Hardly - they’ve engaged Apple’s lawyers in a fight and besmirched their name. Apple will not forgive so easily and Epic know this.
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 Ready to 'Welcome Fortnite Back Onto iOS' if Epic Removes Direct Purchase After Losing Restraining Order Ruling
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hardly - they’ve engaged Apple’s lawyers in a fight and besmirched their name. Apple will not forgive so easily and Epic know this.
Yeah cause it's all about pride and forgiveness rofl.
I can't. Seriously.
I don't think so, Fortnite is just a pawn. Questioning the commission 30% against anything not a subscription is a large chunk of potential revenue given to Apple. Do they want it for free hardly, but I think they are trying to decrease commission % so they can earn more. Of course Apple will earn less so they are unwilling to change at this time. If Apple dropped this to 15% do you think this battle would continue?
Last edited:
I agree here.
They planned this.
Would be very surprised if that's all there is to it.
Because without the platform there would be no customers. For decades developers struggled to market, sell and distribute their own apps. Apple provided a place filled with users and a easy to find market for those users. Apple also takes care of the banking and legal aspect of every transaction. They also host, test distribute builds and updates with notifications to users to make it easy to always stay up to date. Apple provides security and peace of mind for its users and that in turn creates a lucrative marketplace for developers.
Look at it this way. Before selling indie software was like a farmer with a stand on the side of the road. Maybe somebody would drive by and stop and buy something if they had nothing better to do. Now its more like a large farmers market that attracts tens of thousands of people that will stop by your stand. That farmers market may not advertise directly throughout the region your specific awesome cucumbers and corn but they advertise that they are a farmers market and that attracts a ton of people to one spot so you have a better chance of selling your goods.
This is precisely why we have things like shopping malls, farmers markets, stores, flee markets, digital marketplaces and so forth.
Wow this is so wrong. People use the iPhone because of the eco system they are in and for privacy and security and ease of use. The iPhone was popular even before there was a App Store. Both android and iPhone have pretty much the same apps. If they shut down the App Store tomorrow I would still use the iPhone. Apps just make something’s easier and quicker.
You may be able to go to Target or Walmart, but both of them likely use the same wholesale distributor, who charges 40-50% to get that product onto retailer shelves.
30% is a great deal for developers for everything Apple provides. (Even Epic agreed for almost a decade. Then they got greedy.)
From Judge Rogers to Apple counsel from yesterday. She was asking some good questions.
But Rogers said iPhone users can’t make app-based purchases from Amazon and other mobile platforms.
“So the question is: Without competition, where does that 30% come from?” the judge said. “Why isn’t it 10, 15, 20? How is the consumer at all benefiting from the fact that you get to say what you want it to be?”
Do we know how Apple responded to this?
Doesn't matter in the slightest.
It is about choice vs no choice.
If you have a choice you can decide where to spend your money.
People are stuck with the % while In my opinion they are not really relevant here.
Even if things change they will still probably oscillate at same level.
Difference will be that the profit will be distributed differently while customer will be able to support his/hers favorites.
Nothing better than seeing logic and the legal system work. This is exactly how it should have been handled.
I said this before and will ask again. So how is it fair that only Epic can sell In App purchases to the game and no one else? Epic should be required to offer an API so Apple and other developers can have the option to sell in app purchases to the game at the price they want. In app purchases for the game is like their App store yet no one else can sell anything in it except Epic. Other developers should be able to sell the same items at a cheaper price if they want.
Devs like Epic want a competing App Store only so they can pay Apple less than 30%.
It's not for your benefit.
The percentage is irrelevant. Epic wants to bypass the App Store. This might take years to play out, because Apple is not giving up control of the App Store without a fight.
Epic tried to provide an alternate way to get their app on Android and nobody downloaded their Epic App Store for Android. So apparently, Epic was unable to promote their store and drive the downloads on their own and went back to the Google Play Store. What that tells me is that the notion of a "trusted" store like the Google Play Store or Apple App Store has value. That value translates into profits for Epic since they get trusted distribution and promotion of their games. The minute you start allowing third parties to do whatever they want, that level of trust diminishes and Apple and Google lose value in the assets that they have created and the customer no longer knows who they are dealing with or who they are paying.
I can just imagine the nightmare of Apple and Google support representatives fielding phone calls from angry parents when their kids managed to make large in-game purchases and Apple or Google have to do the up-front research to determine if they received the payment or if Epic received the payment and then refer people to Epic customer support. That would be a total mess -- especially if Epic's payment system had a security breach and leaked credit card numbers.
How many of those billion iPhones do you estimate apple could sell without third party apps, you know, the ones developers like Epic make? Apple makes arguably the best phones and computers, but they depend on developers to sell them, not the other way around, developers still have android and windows. Not a tiny market.
As a sensible poster said on the first page, two rich and powerful companies fighting for profit.
If I knew a good chunk of the increased profits were going to the coders who actually work their tails off to actually make the game profitable, I'd like to see the % that Apple takes in on app/in app at least decrease. But from what I've read in these forums Apple apparently isn't the only platform company taking in 30% + of purchases.
You know credit card companies and all the intermediaries in a credit card transaction take a share of those transactions, too. Why do they get a percentage of the transaction even though a $1 transaction takes as much effort and infrastructure as a $10,000 transaction? Because everyone involved understands the obvious: A service processing a $10,000 transaction is more valuable than one handling a $1 transaction. Value is not necessarily related or proportional to the effort required for an action.
I found a NY Times article on this part since the people monitoring the video feeds shut down.
During a terse exchange with Apple counsel Richard Doren at a hearing on Monday, the judge said she saw "no competition" to Apple's App Store on the iPhone.
"The question is, without competition, where does the 30% (App Store commission) come from? Why isn't it 10? 20? How is the consumer benefiting?" she asked.
Doren replied that consumers had choices when deciding to buy an Android device or an iPhone.
"The competition is in the foremarket," he said, reiterating an argument that has been central to Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook's defense during Congressional antitrust hearings.
Gonzalez Rogers replied that there was "plenty of economic theory" to show that switching brands imposed costs on consumers.
She at one point muted Doren in the virtual proceedings. Doren later said that Apple would prove at trial that "people switch all the time".
Do you think guys that consumers switch all the time as Apple's counsel Richard Doren states, say when you been using iPhones for awhile?
Last edited: