What Apple adds is non-zero. As the parent comment points out, Apple offers discovery, billing, and distribution. The App Store is a single (theoretically trusted) place for iOS users to search for apps.
Let's not forget that, at least in theory, Apple curates the App Store. Neither Chrome nor AT&T does that in any substantial way.
Furthermore, Apple's business model is different from Google/Android's. Android can be a loss-leader as long as it draws users to revenue-generating Google services. Last I checked, iOS was one of Apple's primary sources of revenue. In principle (if not practice) Apple's model is based on offering a privacy and security-centric platform. For the privilege of accessing it, you pay developer subscription fees and give Apple a cut of the money you make through your app.
I think it's totally valid to argue what Apple offers is not worth the 15-30% cut. Either way, though, Apple is adding more than zero value.
> Apple offers discovery, billing, and distribution
In the context of Netflix, I'm not sure that they're actually getting any value from any of those things from Apple, since they already have well-established pretty much everything in that area.
I mean, sure, maybe someone had never heard of Netflix until they saw it in the app store, but I'm going to guess that number of people is well below even a blip in Netflix's revenue (especially given the universal 30% cut). Likewise, Netflix is pumping more bits around the internet than most other companies; distributing apps is only a benefit for them because they literally don't have an alternative option for iOS.
For other, smaller companies, I would agree that it is non-zero, and I would also argue that 30% is way too much.
Before Apple came out with the iPhone, the carriers had complete control over the apps on your phone, and their access to the network.
Even initial iterations of the iPhone limited video streaming to WiFi only. Apple blazed the trail enabling millions (billions?) of hours of Netflix viewing. Apple devices are a primary use case motivating my initial Netflix subscription for kids to watch in the car on the iPad.
Further, Apple iOS provides the SDK and APIs to enable Netflix to develop their app in the first place, securely stream their content, etc.
The App Store is the only mechanism that Apple uses to charge companies for exploiting the power of these devices for their own benefit.
It’s a lot more than just the seamless experience of installing and running the app. It’s the whole stack that forms a cornerstone of how Netflix customers experience the Netflix product.
When was the last time I consumed my Netflix on something that wasn't an Apple device?? I can’t even remember!
While carrier app stores were a thing, it was quite common to download apps from other sources before the iPhone. There were Java apps, Windows mobile apps and others.
I'd agree - Apple handling payments/fraud/refunds and all the rest has value.
Where they don't have a value proposition is with the larger providers of content. People turning up and wanting to buy your product (and not caring how it's provided to you)
Same issue has been seen within PC gaming for many years - most consumers would quite happily add games to their Steam library - but Ubi, EA, Blizzard, Bethesda, Rockstar blah blah blah all nudge/command you to buy from their own shonky store.
It adds payment/fraud/refund etc only because providing that is cheaper than making sure developers pay their share after the fact. Benefits of a monopoly! Just think for one brief second how better the eco system would be by now if apple wasn't killing it via a monopoly. You are pretty much praising the mob that sells you protection because they gave you a point of sale that already subtracts their share.
That monopoly is so profitable that even TV manufacturers, kids toy manufacturers, etc now have a lock-in app store! Did you ever saw the marketing material for smart TVs development? I recommend you look it up. Their only 'feature' is 'captive users'.
Also, on your other over-simplified example, online gaming stores didn't solve any problem for the old consumers. Most of them still buy games despite the online systems like steam, while crying about lack of physical copies. What it did was unlock a huge market of non-gamers that didn't bothered to buy before.
Let's not forget that, at least in theory, Apple curates the App Store. Neither Chrome nor AT&T does that in any substantial way.
Furthermore, Apple's business model is different from Google/Android's. Android can be a loss-leader as long as it draws users to revenue-generating Google services. Last I checked, iOS was one of Apple's primary sources of revenue. In principle (if not practice) Apple's model is based on offering a privacy and security-centric platform. For the privilege of accessing it, you pay developer subscription fees and give Apple a cut of the money you make through your app.
I think it's totally valid to argue what Apple offers is not worth the 15-30% cut. Either way, though, Apple is adding more than zero value.