Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
And thats different than Epic how? You download an app to use services outside of your phone. Use the app to control a device outside your phone. Use the app to view video of the net for a monthly fee that is payed outside the app with no in app option.
I guess Amazon does get better treatment
 
No. They clearly said it was to help businesses affected by the pandemic. Games have not been affected. Apple could flip this on Epic to prove their profits where down a lot. Which they can’t do.

Yes, I understand Apple's reasons for waiving the fees to help small businesses.

But I'm not the one with beef with Apple over in-app purchases—Epic is. So what I meant is that, regardless of Apple's intentions, I think that Epic will use this to their advantage, to strengthen their case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
So Apply is playing favorites. I thought every developer was treated equally?

Yes, and it really was a no win situation for Apple. I am disappointed that they are playing favorites though.
[automerge]1601101576[/automerge]
I despise Facebook but I think Apple made a decent decision here, it’s not about them, it’s not about Epic&co’s war on the “Apple Tax”, it’s about helping some real-world small businesses in the midst of an economic struggle to survive. Not selling marshmallow hammers in a clown suit to gamers or whatever.

No Apple did not make a good decision here. They just showed they are not truthful and they DO in fact play favorites to some developers.
 
Yes, I understand Apple's reasons for waiving the fees to help small businesses.

But I'm not the one with beef with Apple over in-app purchases—Epic is. So what I meant is that, regardless of Apple's intentions, I think that Epic will use this to their advantage, to strengthen their case.

Yeah that was my point. They can’t build their case. They can try but Apples lawyers can say it was to help small business affected by the pandemic. Gaming is not affected.
 
Yeah that was my point. They can’t build their case. They can try but Apples lawyers can say it was to help small business affected by the pandemic. Gaming is not affected.
They are already building their case and considering the antitrust hearing Apple was in not long ago, it’s not going to end good for Apple eventually....
 
You can't create events on Instagram(owned by FB for the ignorant), on twitter, on snapchat, on tik tok, where are you going to create/invite people to an event?

#DeleteFacebook is stupid. Don't like FB? Don't use FB. Freedom of choice.
 
Came here to say this. They couldn’t be more egregiously hypocritical if you tried.

So Apple was flat-out lying?
Does every business treat it's customers equally? Nope. The big ones, the important ones, always get that special touch and there are always exceptions made.

Treating everyone equally is not binary in that if there is an exception that doesn't mean it's not true.
 
The fact that Apple has control to change an individual App's payment preferences pretty much proves that Apple had the forethought to be able to treat each App different if they chose to; negating any pre-text that they treat everyone the same; they don't.

If Apple really cared about helping small business during the pandemic they would have dropped the 30% cut for every developer.

Why Apple seems to suck tit from Facebook is interesting...Facebook could cease to exist and I really do not think people would care much.
 
Facebook is a social illness, a virtual dark alley after midnight, and I cannot believe how many people venture down it all day, every day. They (FB) are the vehicle to which dark leadership thrives & its leader laughs all the way to the bank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simonmet
Does every business treat it's customers equally? Nope. The big ones, the important ones, always get that special touch and there are always exceptions made.

Treating everyone equally is not binary in that if there is an exception that doesn't mean it's not true.
You have missed the key point. You seem to have a problem with the definition of “everyone”. In addition, the fact that again Apple lies is what turns many people off. If they were honest and said that we treat the majority of our customers equally, but we make a few exceptions for reasons x, y and a, many people would except it. It is just that Cook spouts BS and thinks everyone will lap it up, no questions asked, and some of us find this hilarious and choose not to agree with the sleazy and hypocritical approach to doing business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
You have missed the key point. You seem to have a problem with the definition of “everyone”.
Nope, I explained the point above.
In addition, the fact that again Apple lies is what turns many people off.
The constituency that is "many", even if you can define them, is fact of business.
If they were honest and said that we treat the majority of our customers equally, but we make a few exceptions for reasons x, y and a, many people would except it.
I think that is abundantly clear in the way the app store is run, Apple doesn't have to explicit get into the nuance, for those who want Apple to be pedantic or are pedantic themselves.
It is just that Cook spouts BS and thinks everyone will lap it up, no questions asked, and some of us find this hilarious and choose not to agree with the sleazy and hypocritical approach to doing business.
That is your (subjective: sic) opinion.
 
You are really living on another planet if you think your statement makes sense.
With tens of thousands of developers, some tiny and some huge conglomerates, and millions of apps if you believe Apple treats every single developer the exact same way, you have the wrong impressions of the business app store. What Tim Cook said was a fair statement and 99.99% of the time being true doesn't make it wrong, regardless of the pedanticism displayed in the post.

Again, this is not binary. Huge developers can discuss exceptions. It seems Epic got a few concessions here and there with a lot of help from Apple, as FB got an exception as well.
 
Again, this is not binary. Huge developers can discuss exceptions. It seems Epic got a few concessions here and there with a lot of help from Apple, as FB got an exception as well.
There's also a danger in extending the idea that Apple treats all developers equally to paint too wide of a brush. Apple's point is that it's rules are applied equally to all developers, and this naturally doesn't apply to things like marketing campaigns, App Store promotions, paid placement on the store, and things like that. It applies to the App Store Guidelines and the idea that Apple doesn't make special exceptions for any one developer — at least in principle.

Now, to be fair, yes, Apple has made some exceptions, but they've wrapped those up in new programs that any developer within that category can qualify for. There's no doubt in my mind that the Amazon deal began as a desire to woo Amazon Prime into the fold, but Apple didn't negotiate a special deal that was exclusive to Amazon, but rather it created a new "Video Partner Program" that any premium streaming service was eligible to participate in. Now, does this apply to ALL developers? No, because it's targeted as "premium streaming services" so it applies to any developer of an app for a "premium streaming service" which is entirely fair, IMHO, since the deal is an exchange for something that only a premium streaming service can provide to Apple — the value of an app for their service that embraces the iOS and tvOS ecosystem.

Apple's biggest mistake with its Video Partner Program was in keeping it a secret, since it made it seem like the company was signing backroom deals, but in reality it sounds like it reached out to premium streaming services directly — and equally — to offer the program to all of them. When Apple finally did publicize the program — you can read about it here, it also disclosed that over 130 developers are currently participating in the program, so it's far from a special exclusive deal with Amazon.

This latest thing with Facebook is the same... Apple isn't making a special exception for Facebook, but rather rethinking it's rather draconian approach to paid video events in general — essentially partially reversing a decision it never should have made in the first place. The fact that it's only providing a three month reprieve is the real tragedy here, since IMHO Apple shouldn't have drawn the line between physical in-person classes (which can use direct payments, bypassing Apple 30% commission) and video-based classes (which are considered "digital goods" and therefore require the use of Apple's IAP and the 30% cut), especially at a time when many small businesses had no choice but to offer their content in such a manner.

As noted in the article, it was actually ClassPath and AirBnb who were first impacted by this... Facebook only came along later and made a bunch of noise because.... well, it's Facebook and garners more attention than the others do. However, Apple's policy change applies equally to all three of them, and likely any other developer who is now offering online video events, classes, training sessions, or the like. Apple already changed its rules earlier this month to waive the IAP requirement for one-to-one online training sessions, but group sessions weren't similarly exempted. It's a fine line, to be fair, but Apple is still on the wrong side of it, IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
The only reason why Apple are doing this is because of Facebook "paid" feature. If it was free, Apple wouldn't care.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.