[unknown2374]

There are open platforms, and due to convenience of distribution developers have reluctantly chosen these platforms over open ones. Now while I am not defending Apple's position here, developers who have chosen to distribute only on such platforms for the past few decades are partly to blame too.

The success of Apple (etc.) are due to choices that developers have made, closing themselves in and then citing anti-trust when they themselves locked the doors and gave away the keys.

[ece]

While this is even more true for consoles, the difference is in a specific purpose vs a general purpose.

General purpose platforms that become overly closed have roundly been rejected or been forced to open up: Carterfone, AOL, Windows, carrier locked phones, etc.. even iOS itself didn't allow apps at first and now does.

Closed platforms for a specific purpose like consoles, kindles, rokus, etc.. do a bit better because they are 1) more likely to have competitors, and 2) have more limited impact from being specific purpose platforms, though are still capable of maintaining monopolies/duopolies.

The phone market is a iOS/Android duopoly, and both are being forced to open up more. Hardly surprising.

[Thorentis]

Exactly. Developers loved the gravy train while it lasted. 30% cut for being put into the hands of millions of people instantly was pocket change in the 2010s. Now that the market is saturated and developers have tougher competition, they're turning on Apple. Take your money, smile that it happened, and go work on open platforms from now on.

[notSupplied]

What if the phone is in the hands of millions of people in the first place because it is full of apps? Didn’t the Mac cede it’s place in PC history because Windows had more software?