I don't see how there can be any discussion/legal lawsuit after this analogy. Every retailer decides what goes in their store and how much they make. You can go sell your stuff at other retailers if you want, but you can't decide what goes in a store. It's called the App Store. It's a retail store. End of discussion. If Epic were to win, I'd go start selling stuff inside Costco and use the case as precedence.
But you also have to remember that before the mid 80’s computer virus were pretty much nonexistent so you did not have to worry much about malware. There were a lots of people downloading illegal copies of software in those days also before the Internet.
Saying Epic can sell its stuff at other retailers misses the basic point that iOS users can’t purchase apps/digital goods at any other retailer. So in reality when it comes to iOS users, Epic (and other developers) cannot sell their goods anywhere except through Apple as the middleman who takes a 30 percent cut. However, MacBooks, iPads, other Apple gear are available from multiple retailers besides Apple( like Amazon, Newegg, Best Buy etc). Epic is trying to open up the marketplace with respect to where iOS users purchase our apps/digital goods from.
Also,FWIW, I agree that there is a cost to Apple for running the App Store, and that developers should not per se be given a free ride. But I disagree that the cost of running the App Store is 30 percent of the billions of dollars of digital revenue generated. If it is, I’d like to see the receipts that explain why. I’m not arguing that Apple isn’t owed any money, but 30 a percent cut seems like robbery. Especially since apps that deal with physical goods don’t have the same limitation. I believe that if the in-app purchases market opened up to other suppliers (besides Apple), costs will come down.
Epic own store works the same i.e take % of each sell , the same for every other store , so they wont be doing anything different , Epic want to be a new middleman thats it , if you think this will benefit consumers I believe you are wrong , it will help developers , thats probably true , but it wont help consumers , having doezns of stores is going to be annoying (why would other developer go to any store but its own) , you will get tracking back on apps , along with porn and gambling that are currently off limit.Saying Epic can sell its stuff at other retailers misses the basic point that iOS users can’t purchase apps/digital goods at any other retailer. So in reality when it comes to iOS users, Epic (and other developers) cannot sell their goods anywhere except through Apple as the middleman who takes a 30 percent cut. However, MacBooks, iPads, other Apple gear are available from multiple retailers besides Apple( like Amazon, Newegg, Best Buy etc). Epic is trying to open up the marketplace with respect to where iOS users purchase our apps/digital goods from.
Also,FWIW, I agree that there is a cost to Apple for running the App Store, and that developers should not per se be given a free ride. But I disagree that the cost of running the App Store is 30 percent of the billions of dollars of digital revenue generated. If it is, I’d like to see the receipts that explain why. I’m not arguing that Apple isn’t owed any money, but 30 a percent cut of every transaction seems like robbery. Especially since apps that deal with physical goods don’t have the same limitation. say I make an in-app purchase of $10.00, apple gets $3.00. If I make a $1.00 purchase, Apple gets 30 cents. Do we really believe that the $10.00 transaction cost Apple $3.00 but the $1.00 transaction cost Apple 30 cents?? Something seems arbitrary and capricious with Apple’s scheme.
I believe that if the in-app purchases market opened up to other suppliers (besides Apple), costs will come down.
Nope. It's a hardware platform. A phone isn't mandated by law. You don't NEED a phone and you have plenty of other choices like since 80% of the market that isn't iPhones! This isn't a LEGAL issue. It's a business issue. What's good for a consumer isn't a legal basis unless you prove monopoly issues and that is simply impossible in this situation. Impossible. You know what else isn't good for consumers - ALL KINDS OF STUFF!But it's not 'illegal'. I get that many people don't like this. Then say you don't like this and purchase outside that environment. And PC Gaming has been dying for 15 years. Not a great example.I find it interesting that people appear to disparage Epic for wanting their own App Store. Of course they do. Competition is healthy.
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
Consumer Pros and Cons most often have nothing to do with what's legal and illegal except in a monopoly when the consumer loses choice. But the iPhone isn't even 30% of the total mobile phone market. It's only 100% of the iPhone market. This is a silly series of arguments and I think we all know Apple never loses this case or any 'monopoly' style case. So it's simply about other companies wanting more money. And that is what the market is all about.Epic own store works the same i.e take % of each sell , the same for every other store , so they wont be doing anything different , Epic want to be a new middleman thats it , if you think this will benefit consumers I believe you are wrong , it will help developers , thats probably true , but it wont help consumers , having doezns of stores is going to be annoying (why would other developer go to any store but its own) , you will get tracking back on apps , along with porn and gambling that are currently off limit.
I suggest you do pro`s and con`s for the consumer , i can give cons a plenty , can you show some of the pros for CONSUMERS (not developers).
Mobile developer here.
It's astounding how many people do not get Tim Sweeney and where he's coming from, assuming everything just has to be about the money. It doesn't. He just doesn't want a future where every computing device (mobile or not) is a ****ing walled garden with the gatekeeper taking 30% of sales for eternity, also dictating rules on what is allowed to run and what is not. He considers consoles as a special case as they are sold at a loss and the manufacturer makes up for it with games sales, although do not believe a minute that Epic is paying 30% to Sony and Microsoft and you can bet they have negotiated something better.
Also Epic is taking only 12% on the Epic Game Store (on PC) for not hammering game developers whose life is already difficult. They are a game developer, thus know the difficulties of that industry.
It's easy to hate on Epic but people are really missing the point... Maybe the day Apple Silicon devices are locked to hell iOS style people will start to understand.
Mobile developer here.
It's astounding how many people do not get Tim Sweeney and where he's coming from, assuming everything just has to be about the money. It doesn't. He just doesn't want a future where every computing device (mobile or not) is a ****ing walled garden with the gatekeeper taking 30% of sales for eternity, also dictating rules on what is allowed to run and what is not. He considers consoles as a special case as they are sold at a loss and the manufacturer makes up for it with games sales, although do not believe a minute that Epic is paying 30% to Sony and Microsoft and you can bet they have negotiated something better.
Also Epic is taking only 12% on the Epic Game Store (on PC) for not hammering game developers whose life is already difficult. They are a game developer, thus know the difficulties of that industry.
It's easy to hate on Epic but people are really missing the point... Maybe the day Apple Silicon devices are locked to hell iOS style, people will start to understand.
And look how safe that was. Think of all the money these companies waste today on unnecessary things like cyber security, Identity Access Management, Hardening workstations... Didn’t need that junk in the 80s so shouldn’t need it today. 🤦♂️Doesn't take a genius to understand what he's saying. All platforms that did well in the 80s and 90s had free and open environments for development. If you paid for the tools, you could write your software and distribute it however you chose, with no editorial or gatekeeping functions. DOS/Windows, Mac, Unix, Linux, Apple II, they all were built on these "founding principles". Outside of consoles which was a subsidized business model with a select few blessed offerings in software, "walled gardens" is a 2005+ phenomenon. Its hard not to call a product with over 1 million apps anything but a general purpose computer.
Competition would be healthy if Epic invested in it's own infrastructure, r&d, programming staff, data centers and what not to support another app store. Otherwise the "competition" is freeloading off of Apples infrastructure.I find it interesting that people appear to disparage Epic for wanting their own App Store. Of course they do. Competition is healthy.
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
It's amazing that Epic's board signed off on this stunt. Epic has been booted from the main app stores and the lawsuit will take years to resolve.
How does this benefit Epic's customers? Epic's customers had no issues paying for Epic's IAPs.
What was the real plan and expectation? I doubt the Epic board expected to be shut down.