And yet somehow indie devs have managed to sell software for macOS for decades before the invention of the Apple App Store. Only the larger software shops are atually running their own payment and licensing backends. Most use payment providers like Paddle or Fastspring. There are also other distribution channels like SetApp for expample.
One thing that Apple has made very easy for devs are In-App Payments. But I think you can argue if that is such a good thing for Apple's customers.
macOS app ecosystem isn't really thriving and the regulatory complexities arrived after the Internet matured.
Something being possible isn't the same as being good. Selling 1000 copies at %30 commission(it tends to be around %50 once you ad stuff like VAT) is much better than selling 10 copies at %1 commission.
I also think that from the users perspective it's much better to have one place where you manage all your payments/subscriptions/downloads etc. That can be solved through some kind of unified purchasing interface though.
I'm not saying that App Store distribution is useless. But I think vendors should have a choice. If Apple's system is so superior, they have little to worry about.
> ... you have access to the exact same processes as the Epic or Microsoft.
No you don't. Netflix and Amazon got special deals (before the whole Epic saga) [1] [2]. From partial waivers of the Apple Tax, to Apple-run editorial promotions, to bundling!
"The emails could serve as evidence that for lucrative and powerful partners, Apple seems to be willing to make concessions."
One thing that Apple has made very easy for devs are In-App Payments. But I think you can argue if that is such a good thing for Apple's customers.