The article posted by a business entity with an agenda of its own, you mean?
It’s but one of many subjective takes by someone who earns through clicks, grabbing attention, instigating circular discourse online.
I have no obligation to support this author’s position, OR Apple’s rhetoric. I judge on the technical implementation; Apple earns through hardware sales and fees for services charged directly to service users.
Whether you agree with the price they set for those things is irrelevant; technically speaking the bulk of their revenue comes from hardware sales and direct charges for services.
Their competitors could do that too. They could charge for a phone and take a cut for app distribution, sell storage services. They don’t, because they don’t want to compete with Apple; they want the public and courts to force Apple to change.
That they went a different way of generating revenue and it bit them in the ass is not Apple's problem. Those businesses made their choices.
That’s how it’s supposed to work. All this rhetoric about those “poor” wealthy businesses being screwed by Apple are actually mad they picked the wrong path to revenue.
Ideas like designer drugs and therapy to embed experience and knowledge is way more interesting than VR apps