I think there should be prosecution of Apple based on this, not Google. Because of this huge cut, Apple won't allow other browsers on their platforms, which is anti-competitive.

> Because of this huge cut, Apple won't allow other browsers on their platforms, which is anti-competitive.

That’s not the case, though. What some people complain about is the fact that other browsers must use the WebKit engine, but there is nothing stopping people from putting browsers in the App Store. This is not relevant to this deal. The engine does not matter at all, what matters is the user base.

The engine absolutely matters! If you want to use a feature that is available in Chrome and Firefox, but not in webkit/safari, you are completely out of luck on iOS.

Apple has been holding back web development for many years with this policy. I suspect it is to keep PWAs from being competitive with native apps, but whatever the motivation, that is very much the effect.

> But I dont think revenue share is in anyway wrong or illegal.

It’s a thin line between revenue sharing, which is fine, and anticompetitive bribes to entrench your dominant position and extinguish competition, which is not. I am not saying that it’s the second case, but that’s what the DoJ wants to prove.