Perhaps the parent's use of "contradictory" wasn't so great; I would say "hypocritical" would be better. This isn't about doing anything legal or illegal, or violating or not violating anyone's terms of service. It's simply pointing out that Apple, when given a choice, would rather use an external payment processor (in order to pay lower fees) when building an app for a platform they don't control... while at the same time denying people the ability to do that on their own platform.

To me, that sounds like a compelling argument in a hypothetical anti-trust suit against Apple where a plaintiff is claiming that Apple's requirement to use Apple's in-app payment system for all payments in iOS apps is anti-competitive behavior.

The rule being bypassed is the 30% Google tax by using in app transactions through the pay store.

They just don't ban the alternative practice.

I'm just amazed that no one on both sides is following the prisoner's dilemma scenarios