> Epic did not design their own hardware, their own silicon, build entire global supply chains, design UX, etc. Apple and Google did. Do they not deserve a cut?
Where did the $1k I spent on my phone go?
Where did the $1k I spent on my phone go?
The difference is Apple sells a user experience. Sure, you have to purcahase a physical thing to access that experience, but that is the nature of what you have purchased when you buy an iPhone.
I think this boils down to a mismatched set of perspectives on the business Apple has created. Apple breaks the typical “buy hardware from X, install software from Y” flow and instead turned their iPhones into a portal into their own user experience universe. They did this because it provides a fundamentally unique experience when compared to other platforms. It’s a differentiating factor for them. Again, I would argue that Apple doesn’t want to be a hardware company. They want to be an experience company. In order to do that, they have to develop and sell cutting-edge hardware to you and me.
Don’t get me wrong, not trying to say this is good or bad — just observing a sublety that I think gets missed when passionately arguing about hardware ownership and the rights that come with it.
If you or any customer feels like the hardware's capabilities (i.e. no side-loading) was miss-advertised, I would highly urge them to return the hardware to Apple, sell it, or at the least not re-buy an iPhone next time.