I basically agree with this. My premises are the following:

1. There is no privacy on the internet.

2. How companies make their money determines their behaviour.

Google is an advertising company, i.e., they make money by showing ads. They need user data to show ads in the most optimal fashion. More data on a user results in more customized ads and high click through rates for them. It is in Google's interest to collect as much data as possible on users.

Apple is a products and services company. They make money by selling products. One feature they emphasize with their products is privacy. Apple's reputation is that it considers user-first. It is in Apple's interest to collect enough information on you to sell you more of their products and services. It is NOT in Apple's interest to sell third-party data because it would increase the chance the public would know the privacy feature is compromised and their user-first reputation would suffer.

They don't have to change anything??? iOS is certainly not capable of supporting App Stores. Side loading is something completely different and would be even worse, less secure, than a third party App Store. I don't know what you mean about removing a single statement. As a coder for over 25 years, I just don't see how this is possible.

You have no idea what you're talking about. But, nice troll job.

How long do I have to wait until I can sue Epic for not letting me have my own payments processor/app store on Fortnite?

If they win, they stand to make 30% more on their revenue from purchases on Apple devices, no?

And I think further to this, I'd gather 100% of people who read /. chose their smartphone based on the restrictions Apple, Android, etc. apply to their ecosystem.

According to that argument, every app developer should also reveal their costs to develop, operate, and maintain their software... because we should all know the actual cost of everything we buy. In a capitalist system, we choose what we pay by evaluating the competition and taking whatever trade offs come with it. iDevices vs Android. Playstation vs Xbox. VHS vs Beta.

And how would they gain access to the Epic App Store? Either through Apple's App Store, or Apple has to design, implement, and secure their platform for third party app stores. Do you have any idea of the cost of this? Me neither, but I'm guessing it's many millions of $$$ to make sure this is developed and operates in a secure fashion. And do you have any idea how much work is involved in every OS update to make sure the app sandbox is secure? The application sandbox Apple provides for apps would be open to much more nefarious apps that they would have no ability to shut down to keep their infrastructure secure. And security doesn't just mean data... it means protecting all the resources of the device for the health of other apps and the owners' data.

What right do others have to a store on Apple's proprietary platform? Anyone can sell their product on the App Store as long as they follow the rules. There are other platforms with their own app stores, so I don't see how it's a monopoly. I'm an app developer. I have no problem with the rules, as long as they are applied equally across the board. That is something Apple should be held accountable for.

Who covers the cost of the service the App Store provides? The infrastructure. The design of it. Etc, etc. It's not like providing a service like an App Store (Apple, Google, or Amazon) is a commodity service. Like most custom software solutions and services, it requires constant work. It's NOT free. How is that paid for? As an app developer who publishes apps on the App Store, I don't expect Apple to cover those costs. I understand that I pay for that. I just don't hear that side of the story being told.