In recent days there was quite a debate about the conflict between Apple and Fortnite. Among other places, the debate arose in the official Publish0x telegram group. Here is a summary:

As you may know, authors are allowed to post a link to their Publish0x articles in the above mentioned Telegram group. That way, an author can draw attention to their work. (Note that you are only allowed to post to link ONCE per article you write on Publish0x.) That is what the author of this article dealing with Apple, DApps and Coinbase did. It is a good article, I enjoyed reading it and tipped the author. I can recommend reading that article after reading this one. Even though the article does not mention Fortnite, the author's introduction to his article on Telegram did. Here is the screenshot:

That introduction spurred some controversy:

(I haven't found any such article on Publish0x. Therefore, I believe INAM did not write one. In case there is an article and I wasn't able to find it, I will link to it, of course.)

The author responded with

which is technically correct, but you know, there was this introduction on Telegram that had mentioned Fortnite.

Another user provided interesting and relevant information on how other companies react to Apple's policy:

And there are two really well-made videos on YouTube discussing the issue. The first one was published after Epic Games' reaction to Apple banning Fortnite from the AppStore. That video summarizes the entire story very well, explains Epic Games' position and the video creator lays out the reasons why he rejects most of their claims. The second video goes in detail on Apple's reaction to Epic Games/Fortnite.

Here is what I think about the issue after researching both positions with regard to the quote from the Protonmail CEO:

There are other computers, tablets and smartphones consumers can buy.
The walled garden is part of Apple's product design. They control what users can do with their devices. If the costumers don't like that, they should not buy Apple products. In fact that is why I haven't bought any Apple products in years.

I also attempt to offer a solution:

However, software companies can only either accept Apple's terms and conditions or they can ignore Apple's costumer base. In case they opt to offer products to Apple's costumers, they should add the fees and additional costs resulting from the walled-garden approach to their products for Apple's costumers to pay.

To explain that a bit further: Apple's approach increases costs for app developers. The only people who can choose whether they prefer that walled-garden approach to an open platform, are Apple's customers. If they opt for lower prices (as I do by the way), they need to buy products from other manufacturers. If they prefer the walled-garden approach, they need to be prepared to pay higher prices. In fact, they already do. Apple's products are usually priced at the high-end.

I know this is a controversial issue and I hope I was able to offer some new information and maybe an interesting point of view. Please let me know in the comments what you think about it. Or write a counter-post on Publish0x, maybe. Feel free to try to change my mind. I usually respond well to constructive criticism, I incorporate new information into my point of view and I accept other points of view as well. Let's have a discussion. But please, let's try to keep it civil.