[keepper]

...or Apple could be a true platform and not compete unfairly?

You know, just a thought.

They want secure app distribution? Great! Build an equitable charge model. Charge for transactions, charge for usage, don’t charge flat rates that don’t scale. Certainly don’t prohibit other payment gateways.

And certain don’t punish your competitors in ways you don’t punish yourself. ( blanket certificate removals for a company and all its subsidiaries)

The ends do not justify the means. Apple can run a profitable and secure app distribution platform. It requires being open and fair. They are not doing that.

[LexGray]

The threat model Apple is addressing by not allowing third party payment systems is user privacy, issues many systems having securing that data, and dark patterns vs subscription cancelation or outright scams.

It is not an unreasonable thing to offer a platform with that security built in.

Blanket punishments are about the only thing that works on large corporations. Everything else can be worked around. Facebook would not have budged an inch on their app unless half their company was shut down a day. I have no doubt part of the point of Epic trying to bypass the billing system is to get additional user data they can monetize.

While it is true Apple is neither open or fair, it is reasonable to assume the many of the apps on the store have no intention of being either open or fair either. Apple is trying to stand between the consumer and rampant corporate ethical lapses. That they are also doing so in the name of corporate greed makes them hard to defend, but then I hate how much of my income funds the police.