Except that if I don't like one store, I can always go to another. That's the case with Android, and at least to an extent with Windows (even store apps can be distributed and installed by package if you don't want to use their store, plus classic Windows apps are still a thing). With iOS, it's Apple's way or no way at all. There's no competition.
Changing countries is usually not even possible because of immigration restrictions. And even if you could get past that you are looking at years/decades before you are a proper citizen.
Speaking of which, even just developing for iOS is a painful chore compared to Android. Unfortunately when the client and the users want iPhones, folks like us have to develop for them. In this world, it's fuck or walk.
If you run a business and then complain about where your customers prefer to buy your products... you're literally complaining about the fact that you have paying customers. You're free to not support the people who keep you in business but they're then also free to not keep you in business anymore.
it theoretically would be fine to dev for apple, if they added proper progressive web app support (or gave users the tools to build this out themselves) but of course that would hurt their interests by introducing competing (even if inferior) software distribution methods to the native effectively walled garden monopoly they have now.
As a developer, you should be listening to your users, not telling them what to use.
Also, iOS is a treat to build on. Not sure what your source on that is, but they don't have the device and OS fragmentation of Android, to say the least.
My source is me, having to develop and manage a cross-platform mobile app (Android and iOS). Doing anything with the latter platform is an uphill struggle, from the platform itself to publishing the app. On the other hand, working with Android is pretty smooth despite the fragmentation; most issues with it are purely visual and easily fixed.
A better way to put it is that Apple has a monopoly on selling apps to iOS owners. So yes, Walmart and Apple can both have a monopoly on their "shelves", but Walmart doesn't have a monopoly on their customers. Their customers also shop at grocery stores, Best Buy, online, etc. If I don't agree with Walmart's terms my potential customers can still buy my product at any of these other stores.
The other issue here is using dominance in one market to expand into another. Walmart may sell their own branded stuff, but even then they're still a retailer buying and selling things. Compare that with Apple where building phones and selling online music subscriptions are different markets.
This is a good point -- the friction in switching from shopping at Walmart to shopping at Target, for example is pretty low (provided both exist in you local area).
The friction of switching from iPhone to Android is high for most people: purchasing an iPhone quality Android device and repurchasing apps could easily exceed $1000.
> The friction of switching from iPhone to Android is high for most people: purchasing an iPhone quality Android device and repurchasing apps could easily exceed $1000.
But...so could the cost of buying a iPhone quality iPhone (without trade in or other discount the XS Max seems to be $999 to $1499.)
This is like saying I’d like to have a Dodge Viper engine dropped into my Subaru Outback to get more HP, but that’s not the way things work. If I want Viper HP, I need to buy a Viper (or do the mods myself and accept the outcomes, ie jailbreaking)
when the store also controls the ordinance it lives in and makes shoppers approve several big red "THIS STORE IS UNSAFE" banners if they even think of shopping anywhere else, then yes, that store having a monopoly over its shelves is an issue.
