Legally speaking, corporations are defined as people in the US.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Might Be Forced to Bring Fortnite Back to U.S. App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Probably lots of kids who do not own a console or a gaming PC.
It's like calling McDonalds a monopolist because they don't let anyone else sell Big Macs while you ignore the entire rest of the fast food market. Android apps exist, web apps exist, jailbreak apps exist, Mac apps exist, Windows apps exist, Linux apps exist.
"Apple got too big, so even though there is fierce competition lets give away their property for free!"
Because unlike Windows and Google, iOS doesn't have a majority marketshare. Windows had like 90% of the market, Google still does. Apple's marketshare is ~25-30% of the global smartphone market.
I mean, I bought a Tesla years ago so I already kinda did. If there are other options that allow me to choose where to fill up then I have no issue with a car manufacturer limiting where I can fuel up. I understand why gas stations might get upset though.
Again, you're just giving away Apple's property because "they're too big" and completely ignoring that other options exist because you don't want to use them.
The majority will suffer by opening up iOS and are better protected under the current system. Most of Apple's users are not technology enthusiasts like us who post on MacRumors. There are ~1.5-2 billion iOS users and ~150 million MacOS users. The iOS user base is significantly less technically savvy than the MacOS user base, and there are a lot more of them, making iOS a much more attractive target to bad actors. Just look at malware on Android - why do you want that on iOS?
The only "petty" party in this is Apple. Why make them create a new developer account when they could literally just re-enable their current account? Because Apple is a petty b*tch that just tries to make developers jump through unnecessary extra hoops and hurdles.
Because epic is slimy company who attempted to defraud Apple.
Web works great.
Developers have developed games exclusively to Xbox/Playstation/or Switch without issue.
When all of this began, everybody said Epic was foolish, they’d never get anywhere, they violated Apples terms and Apple had every right to terminate them and the lawsuit was a complete waste. Here we are, 5 years later, and epic has made a lot of headway. I knew this would happen and refrained from posting it, because those who can’t see past anything that Apple does as being completely perfect and righteous would just “dislike”, “angry face” and “haha” the post.
But, here we are 5 years later, closer to official “sideloading” (aka the most completely normal way to use any computing device) and Fortnite being back on the App Store.
Huge Apple fan, but they are not immaculate, and “privacy” campaign is a lot of hokum, the closed system is absurd, and Apple runs ads (for all the haters out there)
And don’t give me the love it or leave it crap. You’re just wasting your key strokes. You can be a die hard fan (aka I’m all apple and only apple for nearly 20 years) and still be critical of their shortcomings.
But, here we are 5 years later, closer to official “sideloading” (aka the most completely normal way to use any computing device) and Fortnite being back on the App Store.
Huge Apple fan, but they are not immaculate, and “privacy” campaign is a lot of hokum, the closed system is absurd, and Apple runs ads (for all the haters out there)
And don’t give me the love it or leave it crap. You’re just wasting your key strokes. You can be a die hard fan (aka I’m all apple and only apple for nearly 20 years) and still be critical of their shortcomings.
Last edited by a moderator:
The EU has it's own issues with Apple and they mainly revolve around privacy and access to user data. EU does what they can to scrutinize Apple for not complying with certain demands EU makes. I live in EU, and I know that EU is very good at picking and choosing whom to scrutinize and what to ignore completely. The EU forcing Apple into things here doesn't make it right.
This particular situation is about intentionally breaking App Store T&Cs, getting banned and not being allowed back. Majority of developers decide to not break the T&Cs and are happy with the profit they make, which they wouldn't make if Apple didn't provide access to the App Store. 15% of a dollar made is better than 100% of nothing.
Apple created the hardware, software and the App Store in particular to earn money on it. They invested into it a lot, and expect it to earn a lot more in the future. They have every right to make sure they continue to hold the position they have, and they should be allowed to hold that position.
AppStore is profitable for developers MAINLY because of how Apple does things with the AppStore. A few greedy mouths are complaining about not piling up even more money on the platform that they didn't build, but how AppStore's policy was originally set up is what made AppStore such a good app store.
Nobody is forcing you to buy an iPhone or use iOS. If you don't like what Apple does, use something else or create something better.
Regarding car manufacturers - it's not exactly that. The correct analogy would be "charging your phone only at Apple's Authorized Charging iStations"
Something similiar would be the SFD2 (a firewall) in newer VW group cars manufactured in 2024, which blocks me from using OBD to make modifications on the control units. I'm certainly not happy with that, it's a "software security measure", but it's what the car manufacturer does now, so I can't disable the freaking start/stop or speed limit alerts, but I still decided to buy my car knowing that I won't be able to modify it with OBD and I'm still very happy with the car. I wish I had control over what I can do to the control units, but I understood that Audi doesn't want me to and I accept that.
Last edited:
Wishing death on somebody who upset your favourite mega corporation. Classy...
There is no such thing as a gatekeeper in the US. This would require new laws to be created. A judge does not have that power.
That my friend is the crux of the issue the goalposts weren’t in the correct place. Epic tried to defraud Apple and resulted in a series of events that are still playing out.
Epic stated in court that what they take from the Epic Games Store is not sustainable. So maybe Apple’s 30% is justified. If they no longer get that source of revenue, the App Store will fail just like it is on macOS.
Unaccountable power corrupts. Market power does not, because it can be maintained in precisely one way: serving your customers. If someone else serves your customers' needs and wants better, they'll take away market power from you. If all of Apple's customers wanted things to be different, they'd have no power left because nobody would "vote" for them with their dollars.
Epic stated in court that the Epic Games Store doesn’t make money. They charge less than 30%. Their store is a shell of what the App Store and Steam for that matter offers. So maybe 30% is justified here.
Based on that is what every online store of time charged when they created the app store, and most still charge. It should also be noted that 30% is far less then would have to pay to sell software in a physical store.
What too often goes unmentioned in the 'defenses' of Apple's behavior here is that Apple itself would not exist in its current form if others did that 30% gangster thing back in the day.
If Microsoft took 30% of all transactions made on Windows PCs, iTunes for Windows wouldn't happen - the iTunes Music Store couldn't happen on Windows, which was an enormous part of the iPod's success. Without the success of iPod, which happened due to iTunes getting a Windows version - Apple would not have the money to bet the company on iPhone.
We'd all be using webOS phones. Apple would be making neat computers that few people buy. Android would exist and would transform from a Blackberry clone (what it was until the iPhone unveil happened) to a webOS clone instead. Apple would be a bit player in the computing market.
It's incredible how one can benefit enormously from basic freedoms and also want to deny those same freedoms to others.
If Microsoft took 30% of all transactions made on Windows PCs, iTunes for Windows wouldn't happen - the iTunes Music Store couldn't happen on Windows, which was an enormous part of the iPod's success. Without the success of iPod, which happened due to iTunes getting a Windows version - Apple would not have the money to bet the company on iPhone.
We'd all be using webOS phones. Apple would be making neat computers that few people buy. Android would exist and would transform from a Blackberry clone (what it was until the iPhone unveil happened) to a webOS clone instead. Apple would be a bit player in the computing market.
It's incredible how one can benefit enormously from basic freedoms and also want to deny those same freedoms to others.
Microsoft missed the boat on that. But retail didn’t. And Apple gave devs and customers alike a safe haven with a concentration of customers so all parities will make money.
Win, win
Microsoft didn't 'miss the boat', they choose to behave in a more ethical manner - backed off the (correct) belief that making developers happy benefits your platform, which benefits your users by increasing the availability and quality of software for your platform. This continues to be the Windows model to this day.
This is why Windows has the extreme long tail that macOS never has had. From professional software to games, it all happens on Windows. Some stuff is offered as a macOS version. Lots of stuff is not. Almost nothing in the 'serious software' space gets shipped on iOS, due to brutal economics plus general platform holder hostility towards interesting software.
Windows is a place where you can build an entire platform. You have third parties (Valve, Oculus/Meta back in the day) building entire platforms on top of Windows. Microsoft isn't hostile towards this - they win when you win. Apple just wants to rent seek. Different businesses.
Instead of reflexively defending Apple, consider listening to developers. From indies to giant businesses - hatred for Apple's App Store cartel is widespread.
No they weren’t more ethical. They had a different business model and the app store that is today was foreshadowed in 2008.
Correct. Different business and different models.
Instead of automatically making developers right, look at what Apple provides. Popularity in this case may be their downfall.
More ethical?!? Their decisions cost us trillions of dollars by enabling the malware and malware protection industries.
It's amazing how quickly people forget the old model was awful.
Yes, actually more ethical. As in 'Microsoft choosing to not shake down developers for 30% doesn't result in criminal referrals'. Apple's model is illegal, which is why you see country after country and court after court doing stuff about it.
Microsoft engaged in plenty of bad conduct but nothing they did compares to this outrageous rent seeking crap. The good news is that no matter how many people on Apple sites defend Apple's practices, it doesn't matter. It's over. Court order.
It'll be a great day. Fingers crossed it makes the news so we can celebrate.
What are you even talking about? There is no relation between 'not taking 30%' and 'Malware!'. Apple never took 30% on the Mac - but OS X's security model was built after Microsoft was locked in due to decisions made a few years too soon. Not to say that Mac malware didn't/doesn't exist - it absolutely did/does - but Windows had specific security problems that *any system* - regardless of business model - would have if you designed that system around 1995. In other words, classic Mac had the exact same security problems that Windows had. It just didn't have mainstream Internet usage and a huge install base. OS X was built on a better foundation, but Microsoft built *their* new system a little too soon, before privilege separation was a mainstream concept.
Computers are tools. They have requirements, underlying knowledge requirements and stuff like that. Systems designed before code signing and privilege separation and (long list of security practices that were not mainstream in 1999ish) are more complicated for low knowledge users to use safely. Add the whole 'we want Windows 95 applications to continue working' and it is a real security challenge. Microsoft eventually got it together, but it took a while.
More ethnical. As in - when Windows was modernized, when new ways to offer applications were introduced (UWP) they were not tied to a store. The very first final build of Windows 10 supported installing UWP applications from outside of Microsoft's Store. Pay nothing. Same security benefits.