the differences are subtle, and indicate more of a degree of monopolization than a binary determination (as is always the case).
the console market differs in at least these ways: (1) console makers don't set the prices for games, (2) console makers can't charge any amount of markup on the games, (3) gamers have more mobility among platforms (can switch to PC gaming, for example).
overall, apple has much more control of the producer-to-consumer value chain, and they extract all the excess value in the value chain, which is why it's considered a monopoly even though technically there is competition via android and the play store. for example, and as noted in the article, producers absorb the cost of apple's markup, rather than passing it on to consumers, which indicates apple has all the pricing power in the relationship.
this 30% markup is the rent-seeking behavior of concern in the article. apple's growth is no longer built on innovation, but rather on its market posiiton and ability to extract these rents without providing further, direct value. for investors this is a clear concern (but not necessarily a reason to dump the stock). for consumers, it's a clear concern--we've seen this movie before with the likes of ibm, at&t, microsoft, sony, etc.