[JimDabell]

> Before this unnatural practice became prevalent

We’re talking about computer hardware and software. Complaining that it is “unnatural” makes no sense.

> any computer user and / or Linux / Windows / Mac / Android developer could create and distribute software on the respective platforms for free without any such financial consideration.

This isn’t true. The first Android device was launched to the public after the App Store was open for business. And you are ignoring all the platforms where this was a common practice beforehand, like consoles. Apple weren’t the first to charge for access to a platform, this was already a common practice. Nintendo have been doing it since the mid 80s, for instance.

[Const-me]

The consoles are niche entertainment devices. They also have many alternatives: multiple stores on PCs, and several newer cloud-based products. For this reason I'm OK with the stores in xbox/playstation/nintendo.

With smartphones it's different. Phones are not niche devices, they are ubiquitous and have killed whole industries like consumer photo/video equipment and portable audio.

From consumer point of view, no reasonable alternatives have left. It's for this reason I'm not OK with Apple and Google abusing their monopoly.

[JimDabell]

> The consoles are niche entertainment devices.

They sell by the tens of millions. They are in no way “niche”.

> Phones are not niche devices, they are ubiquitous and have killed whole industries like consumer photo/video equipment and portable audio.

It wasn’t common for things like cameras to have open development platforms either.

[Const-me]

> They sell by the tens of millions

There’re billions of active Android devices. That’s 2 orders of magnitude difference. Compared to these volumes, consoles are niche devices.

And don’t forget about alternatives. If you wanna play videogames you don’t have to buy a console, you can get a PC and buy Windows games from gog, steam, epic or origin. And in some cases like take-two directly from developer. And recently there were multiple attempts to make cloud gaming work, pretty sure some day someone will do that successfully.

Because customers have so many alternatives, xbox and playstation are not a monopoly despite MS/Sony are selling devices locked to their respective stores.

For smartphones, customers only have 2 alternatives. It’s for this reason apple and google are a monopoly, and we should treat them this way i.e. regulate the hell out of them.

> It wasn’t common for things like cameras to have open development platforms either.

I don’t think many people care about open platforms. They care about choice. Back in the days, if you didn’t like e.g. Sony pushing their overprices memory sticks, you could buy a camera that’s not Sony, there were many other good vendors on the market. Nowadays, the cameras are either prosumer and professional (i.e. expensive), or non-existent because smartphones killed them. And while there’re many companies making smartphones, all these smartphones are controlled by just two.

[JimDabell]

> Compared to these volumes, consoles are niche devices.

“Niche” doesn’t mean “this other thing sold more”.

> A traditional game console is in 51 percent of U.S. households.

— https://venturebeat.com/2015/04/14/155-million-americans-pla...

Consoles are in no way “niche devices”. You’re only saying that they are because it’s convenient for the point you are making. If we can’t agree on a basic fact like this, there’s no discussion to be had here.