> I don’t think Apple sees this as a promising revenue stream. It’s just another way to encourage people to stay within the walled garden. That seems many times

> I don’t think Apple sees this as a promising revenue stream. It’s just another way to encourage people to stay within the walled garden. That seems many times more valuable than any possible licensing fees they would get from manufacturers I agree this is the optimal way of seeing it. Apple did not do the same with App Store though. The initial vision was to just apply enough fees for hosting and vetting the apps. Now with the way they hold on to the 15/17/30% fee, they are treating it like a revenue stream instead of a "courtesy service".