No, padib. There's only Switch for handheld gaming. Nintendo owns pretty much 100% of the market. But if you insist on your logic that there are many more options than Switch (which would then be PlayStation, Xbox, PC, smartphones, tablets etc.), then the same has to apply the other way around for Apple's store that houses games in addition to all sorts of other apps. Apple doesn't control the game market, heck, they are not even remotely close within their own segment of mobile gaming where iOS has a marketshare of ~25%.
Did you know that every iPhone user can open Safari and buy Fortnite microtransactions directly from Epic's site without Apple getting a cut from the transaction? That is allowed by Apple. What Epic insists on with their lawsuit is that they are supposed to get direct access to the market that Apple built without having to compensate Apple for it in any form.
Epic's case against Google is very similar. Epic had pulled Fortnite from the Google Play store in 2019 to provide it only through their own store on Android, but then in 2020 Epic brought Fortnite back to Google Play. The issue that Epic has is that they want direct access to the market that Google built without having to compensate Google for it in any form.
Going further with this, you have to ask yourself why Epic didn't target Nintendo, PS and Xbox yet, because all console manufacturers' ecosystems are even more closed than iOS. The reason why Epic didn't do it is because a core part of their strategy is to instrumentalize gamers to pressure other big companies into giving in to their demands. But what would happen if Epic tried to turn console gamers against console manufacturers over their free-to-play game; do you think console gamers would side with Epic on this? The answer is obvious, hence why Epic's way of how they go about all of this is so laughably inconsistent and full of holes.
You're wrong Rol about the first part. While there are many options for gaming on the go (including on Smartphones), there are only a few options for handheld computing, two to be exact at the OS level.
As for everything you're saying against Epic, I mean I thought I made it clear that their case is garbage. Isn't that my point anyway?
Their strawman argument only gives more legitimacy to Apple, who, apart from this flimsy case by Epic, is moving towards monopoly territory. You should be concerned about it.
@LurkerJ, who said anything about being offended? I just asked you to stop that's all.
To stop what? You asked me to stop and informed that "I am being respectful to you", you wouldn't say unless you wanted to imply that I was disrespectful. What a random thing to say anyway, in fact, your last two posts are full of random statements that don't say anything at all.
For the example, the underlined part: How are they exactly heading that way with a shrinking market? What recent practices imply to you that Apple is becoming more controlling? Why should I be more concerned when there is enough competition to keep Apple in check? You give no explanation whatsoever.
The truth of the matter is that iOS becomes more open with every annual update, and the app store policies have been largely the same for most developers since its inception, and those policies don't deviate from the norms the industry has been accustomed to. In addtion, iPhones sales ceiling has been established and the only forward is selling less iPhones (with updates cycles getting longer every year), I just don't understand what metrics you're looking at that makes you believe Apple is heading down a non-consumer friendly path.