Apple just kicked Fortnite off the App Store

It's not Apple vs. Fortnite. It's actually Apple vs. Users. Apple has been taking us for a ride this whole time. We pay damn much and buy the phone. It is the user's property from then on. What the user install's and uninstall's from his phone should be his decision. Taking a cut of say, 3%, to keep the app store running is forgivable. But 30% digging into users pocket is unpardonable. Apple is no longer the underdog that it was 40 years ago, and some fanboys pretending it to be is despicable. It's a monopoly and the only thing it cares is it's profitability. Despite all the sugarcoated lies Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google have been saying to the senate, they are a monopoly. Stop letting them deceive us. Let's take the power back. Stop enabling such deception. Death of a country is determined by it's governance. Death of a society is determined by it's culture and greedy monopolies. The way we can claim our power is by raising awareness to the point that the powers that are will take note and take action.

> It's actually Apple vs. Users. Apple has been taking us for a ride this whole time.

Oh please. Nobody who actually uses Apple feels that way. Though I agree they should allow a way to sideload apps.

One of the downsides of being primarily an iOS dev is not being able to participate in activities like game-jams because there's no way to casually share my stuff with other users.

> Taking a cut of say, 3%, to keep the app store running is forgivable. But 30%

Do you know how much Google, Microsoft, Steam and Epic themselves take from sales on their stores?

Apple protects its users better than the other major players. Their privacy and accessibility features alone are unparalleled, and they do a lot to curtail scummy developer practices. The entities which Apple protects users from are often the ones crying foul.

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647 and similar comments:

> the magnitude of this is not immediately apparent unless you’ve worked in an agency / freelanced building iOS applications. You have no idea how many user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown completely out of the water with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that". It wins arguments in favour of the user instantly and permanently.

> I’ve run up against Apple’s capricious review process more times than I can count, so I’ve got more reason than most to complain about it. But it’s impossible for me to argue that these rules don’t help the user when I’ve personally seen it happen so many times. It’s a double-edged sword to be sure, and I believe the best way of balancing things in favour of the end-user is to be more open than Apple is, but there are undeniable benefits to the user with the current system.

> they do a lot to curtail scummy developer practices.

Which is excellent. Apple taking a cut for apps I have no problem with. They have support, I trust them with privacy/security and so on. That costs money.

The interesting discussion is how much apple can claim to own a part of profits made in the apps, by selling content (in-app purchases).

On one hand: if a game is free for a trial, and you can unlock the full game I think that should count as an app purchase (the alternative would be to not have in-app upgrades and just have 2 apps, which was a worse situation).

But on the other hand: if I buy a recipe app for $10 and then recipes for $1 a piece which I could also buy on the corresponding website, then I don't think apple should have a cut at all.

> if I buy a recipe app for $10 and then recipes for $1 a piece which I could also buy on the corresponding website, then I don't think apple should have a cut at all.

Ah that sounds like a fair point at first, but it could be argued that you gained access to those sales because of Apple.

More importantly, they're processing payments for you, and every payment processor out there takes a cut, one way or the other.

Do stores pay a percentage of each sale to the mall?

That seems directly comparable. The store wouldn't have any sales without the mall's infrastructure so it seems like they would be owed a cut of everything that happens in the store