> guys, it's a phone/tablet. The consoles are much more like a General Purpose Computers

Some five billion people have a smart phone [1]. For many it's the primary way they access the Internet.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/203734/global-smartphone....

A lot of ppl have ovens or calculators or cheap smart tvs doesn’t make them general computing devices.

> If the user chose iOS maybe they chose it because they wanted the curated experience and the locked it product.

This would make a lot more sense in a world where users have more choice. If you want to make this argument, you probably need regulators to step in and enforce standards and interoperability such that consumers have more choice, along more different axes than they currently do (2-ish operating systems, determined by the hardware you buy).

The problem is that this "choice" in iOS is an illusion, if both Google and Apple employ user-hostile, monopolist tactics. That's like saying someone chooses to stay with an abusive guardian when the only alternative, foster care, brings its own sets of challenges.

I'm curious, do you have an Amazon subscription or any of the dozens of other major subscriptions that didn't go the AppStore route because of Apple' policies ?

I'm not sure at any point I experienced a "cancel all my subscriptions" in a single place, even as I was neck deep in the Apple ecosystem.

Just yesterday I stopped a handful of subscriptions all at once and it was excellent that there was a third party disinterested in trying to retain my business giving me a nice list of everything and a button to stop them. If I can subscribe through Apple Pay for anything, I will. It would be great if a bank had a workflow as nice as that.

> really don't understand the negative sentiment against Apple

I just want them to be better.

They take 15-30% of my gross revenue and are the source of most of my stress (through regular rejections of my app updates). It would be nice if they charged less and stopped rejecting me for mentioning Android in my app copy.

>I like and prefer that I can only buy stuff and most importantly have a single place to cancel all my subscriptions without dark patterns like having to talk to a person to cancel.

You could STILL do that if that does happen on Apple. No one forces you. It just gives people more choices. Choices are good.

Not if every app decides to implement their own in app subscription in order to make it harder for me to cancel or dispute. And then move their app to not the App Store. Apple provides a common playground for every app. You need to provide these things to your customers or you can play with them. I like it because it forces developers to adhere to some standards. Like for example not tracking me and not building only the subscription start part but have the cancellation behind an email I need to send.

Just require that apps have to (non-exclusively) support Apple billing to be in the Apple store.

Then you can (personally) choose to never break the glass to install something from outside the store.

Apple forbids developers from even telling their customers that it's costing them 30% more.

Is it worth it to pay 30% more for everything in order to have that convenience?

Even if you think it is, other people might disagree. Apple prevents app creators from even mentioning that you can purchase content or subscriptions in a web browser instead.

I just want to be able to use the hardware I already paid for without Apple taking a cut of everything I do on it.

But you knew exactly the contract you are getting into and still went ahead with it.

Also Apple take around 15% from most developers.

Also it’s not really about providing choice given that developers will flock to the lowest % store and it doesn’t matter if that store siphons personal data. My main problem with this is that the push comes from profit margins and not care about the users and that is pretty obvious if you ask the why question a few times

"Monopoly is actually pretty cool" is definitely a new one but I guess it's par for the course on this site.

> If the user chose iOS maybe they chose it because they wanted the curated experience and the locked it product.

If no iOS user wants a 3rd party store, no one will install them, all of them will fail and we wouldn't be talking about this.

So why are Apple so afraid of a little competition? I think some iOS users (me) are willing to use other stores. And that's why Apple blocking it is anti-competitive.

One plausible argument is that Apple is afraid of other parties competing unfairly; if apps can ship outside the App Store - and, critically, if they can thereby bypass some of the restrictions Apple imposes through their review process - then ex. Google and Facebook could ship apps that do bad things (probably privacy related) and abuse their own market positions to coerce people into using such apps. Given that this doesn't happen on Android, it might well not be a problem, but Google already does anything they want on Android and arguably the restrictions that companies would want to bypass just don't exist there so it may or may not be a useful point of comparison.

A different angle is: If a user wants a 3rd party app store, why did they buy an iOS device?

(To be clear, I'm not really convinced either way at this point; I'm throwing out what I think are reasonable arguments but that doesn't mean I'm convinced there aren't good counterarguments to them)

> If a user wants a 3rd party app store, why did they buy an iOS device?

Wants and circumstances can change over time. When I purchased my device, Fortnite and Xbox Cloud Streaming were available from the Apple App Store. Now they aren't.

Also I can want more out of my device; none of my devices are perfect but I still buy them. I believe 3rd party stores would be an improvement to my device. Replace the feature "3rd party app store" with folding phone: "Why did they purchase an iOS device if they wanted a folding phone" is a leap in logic to "No iOS user wants a folding phone"

A year ago, I'd say USB-C, but that's no longer the case.

> if they can thereby bypass some of the restrictions Apple imposes through their review process

Those same restrictions are blocking apps like Xbox Cloud Streaming. When Apple chooses to block those, but I still want access to apps, 3rd parties providing the such apps isn't unfair competition.

> guys, it's a phone/tablet. The consoles are much more like a General Purpose Computers and we are not really touching those

I mean, I'm on board with using video game consoles as proper computers as well, but my phone literally has gcc installed so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

It’s not a general purpose device, it’s a phone. The only reason why anyone is pushing for this is because their profits are affected and they do all sorts of mental gymnastics in order to justify it. If Apple tomorrow says 0% fees - 90% of the developers are going to say YES we did it. But in reality no new user freedoms were gained or choice to the user was provided. It’s an assumption but everyone always talks about the % being high and given that there are more app developers than console developers it seems like it’s not a mindset but just a “it hurts my profit margins” which has 0 benefit for the user.