Apple vs. the "Free Market"
Apple’s enforcement of a 30% fee on digital purchases made through iOS apps like Patreon is reigniting debate over its market power and control of the iPhone ecosystem. Commenters argue over whether this is legitimate platform monetization or monopoly-style rent-seeking that distorts prices, limits software choice, and even enables censorship, especially given that users cannot freely install alternative app stores or operating systems. Others counter that the open web remains a viable workaround, that many users value Apple’s curated, privacy-branded environment, and that any change should come via regulation rather than expecting major services to abandon the App Store.
Apple’s 30% Cut and Digital-Only Policy
- Apple charges its commission on digital goods and in‑app payments, not on physical goods (e.g., Amazon, Temu, Uber rides).
- Several commenters see this digital/physical distinction as arbitrary and driven by fear of backlash if Apple taxed all retail purchases.
- Patreon is viewed as a gray area: mixes digital access, fan “clubs,” physical swag, and tips; unclear which parts Apple can legitimately classify as in‑app purchases.
- The “every creator loses 30% of gross” claim is disputed:
- Only iOS / iPadOS in‑app purchases are affected.
- Creators can raise iOS prices so Apple’s fee is added on top rather than taken from the creator’s share.
- It’s unclear how large the affected share of Patreon’s overall revenue is.
Monopoly Power, Lock‑In, and Regulation
- Many call this “textbook monopoly abuse” and/or a form of “enshittification” based on Apple’s control of iOS app distribution.
- Others argue Apple faces competition from Android and the web; users and developers “can just leave,” especially by using Patreon’s mobile website.
- Counterargument: network effects, switching costs, and app-ecosystem lock‑in make “just leave” unrealistic; comparisons are made to Microsoft bundling IE.
- Some advocate antitrust action, mandated alternative app stores, or even splitting Apple into devices, OS, and services/marketplace units.
Privacy, “Users as Product,” and Incentives
- One view: Apple’s privacy moves mainly ensure that all access to iOS users goes through Apple as middleman; services, App Store and ad revenue are rising faster than hardware.
- Others respond that Apple remains meaningfully different from ad‑driven companies; its business is not primarily selling user data, and privacy features still benefit customers even if profit‑motivated.
- Debate over whether “users are the product” properly applies to Apple; some see the phrase as misused and overly reductionist.
Ownership, Openness, and Security
- Critics: if users cannot install arbitrary software, unlock bootloaders, or choose app stores, they don’t truly own their devices; this enables censorship and political control.
- Defenders: locked‑down phones protect non‑technical users from a hostile ecosystem; open sideloading would massively increase malware and fraud.
- Counterexamples are raised (Android, Linux) to argue that open models with curated repositories can balance safety and freedom.
Native Apps vs Web / PWAs
- Strong support from some for abandoning the App Store entirely for use‑cases like Patreon, which already has a capable mobile site.
- Others say users expect native apps; complex web apps still feel worse on phones, and until recently iOS limited key web capabilities like push notifications.