One drawback of the current situation is that for example you can’t purchase ebooks through the iOS Kindle app (because Amazon can’t/won’t let Apple take their 30% cut there), and the app can’t even link to the corresponding product page on Amazon. If the new ruling enables such purchases and linking, then as a consumer I’m very much in favor of it.
I used to love buying comic books in Comixology—it was so quick and easy to try new titles. And then Amazon bought Comixology, and almost immediately removed in-app purchases. I haven't purchased many comics since.
But yet you can by directly from Amazon in their app without using Apple. How can Apple say that they cannot sell eBooks directly on Kindle app, but allow direct sells from the retail store?
You can’t buy Kindle books with the iOS Amazon app. It only allows to download a free sample.
Amusingly, when you tap on an Amazon link to a Kindle book in iOS Safari, it redirects to the app (because of the Amazon URL), but then the app notices that it’s a Kindle book page and redirects back to Safari.
It's because then Apple Books would have to compete with the Kindle app on fair terms. IE Apple is being anti-competitive and giving their own app an advantage. This is basically a part of what the original lawsuit was about.
Apple doesn’t ban sales of eBook, but claims that those are software and would apply a 30% processing fee to them like on all virtual goods. They also demand the price to be comparable to other sources, so Amazon has to decide between
1. taking a 30% hit on its iOS sales,
2. forgoing them, or
3. raise its prices of eBook by 30% on its main app.
There are enough few enough iOS sales, and free sample downloads lead to enough conversion on the website later to go for 2.
Apple doesn’t make the same claim on physical goods.
