There have been several attempts in the past to build a 3D standard for web. Most, if not all, have failed. The main reason that they have failed is that they have required extensive 3D party plug-ins or additional software that bloats web browsers, opens additional security flaws, or is simply incompatible with a given platform. There have been some advances made recently with the progression of WebGL, introducing a more accepted standard is widely used among all web browsers. Even with this technological improvement, there is still a lack of practical application for this standard to be widely used in everyday marketing. While I have seen some unique uses of 3D in product marketing (the Lacroix can designer comes to mind - http://mylacroix.com/), mainstream use of this type of marketing has still failed to gain widespread acceptance. I feel that web based 3D will not really catch on until there is a significant number of connected AR/VR devices that can fully utilize the unique attributes of 3D. When there are users that can justify the cost from a marketing standpoint to fully integrate 3D design, then we will being to see a true evolution of 3D web-based technology.

Each of the devices have radically different technical implementations and user bases, so I would try to identify advisors or companies with products and experience in those marketplaces. Try to clearify what your primary goals and objectives are in advance of pursuing professional advice and you will be able isolate what aspects of that individual platform that you will need to solve. Like others have mentioned, Odesk and this site are useful resources, additionally you can try reaching out to developers directly or join developer forums on services like steam. Some services such as Microsofts' may have non-disclosure agreements in place with working developers, so you may be required to approach them as a paying client to get the information your are seeking.

The short answer is, you can't. Unless one of the versions price is free, which is what a majority of apps are. Any pricing difference is going to alienate a certain percentages of customers. Think of alternative ways that you might accomplish the same goal, which is to get the highest price for your product. Release lite versions which have different features and use analytics to track which convert better. Another solution would be to add the features as in app purchases, and let the marketplace decide which they prefer.

Not knowing exactly the violation you are speaking of, there could be two possible reasons for this: 1. Apple is aware of the alternative use of their platform and allows Fancy to use their system in a method that violates their TOS because of the volume of transactions and their communications with Apple. 2. Apple has not yet detected the violation and/or the violation has not been reported to Apple.

As long as they sign a NDA, you should be ok. Ask them which other software they have tested and see if it correlates with what you need tested.