Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users.
It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription).
What about using the software development libraries you’ve been using all along to create apps? What if Apple decides they want their 30% for those going forward, but you can use your own payment gateway. Then if you want to avoid the 30% you simple need to develop your own SDK binaries, oh, and an OS that runs them all. Maybe Apple will even allow you to side load all that, after they finish suing you for any copyright infringement you create along the way.
Then they'd be stupid and would likely lose developers. I pay nothing for the various Windows SDKs that I use including the Win32 API and the various .Net frameworks. I have to pay for my development tools (like Visual Studio) through an MSN Pro subscription.
I guess all the Apple people don't realize that it's only in the Apple world that you have to pay to play. The Windows world has never been like that.
You don't pay anything for macOS SDKs, APIs and frameworks either. So what's your point?
Darwin, which is the core of macOS, is open source. You can build a whole alternative environment on Darwin without using any of the Apple supplied higher level OS layers and utilities. This is not possible with iOS devices, because the architecture is totally different. Apple does not give you such a license as to build your own higher OS levels and utilities. You will use UIKit or none.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users.
It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription).
What about using the software development libraries you’ve been using all along to create apps? What if Apple decides they want their 30% for those going forward, but you can use your own payment gateway. Then if you want to avoid the 30% you simple need to develop your own SDK binaries, oh, and an OS that runs them all. Maybe Apple will even allow you to side load all that, after they finish suing you for any copyright infringement you create along the way.
Then they'd be stupid and would likely lose developers. I pay nothing for the various Windows SDKs that I use including the Win32 API and the various .Net frameworks. I have to pay for my development tools (like Visual Studio) through an MSN Pro subscription.
I guess all the Apple people don't realize that it's only in the Apple world that you have to pay to play. The Windows world has never been like that.
You don't pay anything for macOS SDKs, APIs and frameworks either. So what's your point?
Darwin, which is the core of macOS, is open source. You can build a whole alternative environment on Darwin without using any of the Apple supplied higher level OS layers and utilities. This is not possible with iOS devices, because the architecture is totally different. Apple does not give you such a license as to build your own higher OS levels and utilities. You will use UIKit or none.
My response was in response to a question that was asked. The question that was asked was:
"What about using the software development libraries you’ve been using all along to create apps? What if Apple decides they want their 30% for those going forward, but you can use your own payment gateway. Then if you want to avoid the 30% you simple need to develop your own SDK binaries, oh, and an OS that runs them all. Maybe Apple will even allow you to side load all that, after they finish suing you for any copyright infringement you create along the way."
Which is why I responded that I don't have to pay for the libraries I use.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
You have misread his post completely!!! He has been arguing that Apple SHOULD pull out of countries which pass laws unfavorable to Apple, like the one that South Korea passed now. Almost, half of his posts in this forum are about this. And he has been ridiculed/ignored by many of the AI forum members for those comments. He strongly believes that Apple pulling out of a major market over unfavorable laws is inevitable and wants to see that happen sooner. His post in this thread was related to that.
You are 100% correct, friend. When I said, "I've been arguing for this for years" I was referring to the headline which said, "Pay up or GET OUT." I was calling on Apple to get out. I can see that you remember that "half my posts are about that." But in hindsight I should have resolved the pronoun that I used to prevent people from misunderstanding. I can see lots of people accused me of being on the other side of the argument. I guess I'm happy that finally there are a significant number of people calling on Apple to "get out." I suppose many of my 2000 posts were not written in vain.
The only way what you're arguing would be correct is if Apple actually exited SK. That is incredibly unlikely, if not only for the fact they'd likely lose 2/3 of their RAM supply as retaliation (Samsung & SK Hynix). So your 2000 posts were still written in vain, because Apple has not pulled out of a market. Have you forgotten about China where Apple happily complies with such onerous rules as moving all iCloud data to be within its borders? Unless a market becomes unprofitable, they won't pull out. Apple was making profit in these countries before the app store even existed, so a hit from some developers using alternate payment methods is going to be pretty tiny. And therefore, Apple isn't leaving SK.
What does this give to an indie developer? I can see it only affecting those developers who have the means to implement their own payment processor.
What happens if Apple have to allow third-party stores onto iOS? Do I, as an indie dev, have to decide which stores to put my apps on? It's hard enough to deal with the one App Store at the moment, but adding extras will make it very time-consuming for me.
Will Apple have to create some way for any third-party store to check our developer profiles and certificates?
And what about updates? If I've signed up to three or four stores, every update has to go to those three or four stores. That multiplies my work with every store I sell in.
Where are the updates stored? My own server? AWS? Who's paying for this?
Will every store use the same image sizes for their marketing etc., or will I have to do a 2048x2048px image for Apple's store, and an 1896x1896px one for a different store?
And what store is going to do this out of the goodness of their hearts? None. There will be a price. Will it be $99/year like Apple's? SO now I have to pay $99 plus $49 plus $35 plus $50 for those other stores every year.
As an indie dev, I can't afford that. I'd stick with Apple's way of doing it.
A post with too many silly questions. Funnily enough, you have answered ALL of your questions in the last line of your post. NOTHING changes for you.
Except for the sales environment. Just like when a Walmart comes to a small town, customers of existing stores may not change their behaviour but they still get exposed to people who do.
There is no change that has zero effects.
Well, SK just made a change and you can bet it’ll have effects. Life is about to get complicated for some developers.
It'll only "get complicated for some developers" if the developer makes their own decision to change to a non-Apple payment gateway. It's called a choice. Remember those? They're something Cook thinks customers shouldn't have because they're all stupid, apparently, and nanny Apple knows best. Definitely nothing to do with his obsession with profit above all else.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users.
It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription).
You well pay for use of their server. And you well be kicked off if your app has malware.
Why would I use their server? My customers are able to download apps from my website and install them.
We are talking about iOS app store. Not the Mac app store.
What difference does that make? An app is an app. An iPhone or an iPad is just another type of computer.
iPhone or an iPad apps are not on the MAC app store also. Mac apps are Pro apps and are not all down loaded from the Mac app store.
Of note Japan just forced Apple into another change in AppStore rules.
To ensure a safe and seamless user experience, the App Store’s guidelines require developers to sell digital services and subscriptions using Apple’s in-app payment system. Because developers of reader apps do not offer in-app digital goods and services for purchase, Apple agreed with the JFTC to let developers of these apps share a single link to their website to help users set up and manage their account.
With a wave of pressure from countries around the world both Apple and Google will be loosening their stranglehold on the two OS markets. It's no longer an "IF".
Maybe the best solution would be for Apple to open up the app store to allow vendor hosted apps which the app store would flag as being hosted by the vendor rather than Apple. Have a Show Vendor Hosted Apps toggle in the app store which defaults to On.
Apple would continue to vet apps hosted on the Apple site, but would leave that to the vendor if was hosted at a vendor site.
Given the temptation, vendor hosted apps would begin to do nefarious things which would be reported in the media.
Eventually, a consensus would probably be formed that buying Apple hosted apps are the safest course of action, and Apple could tout their own hosting, and explain that vendor hosting was added just to satisfy various government regulatory agencies around the world. Entering the app entry for a vendor hosted app would contain a banner which explained that Apple doesn't vet vendor hosted apps nor does it handle their payment processing. Any payment disputes have to be taken up with the vendor.
If you want the wild, wild, west you can have it - but that might not be the best thing for your privacy and device security.
Eventually, a consensus would probably be formed that buying Apple hosted apps are the safest course of action, and Apple could tout their own hosting, and explain that vendor hosting was added just to satisfy various government regulatory agencies around the world. Entering the app entry for a vendor hosted app would contain a banner which explained that Apple doesn't vet vendor hosted apps nor does it handle their payment processing. Any payment disputes have to be taken up with the vendor.
If you want the wild, wild, west you can have it - but that might not be the best thing for your privacy and device security.
I think it will wring out the same as it is at Google Play here in Western countries. Even if 3rd party stores are allowed with a couple of security toggle changes the vast majority of people will still use the official stores. Straying outside would only happen for certain specific applications that the 1st party stores won't offer, and those will be well-vetted by users and security folks.
There's no "Wild West" on Google Android and there won't be on iOS either.
Epic wasn’t fighting to get to escape apples carefully crafted system that benefits its users.
Epic was trying to wrest control from Apple so that epic could create its own iOS App Store where itself and other developers sold their apps to people.
It was a play that Banked on msnipulation of lawmakers who don’t understand why things are the way they are. And it appears to have succeeded in one country so far.
So now Epuc wants to be the place for developers who want to stick it to Apple go to - for a competitive fee of course.
Not as good for iOS users, but will make epic rich.
and are not all down loaded from the Mac app store.
Yeah? That's one of the things that this South Korea law is looking to apply to the iOS App Store.
Would say the iOS App Store is for mobile devices and the Mac App Store is not. Now some developers don't want their iOS Apps running on M1 MACs and some do.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users.
It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription).
You well pay for use of their server. And you well be kicked off if your app has malware.
Why would I use their server? My customers are able to download apps from my website and install them.
We are talking about iOS app store. Not the Mac app store.
What difference does that make? An app is an app. An iPhone or an iPad is just another type of computer.
iPhone or an iPad apps are not on the MAC app store also. Mac apps are Pro apps and are not all down loaded from the Mac app store.
You're missing the point. Apps are just apps. Regardless of the platform they run on. There's nothing special about a Mac or Windows app in comparison to an iPhone or iPad app. There is no technical reason for me to not be able to distribute iPhone or iPad apps directly to my customers. Apple only forces me to use the App Store so that they can take 30% of my sales...ostensibly to pay for the infrastructure needed to support the app store. But I only need to use their infrastructure because they're FORCING me to use their infrastructure. I'd prefer to NOT use it.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
No. As a developer, I feel I should not be limited to Apple's way of distributing apps to my users.
It's as simple as that. I won't use their infrastructure and they won't get any money from me (other than my developers subscription).
You well pay for use of their server. And you well be kicked off if your app has malware.
Why would I use their server? My customers are able to download apps from my website and install them.
We are talking about iOS app store. Not the Mac app store.
What difference does that make? An app is an app. An iPhone or an iPad is just another type of computer.
iPhone or an iPad apps are not on the MAC app store also. Mac apps are Pro apps and are not all down loaded from the Mac app store.
You're missing the point. Apps are just apps. Regardless of the platform they run on. There's nothing special about a Mac or Windows app in comparison to an iPhone or iPad app. There is no technical reason for me to not be able to distribute iPhone or iPad apps directly to my customers. Apple only forces me to use the App Store so that they can take 30% of my sales...ostensibly to pay for the infrastructure needed to support the app store. But I only need to use their infrastructure because they're FORCING me to use their infrastructure. I'd prefer to NOT use it.
I get that you don't want to use the iOS App Store and you want to load your Apps without using the App Store. So who's store services are you going to use or are you going to run your own store. Because of managing that may not be as cheap as you think and you may have to have your Apps signed by Apple anyway.
iPhone or an iPad apps are not on the MAC app store also.
Some of them are.
Mac apps are Pro apps
Most of them aren't.
and are not all down loaded from the Mac app store.
Yeah? That's one of the things that this South Korea law is looking to apply to the iOS App Store.
Would say the iOS App Store is for mobile devices and the Mac App Store is not. Now some developers don't want their iOS Apps running on M1 MACs and some do.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
You have misread his post completely!!! He has been arguing that Apple SHOULD pull out of countries which pass laws unfavorable to Apple, like the one that South Korea passed now. Almost, half of his posts in this forum are about this. And he has been ridiculed/ignored by many of the AI forum members for those comments. He strongly believes that Apple pulling out of a major market over unfavorable laws is inevitable and wants to see that happen sooner. His post in this thread was related to that.
It is not misreading. It is badly formulated original post. I also though that he was arguing for opening up the store for 'parasites'.
Exciting times. I've been arguing for this for years and that's why so many people hate me on this forum.
So you believe a developer has every right in the world to post their apps for free on the Apple App Store? Give me one legitimate reason why Apple should be required to host these apps for free. Apple doesn't charge for free apps but could start doing that if they wanted to. Apple could also start charging developers to even put their apps on the Apple App Store and if these stupid laws pass, I'm all for Apple doing that. There's no way anyone could force Apple to host things on their servers for free. It would be like me hosting your email server on my hardware, which I maintain, for free. Get a grip, I'd never do that and I doubt any company would do that. This shows how stupid these laws are.
Of course, if you want to have your own payment system, then be prepared for Apple to start charging you a hosting fee for every download and install of that app. That's only fair isn't it?
Perhaps a progressive switching towards a model similar/referencing to colocation hosting services may be the way out on how to deal with developers. Catalog 'App Store' services (to developers) and a price tag accordingly.
Example: Colocation/Hosting Providers charges for # of CPUs, GBs of RAM, GBs of Storage Capacity. In the case of App Store, it can be something like:
App Hosting Service Cat A - 100MB @ $1.00 (w/o data backup) per app version and per market (if app is available/publish in 10 markets, it's charged accordingly);
App Hosting Service Cat B - 100MB @ $5.00 (inclusive of data backup, retention policy of 14 days) per app version and per market;
It may also be two differentiated models:
Existing 'pool-based' Model for those developers who opt to stick;
New per service per market based Model.
Ultimately, these creates choices and shut those politicians and regulators up. Apple can also remove itself from some of the unnecessary collateral liabilities which it has been shouldering for last decade or longer. Example: Parents will no longer be able to get support from Apple for app purchases made by their children which are paid via non-Apple payment system. Not legal expert here but I am sure there are legal liabilities which Apple can save itself from. Who knows, maybe a total revamp of App Store where it can toggle between Apple Payment mode or Non-Apple Payment mode and lists only those apps which have opted for each of the mode, and associated set of T&Cs for each mode.
Exactly! Thank you for writing it all down! I couldn't have said better.
Only people who have never developed an app for sale want this to happen. Apple takes care of everything for you, money just appears in your bank account. It's worth every penny.
Somehow I'm able to get my apps out to Windows users without the use of Microsoft's app store. Just like I've been doing since 1995.
So how is that working out for you on the X-box??? By the way, even though you don't use Microsoft's app store on Windows, look at all the security issues and viruses on that platform from people just downloading whatever from anywhere. An issue you don't see on the Xbox CLOSED Platform!!! You are trying to compare apples and oranges.
How about we look at the old days. You know the days before the Internet. You know where you had to get your Game or App massed produced onto floppy's or discs. You don't want to have so many made and lose money. Then there was Box Art, and instruction manuals. All put together and sealed. That is all costing YOU money. Then you had the distributors get your software out to all the stores. They took a cut. Then the Stores sold that software and they once again took their own cut.
You really have it EASY these days. A simple 30% cut and Ap[ple or Google handles everything. All you have to do is upload it into their store.
If people don't like it. They are FREE to create their own OS and Phones and have a completely open platform. There is not a single person stopping anyone from doing that. Create a better platform and people will flee to it.
30% is a massive chunk of a digital good, and Apple's missteps and arbitrary rule applications, on top of a general lack of features and development, undermine it. If Apple are going to charge 30% then they'd better make it worth it, or people will be pissed. And if not, lower the damn charge. "Create a better platform" is not an argument, companies like Microsoft have failed to make a dent in the Apple-Google duopoly, the barriers to entry are too high.
Apple could have diffused this whole circus if they'd been better custodians of the store and acted like partners to the development community rather than overlords. Monopolies and duopolies aren't innately bad, but monopolistic actions are, and Apple have profiteered and thrown their weight around way too much; it was bound to lead to this.
You forgot that you can install apps on Android phones from any other source than Google Play Store. Moreover, Microsoft went into the mobile and failed because they were not good at that market. This is what competition is about. Only the best survive. Your theorisation, however, indicate that you expected Microsoft to succeed? Well, I will tell you the truth, not every one succeeds. Welcome to real life. So your use of words 'monopoly' and 'duopoly' just follows the political fashion without deeper understanding what those words mean.
Only people who have never developed an app for sale want this to happen. Apple takes care of everything for you, money just appears in your bank account. It's worth every penny.
Somehow I'm able to get my apps out to Windows users without the use of Microsoft's app store. Just like I've been doing since 1995.
So how is that working out for you on the X-box??? By the way, even though you don't use Microsoft's app store on Windows, look at all the security issues and viruses on that platform from people just downloading whatever from anywhere. An issue you don't see on the Xbox CLOSED Platform!!! You are trying to compare apples and oranges.
How about we look at the old days. You know the days before the Internet. You know where you had to get your Game or App massed produced onto floppy's or discs. You don't want to have so many made and lose money. Then there was Box Art, and instruction manuals. All put together and sealed. That is all costing YOU money. Then you had the distributors get your software out to all the stores. They took a cut. Then the Stores sold that software and they once again took their own cut.
You really have it EASY these days. A simple 30% cut and Ap[ple or Google handles everything. All you have to do is upload it into their store.
If people don't like it. They are FREE to create their own OS and Phones and have a completely open platform. There is not a single person stopping anyone from doing that. Create a better platform and people will flee to it.
Nice red herring fallacy. I don't develop for the Xbox.
So why do you care about iOS? Develop for your beloved Windows platform only. Don't mix Windows with iOS. If you mix, the other guy can add X-Box as well. Nice try to dismiss his valid argument.
Everyone is making this too complicated. This law only applies to in-app-purchases. A very simple solution is to disallow free apps with non-Apple payment for IAP.
Make an app with IAP that doesn’t use the App Store for payment have a minimum price, say $4.99 (equivalent in SK). Apple gets paid for hosting. Nothing changes for other developers. Of course developers will hate it because they lose their free ride.
You really think that's going to fly? Apple are in trouble for anti-competitive behaviour, and you think their solution will be to pick another anticompetitive behaviour as revenge and everything will be fine?
If there's a hoisting fee it'll need to apply across the board or it'll be discriminatory.
Many services have different price tiers depending how many features they offer in each tier, e.g. Basic, Plus, Pro. Why would it be discriminatory to split those apps based on they payment system into different categories and charge different prices?
Comments
Darwin, which is the core of macOS, is open source. You can build a whole alternative environment on Darwin without using any of the Apple supplied higher level OS layers and utilities. This is not possible with iOS devices, because the architecture is totally different. Apple does not give you such a license as to build your own higher OS levels and utilities. You will use UIKit or none.
"What about using the software development libraries you’ve been using all along to create apps? What if Apple decides they want their 30% for those going forward, but you can use your own payment gateway. Then if you want to avoid the 30% you simple need to develop your own SDK binaries, oh, and an OS that runs them all. Maybe Apple will even allow you to side load all that, after they finish suing you for any copyright infringement you create along the way."
Which is why I responded that I don't have to pay for the libraries I use.
Most of them aren't.
Yeah? That's one of the things that this South Korea law is looking to apply to the iOS App Store.
With a wave of pressure from countries around the world both Apple and Google will be loosening their stranglehold on the two OS markets. It's no longer an "IF".
Apple would continue to vet apps hosted on the Apple site, but would leave that to the vendor if was hosted at a vendor site.
Given the temptation, vendor hosted apps would begin to do nefarious things which would be reported in the media.
Eventually, a consensus would probably be formed that buying Apple hosted apps are the safest course of action, and Apple could tout their own hosting, and explain that vendor hosting was added just to satisfy various government regulatory agencies around the world. Entering the app entry for a vendor hosted app would contain a banner which explained that Apple doesn't vet vendor hosted apps nor does it handle their payment processing. Any payment disputes have to be taken up with the vendor.
If you want the wild, wild, west you can have it - but that might not be the best thing for your privacy and device security.
There's no "Wild West" on Google Android and there won't be on iOS either.
I get that you don't want to use the iOS App Store and you want to load your Apps without using the App Store. So who's store services are you going to use or are you going to run your own store. Because of managing that may not be as cheap as you think and you may have to have your Apps signed by Apple anyway.
Some iOS apps are on the Mac App Store.
It is badly formulated original post.
I also though that he was arguing for opening up the store for 'parasites'.
Moreover, Microsoft went into the mobile and failed because they were not good at that market. This is what competition is about. Only the best survive.
Your theorisation, however, indicate that you expected Microsoft to succeed? Well, I will tell you the truth, not every one succeeds. Welcome to real life.
So your use of words 'monopoly' and 'duopoly' just follows the political fashion without deeper understanding what those words mean.
Nice try to dismiss his valid argument.