have some sandboxed playground, but you could argue a PC is a viable competitor that already allows sideloading.

I don't see why they shouldn't. Consoles are just computers with funny keyboards, why do Microsoft and Sony get to decide who does and doesn't get to make games or applications for them?

Another answer could be that Sony and Nintendo have huge lobbying power in Japan, and they don't want to undermine some of their most important industries.

You could argue that the business model of consoles also doesn't support this, but Apple arguably also makes a fortune on their 30% lock-in charge. They are probably double-dipping though, since the margins on iPhones must not be all too bad.

That would probably cause large changes to the pricing model, as consoles are often sold at loss, at least initially.

There is absolutely no reason. The digital fiefdoms of gaming companies must be abolished and outlawed as well. They do nothing but harm consumers. For example, there's often no technical reason why one platform can't play online with another but these corporate lords impose heavy prices on such functionality with the aim of strengthening their little fiefdoms.

The phone is the center of digital and economic life. No one needs a console.