$99/year + a relatively recent Mac + $4.99 for XCode + extensive technical training on how to compile and sign a project + the source code of the app you're trying to install.

You don't need the source code. Search for InstaSign/iReSign.

And you don't need a relatively new Mac, just a Core 2 Duo Intel or newer (I have a 3 year old MBP and can sign/develop for iOS 6 beta seed 1).

And it requires absolutely zero technical knowledge: You just drag and drop an .ipa file, and sync with iTunes.

Xcode is free.

So, only your first argument ($99/year, for 100 devices) is actually correct.

---

I hate being forced to defend Apple in a case that I don't agree with what they did, but your very poor criticism made me to correct you. I'm sure you understand that it's nothing personal, and doesn't mean I agree with what Apple did.

"So, only your first argument ($99/year, for 100 devices) is actually correct."

Only if we allow you blowing off the "need a Mac" requirement to equal zero dollars...

It's kinda a decent sized hole in your argument.

That's right. Thanks for pointing out.

However if I were to play smart I'd say I didn't have any argument and was just refuting my parent's :)

We use http://testflightapp.com with beta testers, I can't praise it highly enough.

Thanks for posting this! This is exactly what I needed.

Xcode is "free" with your $99/yr subscription

Xcode is free, period. The $4.99 thing was only in place briefly.

Extensive technical training? Seems like it's something a kid can do...

http://www.theolympian.com/2010/04/18/1209941/kid-writes-iph...

No it's not the same. It's not even close to that. I am fine with the 99$/year, I am fine with the no appstore, I can find my methods, but limiting me to 100 devices it's whole another story.

I'm told that if you ask nicely, you can get the limit bumped up to 200 or 300 devices - failing that, you could also get an enterprise license (which has no device restrictions).