From my perspective as a user, that 30% cut is the cost of getting my business. I already trust Apple for software update and other cloud storage and I’d prefer not to have to vet another entity for handling my payments.
I see nothing inherently wrong with providing the service, but Apple shouldn't be prohibiting alternatives, or apps clearly denoting that going through Apple costs more.
People like the above might choose the Apple method, even if it costs more, for the added security layer, whereas someone might choose the lower price especially with an established and trusted party.
Because it's not just the cut from a credit card processor. It's also fraud handling, forex, invoicing, marketing, distribution, and fees for apple to operate the marketplace, plus their cut. I'm not going to defend 30% as the number, nor the _enforced_ 30% cut, but the 10x cut is not an apples to apples comparison. It's the equivalent of saying "just use OVH instead of AWS"
Now try canceling your idevice for a competitor and Apple will change your messages to white text on green so none of your friends can read them easily (due to the distribution of retinal cone cells).
> Apple will change your messages to white text on green so none of your friends can read them easily
Messages always shows the received message as black text on a grey background.
Sent messages can have blue or green backgrounds. Your Apple using friends continue to read your messages just fine. Re-reading messages they’ve sent you is a different matter.
More surprising is that someone would complain about the SMS experience in 2020 in the context of smartphones, given the breadth of rich cross-platform alternatives that do not charge by the message / picture / audioclip.
