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.
To stop saying that I'm using the rules like I want to. Stop pretending like you're more objective than me. I'm not implying that you're being disrespectful, I'm implying that you should stop pretend like I'm bending logic when I'm being respectful. Can you understand that simple request? Thank you in advance, I know you'll get what I mean.
I explained that Apple has a very big marketshare, only shared with one other competitor. Its rules are draconian and have caused problems in the past.
Regarding marketshare, the metrics I am using are on a regional basis like I mentioned in my past posts (which you consider random probably because you don't read them). If your metric is global, then you won't agree. But I clearly said I was talking about regional marketshare. In the US, they have nearly 50% of the market, and it's growing.
However, globally, the only two competitors are Apple and Google for smart device OS marketshare. That's what you can call an oligopoly, a state of limited competition, in which a market is shared by a small number of producers or sellers. (Definition taken from Google) The implications of an oligopoly, which should concern you, are the following (taken from google so you don't say my posts are random anymore):
"The economic and legal concern is that an oligopoly can block new entrants, slow innovation, and increase prices, all of which harm consumers. Firms in an oligopoly set prices, whether collectively – in a cartel – or under the leadership of one firm, rather than taking prices from the market."
So, while Apple's rules might be getting in certain areas more loose, as you can see in this case, and in the case of Apple forbidding xCloud and stadia on its app store, that Apple can mostly decide who gets to operate on their platform almost on purely subjective rules, which they decide, and so they can limit competition by that same fact, in a situation where they are either leaning towards monopoly, or towards oligopoly.
This is not just affecting the question of iOS, but also many other areas touched by the big IT compagnies (ex: mergers and acquisitions), which I already explained are put under hearing so that the government can gain clarity on these anti-competitive practices that we're seeing.
Thanks again for changing your attitude and being constructive.