But it's not the cost for operating the payments gateway. It's the cost for the channel.
The real world equivalent is supermarkets, retailers etc charging for products to be stocked on their shelves. Customer acquisition is extremely expensive and difficult and stores expect to be compensated for it.
Except it's not. People don't download Uber or Netflix because of the app stores. Epic demonstrated unequivocally they could get installs without Google involved as an intermediary. The app store value at this point is singularly it their platform-specific monopolies, and the fact that you have no choice but to play ball to do business on mobile.
> The real world equivalent is supermarkets
It's nothing like that. I have multiple supermarket chains I can go to - I have only Apple and Google when dealing with mobile. Customers can choose either Apple or Google, but most businesses are stuck doing business with both. Not even Microsoft screwed over both sides like this.
At this point, Google and Apple have done far more harm to both customers and businesses than Microsoft ever had. It's beyond frustrating.
You have plenty of options. Your argument is basically that Wal-Mart is everywhere, so Wal-Mart should be forced to serve you on your terms.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/19/22632804/epic-google-laws...
Meanwhile, you reference Cydia (my alternative to the App Store), but I am myself suing Apple for over their efforts to lock us out competing on iOS.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/12/10/cydia-a...
It made my experience of owning my first (and last) iPhone so much better - thanks very much for that, always a fan. Iirc, I was also able to buy one or two apps there, but my memory may be hazy.
I hope you're successful with your Apple lawsuit.
It sounds really lame to say, but it feels like what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of what the market wants. People want a device they can give to their kid without worrying that they'll mess it up.
And I don't think this is an issue where any side actually cares about freedom; you allow proprietary software on Cydia, which sort of kills the user freedom argument, but even then, people would still be free to just buy a phone that supports them using their phone in a way they want to.
If that's what the market wanted then Apple wouldn't have to spend so much money on preventing their customers from rooting their phones, running any apps they want to run and using alternative mobile app distribution methods.
> People want a device they can give to their kid without worrying that they'll mess it up.
Chromebooks are those devices, which is one of the reasons they're used in education. There were 40 million Chromebooks in public schools and about 53 million K-12 students in the US in 2019.
You can run whatever Android or Linux software you want on them, and use whatever mobile app distribution you want, too, like F-Droid.
I hope you get somewhere with the complaint.
Is that sarcasm? All of those combined don't even have 0.5% of the market.
There's no competition, period.
For example is there competition in the "operating system for Samsung microwaves" market ?
They are negligible.
Back when the Amazon app store first started, they gave away a high quality free app every week. Great for user acquisition, then IIRC they stopped paying the app developers whose apps they were giving away, and the quality of the store overall started to drop off soon after.
If Amazon had made a play of taking a much smaller % of payment fees, sales and subs, they could have continued building momentum and been a serious competitor.
I presume they decided not to for some good reason, but the potential was there.
If Wal-Mart had nearly the prevalence of Google Play (on Android) and the App Store (on iOS), it should probably have some cap on its cut, too.
Personally, I am far more likely to try out a subscription if I can do it through the app store, as I don't have to hand over my credit card details, and I know I'll be able to easily cancel.
Uber would never have existed without the App Store.
> It's nothing like that
It's exactly like that. That's where the business model comes from. It's a digital representation of the way physical stores interact with OEMs.
It's not exactly like that. Kroger and Safeway cannot prevent potato chips from being sold outside of Kroger and Safeway.
That's the whole point of the conversation here, don't know how you're missing it. Apple and Google are the textbook definitions of illegal monopolies, Kroger and Safeway are not.
Maybe not within smart phones, but the app store has nothing to do with the success of Uber aside from forced inclusion in the transaction.
Believe it or not, software went decades being successfully purchased and installed by customers before app stores came along. Even on the Blackberry.