> These are apple's customers they have given you access to.
What would happen if this had been the standard applied to Windows?
> If the arguments were "these restrictions are so burdensome I can't be in the app store!", that's a different conversation. But they tend to be "I can access such an irresistible amount of customers via apple, I just wish I could take those benefits à la carte.
For some developers, they are. The ones that are complaining about it are the ones still trying to be in the app store despite the burden.
> What would happen if this had been the standard applied to Windows?
Microsoft had no problem taking features from popular third party Windows applications and building them into their own products, basically stealing the third party developers' markets. That looks worse to me than what Apple is doing.
Plese stop repeating this FUD in every reply on this thread, you already posted the exact same comment here[1] and here[2] as well, and I already explained you why it's false.
No, you explained that Apple has done the same thing. That doesn't mean MS didn't do what I said or that it didn't have a huge impact on third party Windows devs.
It's not FUD, it's historical fact. MS did exactly what I described, repeatedly. PG even commented about it in one of his essays years ago (his comment was that you could invest a lot in developing a third party Windows application and then find out you were just doing market research for Microsoft).
What would happen if this had been the standard applied to Windows?
> If the arguments were "these restrictions are so burdensome I can't be in the app store!", that's a different conversation. But they tend to be "I can access such an irresistible amount of customers via apple, I just wish I could take those benefits à la carte.
For some developers, they are. The ones that are complaining about it are the ones still trying to be in the app store despite the burden.