"Apple should be stopped from creating an artificial barrier towards people selling apps to consumers without Apple's approval. "
Here's how the free market really works:
(1) Apple makes a device at great capital investment and because of this
(2) Apple gets to decides how that device works, what it works with, which apps it can run, where users can get those from etc. Then
(3) consumers can assign whatever weight they want to the constraints Apple has built into the device and then they buy the device or not.
(4) developers can assign whatever weight they want to the ornerousness of the terms Apple has set vs the size of the potential market and then determine if they want to develop for that platform or not.
As it turns out in the case of iOS the devices have been very popular with users and developers. If Apple's terms were too ornerous and draconian we might expect that no one would be developing for iOS or no one would be buying the iphone.
This is again how the free market works.
"There's no reason they couldn't separate the store APIs from the App Store itself, allowing the creation of third-party stores and direct sales. "
There's also no reason they couldn't give all their money to sponsor poor children in developing countries.
There's reasons they shouldn't do either of these seemingly noble things though.
While this is how the free market works, ironically Apple have implemented the very opposite of the free market. Those who develop apps have also expended capital. If their app is suddenly yanked from the market then you can no longer claim that you are working in a perfect free market.
Incidentally, I disagree with you but I still had to think through my points. I am very surprised that you have been voted down. I upvoted you, I hope some other folks do too - your POV is actually quite germaine to this debate and I appreciate that you have expressed it!
Here's how the free market really works:
(1) Apple makes a device at great capital investment and because of this
(2) Apple gets to decides how that device works, what it works with, which apps it can run, where users can get those from etc. Then
(3) consumers can assign whatever weight they want to the constraints Apple has built into the device and then they buy the device or not.
(4) developers can assign whatever weight they want to the ornerousness of the terms Apple has set vs the size of the potential market and then determine if they want to develop for that platform or not.
As it turns out in the case of iOS the devices have been very popular with users and developers. If Apple's terms were too ornerous and draconian we might expect that no one would be developing for iOS or no one would be buying the iphone.
This is again how the free market works.
"There's no reason they couldn't separate the store APIs from the App Store itself, allowing the creation of third-party stores and direct sales. "
There's also no reason they couldn't give all their money to sponsor poor children in developing countries.
There's reasons they shouldn't do either of these seemingly noble things though.