And you know that how?
Magic ball?
**to clarify, this is how it is NOW. That’s where your assumption comes in. My question was in regards to the future since it’s unfolding as we speak.
Last edited:
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
Magic ball?
**to clarify, this is how it is NOW. That’s where your assumption comes in. My question was in regards to the future since it’s unfolding as we speak.
Nope. Only apps sold via Apple App Store would have to pay to Apple for IAPs. Why would any sane developer used an alternative store (or sideloading) and then voluntarily pay Apple 30%?
Nev
Lol who’s the sheep, the one that has no stake and has subjective opinions or the one that Insults people and defends a corporation like it’s his momma?
Also didn’t epic mention other devs as well or they went at it all for themselves?
oh wait. He did. wonder why would they do that...
“...Sweeney wrote in June. “We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers in order to make software sales and distribution on the iOS platform as open and competitive as it is on personal computers.”
Who knew that android can run iOS Hmmm...
Lol who’s the sheep, the one that has no stake and has subjective opinions or the one that Insults people and defends a corporation like it’s his momma?
Also didn’t epic mention other devs as well or they went at it all for themselves?
oh wait. He did. wonder why would they do that...
“...Sweeney wrote in June. “We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers in order to make software sales and distribution on the iOS platform as open and competitive as it is on personal computers.”
Last edited:
30% for access to the biggest market share, development tools, sdk, testing, distribution and monetisation tools? sounds like a great deal. Fortnite are taking advantage of the in-game purchasing that needs to happen right at the time that you need it - i.e. lose, abou to die, need an item. Of course you wont stop the game and go a buy virtual tokens from a computer.
The entire experience has been designed and delivered using Apple UX and platform which is part of what it is so seamless and simple to use and Epic took amazing advantage of it.
Epic games should not be allowed on the app store until they withdraw their lawsuits as well.
Epic does not need access to "the biggest market share". They need access to people/gamers. You are arguing as if Apple owned iOS users and their permission to sell apps to them is required. It is not. Apple is selling crippled smart phones. Government should rectify the problem.
Consumers as in the masses? Don’t know. But if one has been around MacRumors for a while, there are enough posts to show people switch back and forth. Whether that can translate into a legitimate argument for the court is yet to be seen.
mate....
without the ios and it's sdk, there will be no Fortnite for iOS... the entire API that Fortnite is using, even the codebase for it's engine, is based on Apple API, it's ability to take control of the iOS hardware and software... what do you think, that they will be able to build any of that without access to Xcode and the apple SDK?
ha.
Government hasn’t rectified the fortnight issue. And nobody knows where this could go. My hope is Apple prevails, which is a distinct possibility.
Mate. Without iOS and SDK there would not be an iPhone. Apple needs to develop them to be able to sell the devices. Would you argue that without Internet providers there would not be an Internet and thus ISPs must charge 30% fee for everything one buys/streams on Internet?
Apple is actually very interested in software developers developing for their platform. Just like they are for Mac OS. Why is it that Apple is developing OS, SDK, Xcode etc. for Mac and then let the people install the software bypassing the App Store?
[automerge]1598397508[/automerge]
No they have not. But they should mandate that anyone can open an app store for the smart phones (be it iOS or Android)
Is fortnight off the store? Maybe not permanently. But there is a long way to go before people who do t like the App Store policies see a change. While Apple has been blindsided this round they will fight this tooth and nail, imo.
So Apple provides everything, the entire development cycle, design, deployment and production - not to mention QA and testing - for free? is that you brilliant idea?
Not sure you full understand the economics here.
Epic is making a lot of money on consumers giving them a game.
Apple is making a lot of money from developers like Epic giving them a platform to create apps and make money (or pillage like in Epics case) from its consumers.
Both provide a service and both deserve to make money.
I support a level of socialism and communism like the next person but what you are describing is just bad economics and will result and poor and sub par SDK and APIs, something that apple will not allow (thankfully).
peace out.
Interesting how narratives can be set. Macrumors report mentions nothing about the judge querying the 30% cut so if you only consumed this article you’d think Apple were on a winner regarding the App Store point.
This is from Reuters: "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.
Link:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-to-hamper-epics-unreal-engine-idUSKBN25K2JT
This is from Reuters: "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.
Link:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-to-hamper-epics-unreal-engine-idUSKBN25K2JT
30% is industry standard now. Probably started with Apple but is now used by Uber, Uber Eats, Deliveroo, Just Eat, Grubhub, Stuart. They all charge 30% - negotiable sometime to a lower rate based on exclusivity
Apple does not do development or QA for anyone. The only thing they check is that nobody bypasses Apple payment system. They can barely do QA for themselves. Epic does not need App Store for deployment or updates either . They actually want to open their own app store. The only thing Epic needs is SDK. Those normally get distributed with every computer and are free. Let me remind you that the first two app stores for iOS were offered not buy Apple but by the jailbreaking community. And they both were free.
That's where it gets a bit blurry - you might own the iPhone but you only license iOS from Apple.
They develop 4 different SDKs for 4 different platforms with hundreds of APIs... is that not development? what do you think the QA on millions line of code is worth?
Don't be naive. Every app on the app store is using about 90% apple written code and 10% private IP.
the 90% is developed and maintained and QA'd and tested by - yes - apple.
As Epic just demonstrated, this arrangement hurts the consumers (they offered cheaper IAPs via their own payment system, and Apple immediately shut them down). It is government's responsibility to protect the consumer. Mandating ability to open alternative app stores would go a long way towards this goal.
As I said, Apple needs this code themselves. Without it, iPhone would not exist. Moreover, if it was not for Apple restrictions we might have had alternative SDKs, perhaps from Open Source. The cost of software development is included in price of iPhone. The BOM for iPhone is between $200 and $300. Apple charges $1000 more. That's enough to cover software development as evidenced by their profit margins.They develop 4 different SDKs for 4 different platforms with hundreds of APIs... is that not development? what do you think the QA on millions line of code is worth?
Don't be naive. Every app on the app store is using about 90% apple written code and 10% private IP.
the 90% is developed and maintained and QA'd and tested by - yes - apple.
At first 30% sounds like a lot expecially when you are dealing with the billions, as 30% equals $300M but when you think about it you won't be able to make that $1B and gain the revenue of $700M if it wasn't for that 30% cut.
Similarly, Sony asks a cut of sales to make games on their platform and for that cut you get access to 100M PS4 users. Refuse to pay the cut and it is you who lose access to this market. Sony built the console, guaranteed it, developed it, maintains it, and marketed it. They deserve the cut of this market and so does Apple.
One thing I didn't understand is this model was not used with desktop computers as all OS makers including Apple and Microsoft never asked for royalties to sell software on Mac OS ≤9 or Windows 10 or prior.
Similarly, Sony asks a cut of sales to make games on their platform and for that cut you get access to 100M PS4 users. Refuse to pay the cut and it is you who lose access to this market. Sony built the console, guaranteed it, developed it, maintains it, and marketed it. They deserve the cut of this market and so does Apple.
One thing I didn't understand is this model was not used with desktop computers as all OS makers including Apple and Microsoft never asked for royalties to sell software on Mac OS ≤9 or Windows 10 or prior.
Apple's margins have been around 35-40%. The BOMs used by various sites only are for components, not IP. IP is what sets Apple apart.
What does her question have to do with anything. Apple did not get a chance to answer the question. That's what the trial is for. Apple will explain all the work that goes into running a platform and explain why 30% is a bargain in due time. In the mean time the judge sided with the law. The exclusion was self inflicted by Epic breaching a currently valid agreement. No Emergency relief is necessary because they are invited to continue operations as per the agreement while they continue their court case. This is the same agreement that they've operated on making billions over the last decade. Surely they can continue a little while longer until they are proven correct in a court of law, right. Epic is for the people, right. If they don't reinstate fortnight, they are the ones that are going to make their 12 year old customers suffer for no reason and I hope they lose their base doing so. I know, I won't be supporting Epic in the future and if I were a developer, I would think twice about using Unreal Engine. Epic has no problems risking your future. This time its Apple and google, next time it will be Sony, Microsoft & Nintendo.
It’d it weren’t for Apple restrictions, iPhone might not be the juggernaut it is today. Apple is fully allowed to regulate its infrastructure. And nobody really knows what the BOM is, because most of us are not Apple insiders. So the $1000 more may not be really. However Apple can charge what it wants and it seems like people are buying.
The arrangement only hurts the consumer ...just now? Epic had no problem hurting the consumers for the last 10 years while they made billions.
It is the governments responsibility to protect the consumer and they might do that by Apple prevailing.
Last edited:
My point is that even if Apple were to someday allow alternate stores (they won’t), that doesn’t mean people would be able to submit alternate versions of apps that would enable them to cheat Apple out of their 30% IAP revenue share.
The presence of alternate stores for installing Apps is completely separate from whether devs should pay 0%/15/30 or some other rate.
Hell, maybe with all these legal expenses Apple will find it necessary to raise the revenue share to 35 or 40% 🤷♂️