Apple Has 'Lost Sight of the Tech Industry's Founding Principles,' Says Epic Games CEO

[Darmok N Jalad]

When Epic pulled updates for MacOS? You mean when Apple yanked their access to developer tools so they couldn't update the MacOS app either?

Not sure why you are laughing at me. Epic stopped the MacOS updates before they had their account pulled. Obviously, losing their developer account could be an issue now, but that wasn’t the case when the MacOS decision was made.

“It's not clear why Fortnite couldn't be updated on macOS because it's not distributed through the Mac App Store, but it seems that Epic Games is going to withhold updates on all Apple platforms.”

 

[ggibson913]

So Apple has a duty to:

1. Ensure the iOS platform they created and maintained is open source for everyone to access, because apparently it is
public property now.
2. Epic gets to make money on it's property but Apple doesn't get to make money on theirs.
3. Apple is a monopoly because only they make the iPhone and the software and control the App store. SHHH! WE
AREN'T TALKING ABOUT ANDROID NOW!
4. Epic and other development companies should be able to open their own app stores and Apple should be made to
support them, because device security is no longer a thing.

Hogwash

 

[AxiomaticRubric]

Shut up Sweeney. (May we call you Screamey?) If you want our respect then you can start paying your share of the costs for Apple's data centers, content delivery, and cloud infrastructure.

PS: It isn't free like you are pretending it is.

 

[and 1989 others]

Lost sight of the principles. They invented half of them.

 

[tegranjeet]

To me, Epic is wrong here. Before digital software stores, you actually had to buy a physical copy of something, floppy, CD, etc. As a developer, you had to pay the storefront to ”host” your software. Nowadays, there isn’t a physical copy of the software, but it still needs be hosted and distributed. On top of that, Apple handles the development and security of their APIs, the finances, testing tools, review process (sometimes reviews have caught bugs for me), and finally, if you are a successful app, what’s worth a lot, nearly unquantifiable, advertising.

Before, all the store did was shelf your product, and if it’s a big product, a nice big poster in the window. And you had to subsidize all the other business costs of that store, employees, rent, etc. And Apple still has to pay these.

Now, the $99 annual developer fee can only go so far to cover all Apple provides as a digital store. They need a different lifeline, so a cut of revenue is the only way to go. 30% to me as an iOS developer is reasonable for all the services.

I don’t quite understand what Epic is trying to accomplish. If they want to accomplish an “open iOS”, to me that’s a bit frightening and makes me less want to purchase an iPhone. Epic thinks they are helping consumers, when it could prove damaging. Apple has a right to counter strike.

Epic is acting as a lobbyist here in a political issue. I know where I stand. Can’t wait to see where the courts take it.

If they put their money where their mouth is they’d try their own vertical integration. But it’s much too late to get into that arena. So, the only thing left to do is bite the hand that feeds and hope for a bone.

 

[M.PaulCezanne]

This case reminds me of Cinderella’s two stepsisters fighting over a dress. Let’s be honest: it’s greed v greed.

 

[RadioHedgeFund]

Let’s be honest: if Jobs we’re alive he’d calling for Sweeney’s head on a plate.

And that’s a founding father of the tech industry.

 

[kcslc]

How can someone go out into the world and so blatantly lie to people faces? Is he planning to run for office?

Of course it is about the money!

Remember batterygate? Yeah. Nobody lied there. 🙄

 

[Ds6778]

Lol this is the same guy that tried to work a deal behind closed doors? Now he’s fighting for, the little guy? Ok bud.

 

[dguisinger]

To me, Epic is wrong here. Before digital software stores, you actually had to buy a physical copy of something, floppy, CD, etc. As a developer, you had to pay the storefront to ”host” your software. Nowadays, there isn’t a physical copy of the software, but it still needs be hosted and distributed. On top of that, Apple handles the development and security of their APIs, the finances, testing tools, review process (sometimes reviews have caught bugs for me), and finally, if you are a successful app, what’s worth a lot, nearly unquantifiable, advertising.

Oh cry me a river, Apple pays for the development of their APIs and tools... what a shock. The same APIs and tools required for iOS to even exist and operate, which is required to sell their own product. Bet your phone would work amazing without any graphics APIs to display icons or text on the screen, or connect to the network or play audio.

I'm so tired of people acting like us iPhone and Mac users haven't paid for the development of the platforms we use many times over.

 

[dragoon2745]

I really don't understand why they're singling out Apple in this fight. Say you develop a game for the Xbox, you will pay Microsoft a fee every time you sell a copy of the game regardless of if it's downloaded directly to the console or shipping as a physical disk. Maybe the fee amount varies depending on the distribution method but no matter what you have to pay Microsoft something. Why is this concept not the same in regarding to having to pay Apple a fee to sell a game for the iPhone/iPad/Apple TV? Epic says this isn't about money but if Apple were to charge zero fees for some reason, Epic wouldn't have any beef with Apple anymore.

 

[EdT]

Apple isn’t some knight in shining armor, unless you are comparing them to Epic. Apple App Store is a store, just like Walmart or Target and even more like Amazon. They all sell items. None of them carry every possible version or manufacturer of a product. There is no requirement for any store to sell something just because you want them to. Especially in this case. Don’t think that the fees that Apple charges are fair? Then don’t sign the contract allowing them to sell your products.

If Apple was charging Epic a fee that no one else has to pay you MIGHT have an argument. The 30% commission might be high but in reality Epic doesn’t pay it, their customers do. Epic wants all of that money so they redirected purchases to their own website. In violation of a contract that they signed. Unless Epic can prove that Apple threatened to destroy them if they sold their product elsewhere I don’t think they have a leg to stand on. They were getting the same treatment any other App Store seller gets. No better, no worse.

 

[ruka.snow]

Stores and magazines weren't "gatekeepers" for a platform. A gatekeeper would be Microsoft refusing to let your product on DOS. Yes, it could be hard to distribute your product, but it didn't block you from finding a way to do it

Do you think an app would be successful without it being in a box with a manual in a prime location in a shop or in an advert in a magazine in the 80s and 90s? I know a few companies built their success on BB's and shareware sites but nowhere near to the success you would enjoy having something in physical shops. You needed to be on that shelf and the shop needed to agree to sell your app/game and they were looking at their cut and likely you were needing a publisher to get some recognition.

 

[jlc1978]

Epic said in the email that they wanted to charge per download. Which means us developers making free apps would have to pay, or there would not be any more free apps.

Exactly, and as a side benefit EPIC would prevent a small developer from being able to create a game and gtry to build a user base unless they had the money to pay per d/l. OTOH, a concerted effort, if successful, to get a significant part of Apple's user base to d/l Epic's free games with out subscribing would put a serious dent in their revenue. No doubt then EPIC would demand Apple cap the d/l fee.

Oh boo hoo. If this really wasn't "disagreement over money," then why was Epic charging $7.99 (only 20% less than App Store) directly rather than $6.99 (30%) for 1,000 V-bucks? Why are customers still being up charged $1 when all the money is still going to Epic anyway?

There you go, bringing facts into an internet argument. EPIC, IIRC, didn't driop the price until right before they changed the IOS app. It's simply posturing to make themselves look like the aggrieved party.

If Epic did this whole stunt immediately, before getting Fortnite onto iOS, that'd be one thing. But getting on there, racking in millions for months, then throwing a tantrum? They're just in it for the money. They don't care about end-users at all.

Of course. whenever a CEO says "it's not about the money" you can bet it is.

As for the principles of the early computer era, whatever happened to:
1. Providing physical media and instructions that you actually owned and could later sell, much like a book?
2. Putting the entire game on the media, and not charging for extras to make the game more playable while keeping the cash flowing?

I find it interesting that people appear to disparage Epic for wanting their own App Store. Of course they do. Competition is healthy.

Epic doesn't want its own app store, they want Apple to let them on Apple's on their own terms. If Apple said, OK, setup an Epic store and will sign and certify your games for a fee Epic would still be whining it was unfair.

What's good for Epic here is also good for the consumer - look at the PC gaming space.

Secondly, this isn't the same as consoles. A console is limited and specific hardware, whereas phones are general computing devices and central to daily life in the modern era.

You could cope fine. without an Xbox, but would struggle without a phone

A phone doesn't have to play games to be useful. texting, email, web access and even phone calls would still work fine and still be "central to daily life in the modern era."

Oh boo hoo, developers having to pay to distribute their software instead of freeloading and passing their expenses on to others. Maybe that is part of the problem.

Developers pay a fee upfront for access so they aren't freeloading.

 

[gaximus]

Yes, the developer have rights to create apps and get them to the users. But they don't have the right to put them on someone else's platform. If you want that, you'll need to create your own phone/device, it's OS and application store, and put it on there. Then hope you get enough users to make it worth your time and money. Several companies have done this, but they aren't stupid enough to pull their products off of other platforms over 30%.

Nintendo makes their own platform, devices, and games. but they still make games for other platforms.

 

[drsox]

Handbags at dawn.

 

[PDavidAlexander]

"'And finally, creators have rights. The right to build apps, share them with users directly, and do business directly, without being herded through a single centrally planned, anti-competitive store."

Sure they have rights, like the right not to do business with Apple if they don't agree with the company's policies. Apple, too, has rights, like the right to pull you from their platform if you violate policies you agreed to when you entered into contract with them. This is stupid. Epic is just being greedy and not wanting to pay Apple a fair price for exposing their apps to 500 million users. Don't like what Apple charges? Don't do business with them. That is 100% your right. Now, go piss off, Epic.

 

[dguisinger]

Do you think an app would be successful without it being in a box with a manual in a prime location in a shop or in an advert in a magazine in the 80s and 90s? I know a few companies built their success on BB's and shareware sites but nowhere near to the success you would enjoy having something in physical shops. You needed to be on that shelf and the shop needed to agree to sell your app/game and they were looking at their cut and likely you were needing a publisher to get some recognition.

An advert? really? you think a magazine would turn down being PAID to place an advertisement? you really don't understand what you are talking about

 

[notabadname]

They have a right: to simply not conduct business on the App Store. Apple did not violate the terms of their agreement that originally had Epic on the App Store. That violation occurred by Epic, and now they are suing Apple for it - And they are preaching ”principles” - just too funny. Just see what happens if someone violates their license agreement with Epic regarding “Unreal Engine” - lets see how they feel about contracts then.

 

[TomMcIn]

Presume Epic went into the initial agreement with Apple with both eyes open. Now Epic seems to want to get more of the money the users spend. If most other sales organizations charge the 30%, why can't Apple? Apple just makes a better target.

And what does he think would be a fair percentage for Apple to charge? It seems he wants 0% to go to Apple.

 

[Mster]

Seems like the equivalent of moving into an apartment right above a night-club and then afterwards complaining about the noise.

Yup, they have moved into the only appartment in the whole complex with the same nicht-Club below them all ... No one can escape the noise and to get to your apartment ... You have to pay the fee just to get constantly woken up from all the noise! Sad that Apple have to abuse their market power ... Would be great for them to accept diversity!

 

[The Cappy]

Apple's principles sometimes appear to have gone too much the way of making money hand over fist, it is true. Epic's principles, on the other hand, are sooooooo much more noble — making money hand over fist. But they're doing it for *us* dammit, not for themselves. Yeah, sorry, not buying it.

Epic simply wants to launch its own game store so that *they're* the ones getting the cut. They'll charge less than the competition, for no more noble reason than that they're undercutting their competitors. But their goal is exactly and only about the duckins.

 

[sentiblue]

I think there's way too much silly stuffs going on at Epics.

Apple is the only company in the world with $2 Trillion market cap. Their success speaks for itself. Epic's CEO trying to lecture Apple just doesn't sound right. He has trouble making good decisions on his own, let alone trying to lecture a world class leader.

Epic's issues is of their own doing. Nobody forced them to do that. And now when things fall apart, they oughtta suck it up and deal with it.

 

[tegranjeet]

Oh cry me a river, Apple pays for the development of their APIs and tools... what a shock. The same APIs and tools required for iOS to even exist and operate, which is required to sell their own product. Bet your phone would work amazing without any graphics APIs to display icons or text on the screen, or connect to the network or play audio.

I'm so tired of people acting like us iPhone and Mac users haven't paid for the development of the platforms we use many times over.

Ha, I know who I’m not hiring to run my business.

Apple is intelligent. Each of their businless models subsidizes another. Mac subsidizes iPhone subsidizes the App Store subsidizes Apple TV subsidizes Mac...This way, each of their product lines is successful, and has a piggy bank. It would be terribly stupid to sequester any one of their lines. Amazon doesn’t even make take a profit off product sales...all AWS which is insanely expensive, but a necessary tool. Amazon is popular because of their store, but they were smart when it took off. In the same vein, Apple is popular because of iPhone, but they aren’t just going to have that one cash cow.

 

[Swift]

He's not really angry. I think he has fantasy game type delusions of self-importance.