As a developer, I flatly refuse to engage with Apple in any way because of their $100 annual fee.
I feel especially vindicated when stuff like this surfaces.
Imagine being the richest company in the world and having the audacity to charge people for the privilege of being able to contribute to your platform.
It is absolutely insane, and nothing will convince me otherwise.
One reason they are charging is to weed out bad actors or people not serious enough about publishing apps on their stores. That said they could do this as a one off like Google, and make it cheaper too.
Yes and no. If you are making a macOS app and want to distribute your own binary (meaning not via the App Store), you are basically doing everything yourself and not using Apple's network. You still have to get a developer account because that's how you 1) get a valid developer signature, and 2) get access to app notarization service. Both 1 and 2 are now mandatory unless you force your users to jump through a lot of security hoops to open your app.
I maintain an open source macOS software and begrudgingly signed up for a developer account since I didn't want my users to have to suffer through the security settings screen. At least I got a donation program up a few years later so at least I'm not paying out of pocket anymore. Some of my peers/competitors (open source text editors) are still not signing their app (since they didn't feel like getting this sorted out) forcing users to have to go through the security settings which I think is a crappy situation.
They are charging for the access to their "walled city/garden", they are promoting digital feudalism and the worst part is that other companies see them as exemplary for these terrible practices.
I feel especially vindicated when stuff like this surfaces.
Imagine being the richest company in the world and having the audacity to charge people for the privilege of being able to contribute to your platform.
It is absolutely insane, and nothing will convince me otherwise.