Google and Apple have created and invested in their platforms - it’s not insane for them to make profit from them.

They've created an artificial need for the platforms by closing their systems. Open systems don't require these kinds of platforms. I can install whatever I want on my PC and I like it that way.

> I can install whatever I want on my PC and I like it that way.

Good for you, but many other people appreciate the curated platforms that Google and Apple have built and like it that way instead. They're not 'insane' for liking it a different way to you - there's benefits of both approaches.

Yes you can, and so can the unwashed masses that have 10 toolbars in IE, ransomware, viruses, etc.

And it’s not just dumb people downloading from shady sources. Look for a printer driver online and you’re just as likely to find a fake malware site as the real site.

The need for trusted sources for downloading apps with limited permissions can easily be seen if you look at some people’s PCs - or Android devices.

> I can install whatever I want on my PC and I like it that way.

True on Android, too. And both platforms have OS vendor app stores.

Perhaps you've missed the point of the article -- Google's platform is open, and you can install whatever you want without using their store, which is the route Epic has taken with Fortnite.

Google spends absurd amounts of money developing and supporting Android, providing security updates, providing feature updates, and even goes so far as to spend money marketing Android. They then give Android, for free, to manufacturers to use on their phones. They also create, support, and give, for free, many of the development tools which developers like Epic Games then use to create Android applications and games.

After spending an insane amount of money creating and supporting these things, it seems completely justifiable that Google would then ask for a cut of the profits for applications that are built on top of the tools and infrastructure that Google provides for free.

The fact that it is hard and provides value does not stop it from also being unethical. The conversation about antitrust needs to move beyond just monopolies and recognize that an oligopoly of mega-corporations staking out their own kingdoms is still massively anti-competitive. Corporate feudalism isn't my idea of free-market capitalism.

How about physical stores and selling items in retail space? Companies pay money to get shelf space and special promotional displays in CPG all the time.