So Apple killed ios app sideloading on M1 macs

not really surprised as they go out of their way to inconvenience iOS users whenever they can with their overzealous control so of course it would spread to their silicon macs.

“This application cannot be installed because the developer did not intend for it to run on this platform”

Seems to me Apple is protecting a developer’s way to make money.


Apple provides developers the option to not enable the app for Mac, which they certainly should provide imo.
Side loading circumvents that and places Apple in a very dubious petition, legally.

Although I hope more developers support running iOS apps on Mac, and I think this has become a bit of a mess, I think this is the correct move.


Me too. There’s probably legal agreements in place for Apple to respect the developer’s wishes. I can understand the frustration, but saying they “screw the users” is uncalled for.


The root of the problem is Apple’s dictatorial control of the way apps are installed on devices WE own and this could be the first step in locking down the M1. With our iDevices, you own a computer that fits in your pocket, yet you cannot install anything on it that is not approved by some faceless cabal sitting in a round building. It’s wrong. It has always been wrong, but it has been going on so long now, that people just accept it. It is incoveniencing the user. I know this ruffles feathers but devs should be able to create an app, sell it on their website, offer time trials, and subscriptions on iDevices just like any other computer. Apple overlords are staying involved in the process far too long. When Apple reaches out like this, it really rubs me the wrong way. The correct way of implementing this would be If a dev does not want their app on the Mac then the dev needs to opt out. Apple should not blanket ban all of the apps.

In what way has this become a mess?

1 Like

I thought this was too good to be true! Never mind, I can understand Apple’s position, it undermined the feature that was offered to developers.

Any apps that are already installed seem to still function normally, so it’s a “fix the barn door after the horses have come home” scenario. As I did not trust Apple with this to begin with, I made sure I installed all of my backed up ipa files on my M1 if they looked even remotely useful on the Mac. Since I buy very few iOS apps now, this may not even affect me, thankfully (other than irritating me :smiley: )

Is that not what they’re doing? It’s my understanding of it. The dev’s have said they don’t want it running on macOS, so it’s not available to download and run from the App Store. Apple have just stopped the workaround that was being used, therefore enforcing the developers wishes?


I guess they forgot the asterisk.

1 Like

What are you talking about a “blanket ban”? The way this works is: iOS apps are available on the Mac unless the dev has explicitly opted out from being on the Mac App Store. Side loading is circumventing the express wish of the devs. They have already, explicitly, opted out from being on the Mac.

I understand the frustration about the unbalance of some Apple decisions, but this is not the good fight to pick, they’re actually respecting the devs wishes here…


I have no problem with this as long as the “Opt-Out” is not assumed by default. But this line in the article states that the Opt is the other way:

The only ‌iPhone‌ and ‌iPad‌ apps that can be installed on ‌M1‌ Macs are those that developers have expressly flagged and greenlit for use on Macs.

I did not want to lose access to apps that are no longer being developed that work great, like TextTool 2.

This line of “reasoning” that Apple is a form of tech deep state is toxic.

There is nothing wrong with asking hard questions and provide critique to Apple’s moves and decissions. I develop with Apple’s tools and on quite a few occasions felt like putting my first through the monitor myself. Yet, all this sort of conspiracy stuff as said above and in the attached article just needs a second thought, less coffee and perhaps more prozac.

If one is so convinced Apple is closing up their ecosystem with you in it, move out and buy something else. At least stop using politicians as examples of how to reason and bring up a point.


you seem to be the only political cultist in this thread. wanting freedom of choice for hardware you own is as old as hardware and has nothing to do with politics.

The way this works is: by default all iOS apps that are available are available on the M1 Macs, unless the dev has voluntarily opted out.

Side loading is circumventing this measure. Apple is simply closing a loophole and enforcing the devs’ decision. Which, however annoying, is right. If the dev has opted out, then why should a loophole allow for it to work?


Ok the article says the exact opposite. That is what I am basing my argument on.

The only ‌iPhone‌ and ‌iPad‌ apps that can be installed on ‌M1‌ Macs are those that developers have expressly flagged and greenlit for use on Macs.

Nope. The other way around. As aptly corrected by this commenter on MacRumors.


After you sign the updated developer agreement, the App Store automatically makes compatible iOS apps available to users of a Mac with Apple silicon. However, if you’re already planning to ship a macOS version of your app, or if your app doesn’t make sense on the Mac, you can change your app’s availability in App Store Connect.

  1. Open the Pricing and Availability page in App Store Connect.
  2. Disable the Make this app available on Mac option.

Once you remove your app’s availability for Mac, the Mac App Store stops offering your app for sale. Users who already downloaded the app on Mac can still use it, but can’t download it again.

1 Like

Buy a Windows computer and an Android smartphone. You wont have to worry about anybody “controlling” you.


oops. Ok, then I am wrong. :smiley: I was irritated solely by that fact that the default was Opt-Out. I have no problem with Devs being able to block their apps from the Mac. I thought it was horrible that it automatically defaulted to no for devs who did not even have a say, and thats what wigged me out. Sorry.