Then that's pretty confusing when the (?) button next to Install Size says "This is the amount of disk space the app will take up on the customer's device."

These numbers matched exactly to what is currently in the AppStore for the last release we have ready for sale

As it says below "You need to look at the download size on the end user device, not the binary size in iTunesConnect."

Is that what you are doing?

Because otherwise, it includes the bitcode size. (i don't pretend this makes sense. only that it is :P)

In any case, i would still bet more heavily on it being displayed wrong than anything else.

If i was to increase the binary size of first party apps at google by even 1%, there would be a mob with pitchforks at my desk in less than an hour.

I can't imagine apple is really different.

I'm not sure the same can be assumed for Apple based on several things such as internal secrecy, differing organisational hierarchies, their willingness to focus on things that aren't tangible metrics like end user file download size.

Between the org and culture differences I'm just not so sure Apple can be safely assumed as similar as you expect.

None of the things you mention change the fact that if you increase the IOS system image size by 3x, it will likely no longer fit in the default firmware partition :)

I can't imagine anywhere besides Google that would actually notice or care about that.

Gonna disagree: Pretty much anywhere that doesn't generate shitty apps cares about even small size regression

If so, it seems very confusing that the header is "Install Size".