Whereas Apple sold the user a phone, so the users are clearly Apple's customers. There is an argument that they are also the 3P app developer's customers, but there should be no debate about the fact that they are Apple's customers, using a platform developed by Apple. If 3P app developers want to access Apple's customers on a platform developed by Apple, then they should expect to play by Apple's rules...
(And no, I never worked for Apple. In fact, I have worked both for Google and for multiple 3P app developers who were subject to the so-called Apple Tax.)
That whole argument is based on the implicit assumption that Apple's products would still be as attractive to consumers as they are right now, even if they didn't allow 3rd party developers access to their platform. Which is a completely insane take, like literally pathologically insane, you-should-get-professional-help take for me to swallow.
These devs aren't doing this, by and large, today, because its not in their business interest to do so. But: capitalism is an efficiency maximizer. Software has lower margins today than it ever has, and they're only getting lower. The market simply cannot support 30% taxes forever; it'll happen one-by-one, its already happening one-by-one. Apple's choice is: Get ahead of it, find a better more efficient path for developers to distribute on their platforms; or watch their platforms become boring places where no one can possibly leverage their extremely bad and proprietary technology to make money, and "apps" only make sense for gigacorporations to distribute as a value-add for their web apps.
2. Apple also sells Macs, where developers can access "Apple's customers" unencumbered, without needing to play by Apple's rules (developers may also opt-in to a lower-form of "playing by Apple's rules" by submitting their apps to Apple for notarization, or naturally, they may also opt-in to the Full Rules by distributing through the App Store. This is a fantastic, multi-tiered system that works, obviously, well enough for everyone.)
Really, Surface has THAT MUCH?! I honestly doubt it. I think I've only seen 4-6 surface devices in the wild in my life(in Europe). Maybe in the US they have 10% market share.
Successful enough that made Apple start shipping keyboards with the iPad to compete in that segment, as laptop wannabe.
According to Gartner, "Surface has never had more than 2.1% of the PC market."
At 2.1%, they're basically a non-player in the market.
Selling default placement & promotion is a very different beast from "Dell only allows Dell-approved software on Dell computers". We can all agree the latter would have been terrible in many ways.
> If 3P app developers want to access Apple's customers on a platform developed by Apple, then they should expect to play by Apple's rules...
Strongly disagree. Customers and developers should be free to transact using their own devices as they please, without Apple involved. Apple is very welcome to offer services for money - access to the app store, support services, and promotion etc all make perfect sense.
The end result of everybody on the path from the user to the developer adding rules & taking a cut is a world that blocks digital innovation entirely and completely hamstrings the software industry.
This would suggest the "Apple tax" on devs is less than the Steam tax on devs, despite Gog or whatever existing.
Windows users aren’t viewed as Microsoft’s customers from the point of view of third party software. Same with MacOS. Apple has pushed this paradigm in iOS because it’s ludicrously profitable.
Controlling the evolution of a ubiquitous computing platform gives a company a huge amount of power. Add to that the power to control any commercial transaction performed on that platform is simply too much concentration of power.