> General computing platforms should be protected from such predatory practices by manufacturers through strong government regulations. I find it much more pla

> General computing platforms should be protected from such predatory practices by manufacturers through strong government regulations. I find it much more plausible that any regulations will end up entrenching market incumbents and closing off potential avenues for disruption. In other words, this can only make the situation worse or keep it somewhat the same, it won't make it better. > Stifling innovation isn't good for anyone, and as more and more people become software developers, this really just hurts the small guys ... Indie developers need protection from monopolistic and anti-competitive practices from larger players in the market through strong government regulation, not a discount on their first $1m in sales. Indie developers aren't the only stakeholders here, platform users are as well and any regulation will need to take into account their needs and interests. In purely numerical terms, the latter group outnumbers the indies by 100x or more. Realistically speaking, whose needs will any regulation give more precedence? The top concern amongst tech users today is security, whether its security of personal data or a more diffuse sense of security concerning the integrity of public discourse conducted online. It's very hard to imagine any kind of regulation protecting indie devs without also introducing regulations on the distribution process itself, in order to protect end users in these two areas. The only thing harder to disrupt than a commercially dominant player is a commercially dominant player ensconced in a complex regulatory regime. This is not a reality that indie developers or myself (personally), particularly like, but it's the reality we have. Ignoring it won't make it go away.