I don't think most people would. I think most sideloading would be by users making things that fall outside of what Apple allows on their store, like on Android. I see no coherent reason at all why things would be any different on iOS, and nobody has presented one here beyond just asserting the premise that it would be different, and I don't think "Epic believes it is" is a convincing argument.
These are not coherent reasons why it would be different, they are assertions that you think it would be. None of them even speak to any difference between the platforms.
Just saying that it will be isn't a reason. None of this has happened. Every attempt at doing this has failed horribly. Most users are not technically capable enough to even go about installing an alternative store.
Why, given that this has not happened in the case of the leading mobile platform, and in fact all attempts to even mildly break with the play store have been resounding failures, would iOS be any different?
> Obviously you must not be aware that Android is not the leading platform in terms of app sales.
Both are still in the range of tens of billions of dollars. If one is worthwhile the other is too. Android is also by far the leader in number of actual users, which is what matters most to companies like Facebook.
The sideloading process is harder than just installing an app. Most users do not know how to do it and have no interest in doing it.
Google does not allow third party app stores to be distributed via their app store, and I assume Apple would do the same.
Do you think anyone would install alternative stores on iOS?
If so, Android is obviously an irrelevant comparison.
Epic clearly believes iOS is different from Android.