Also the original iPhone wasn't available in a lot of worldwide markets until iPhone3G
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
Also the original iPhone wasn't available in a lot of worldwide markets until iPhone3G
You realize that was what the Apple counsel countered with when asked by the judge Rogers about the following . . .
"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.
So if someone doesn't like something you're suppose to tell them to quit using iPhones and go use an Android phone. Imagine if you walked into a Apple store and some salesperson told you that? We know people switch what they are using but the alternatives are not always what you want.
It's also interpreted as "my way or the highway" you know.
Apple thinks it is fair they get 30%. And because your opinion is, “it defies logic”, doesn’t mean they don’t have a (good) chance of winning.
We obviously don’t know how the trial will go, but I’m guessing someone either needs to prove the practice is anti-competitive or violates some laws or there isn’t a monopoly and epic broke their agreement.
Either way it’s out of our hands.
Pretty simple. Apple doesn’t drive the car for Uber. Apple doesn’t deliver any packages for Amazon. Your examples require a 3rd party or product who are not providing that service/product directly through your phone. By your logic, Apple would charge a driver for driving or charge Amazon a percentage for shipping packages. Your comparison isn’t good, to use your words, “just because YOU said so”. I don’t recall any logically sound argument/explanation in your original statement or reply; even if I didn’t agree with it. This is the second time I’ve explained my thoughts. Maybe try offering your thoughts or opinionS as a reply instead of point a finger And resorting to the “because you said so” argument. You did nothing to move the conversation forward.
Apple will be prepared for this. It may boil down to, in essence, my way or the high way.
Android phones are usually sold a few feet away from iPhones too right? Is that not a choice of what “store” you are shopping at and what you can expect to be available for purchase inside?
Apple has nothing to do with V-Bucks either. They don't "deliver" them. Everything with V-Bucks happens on Epic's servers.
My logic is pretty simple. Apple says it is entitled to a cut of sales in apps, but exempts certain apps and services like Amazon, Uber, etc. Why? I have no good explanation and am waiting for someone to provide one. You haven't explained what makes ordering some V-Bucks from Epic any different from ordering a new coffee maker from Amazon. Either way the user is using an Apple device to make a purchase. If Apple is entitled to 30% of Epic's income, why aren't they entitled to 30% of Amazon's income? Why do they allow Amazon to run their own payment system outside the App Store but prevent Epic from doing the same?
Do you want to try, for a third time, to offer some logical explanation for why some companies get a free pass and others pay 30% of their sales to Apple?
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
Looks like you don't understand the concept of a metaphor. Although a quick Google search for "law synonyms" may clarify things for you, if you are able to successfully apply it to the context of my post.
Yes. That case was settled, and Microsoft rightfully retained their rights. I agree with Milton Friedman's and Jean-Louis Gassée's position on the issue, even if not everyone does.
However, that case is wildly different in the sense that Epic entered into a contract with Apple and willfully broke it. There was no preexisting contract between Microsoft and other browsers. And Apple is nowhere near the position in the industry that Microsoft was in the 90's, from an alternatives perspective.
Yes. The government shouldn't have gotten involved.
I'm not THAT big of an Apple fan. I bought my last Apple product in 2012, and drive an Android today, although all that will change this Fall (or Winter) possibly. My position stems from the fact that what is bad for some of us is bad for all of us. I understand how this is difficult to understand for many of my fellow Americans, given the current political climate.
See my first answer above, but it is you who doesn't understand their similarities (which is of course the point of a metaphor).
You do realize V-Bucks are Epic’s way of trying to get around a contract they signed right? If you still don’t get it you never will, and you still offered nothing more than a rant so you don’t deserve further explanation. That being said, this is an explanation I posted of the bigger picture related to this suit.
Yeah extremely likely. But will the same defense they used with congress, work with a judge that has heard it all before?
No, V-Bucks are Epic's in-game currency. They didn't create V-Bucks to "get around" anything. They offer V-Bucks on every platform.
It's you who doesn't get it. You can't answer a simple question. Why is Apple entitled to a cut of V-Bucks sales but not a cut of Amazon sales? If your answer is "because those are Apple's rules", I will accept that, but that does nothing to sway my opinion that Apple's rules are unfair and deserve scrutiny.
If you don’t understand it must be becuse you choose not to. Not only are you making ridiculous statements and assumptions, you haven’t offered one reasonable argument. Again, you are just ranting with nothing to say and very little understanding of what you are talking about. Even if you don’t agree with my position, I have explained it thoroughly. The coffee maker Amazon sells from your last string of rambling isn’t used in an iPhone the last time I checked. However, the V-Buck are intended to be used as currency for in-app purchases on every platform as a way to skirt the commission agreements period. That is my position. If you don’t agree, fine with me. But if you can’t at least can’t come up with one tiny argument to back your position, then you are wasting my time. Best of luck convincing someone else who can’t see through your nonsense. ✌🏻
Last edited:
When you purchase an app or make an in-app purchase in Apple's App Store... Apple is handling the transaction. You're using your AppleID... you're using the credit card saved in your Apple account... Apple is verifying your identity by asking for your Apple password and/or TouchID/FaceID... and so on. Apple is responsible for those things since you're making a purchase in Apple's store.
However... when you buy something from the Amazon app, the Walmart app, or any other retail app... those companies are responsible for those things. Your Amazon account information and payment information is saved with Amazon... not Apple. It's Amazon who is handling the transaction.
I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.
However... when you buy something from the Amazon app, the Walmart app, or any other retail app... those companies are responsible for those things. Your Amazon account information and payment information is saved with Amazon... not Apple. It's Amazon who is handling the transaction.
I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.
Because, even if we buy for a moment that the rules are the same for everyone, the rules can be tailored to suit apple’s interest.
SO, should all shopping malls stop charging rent ? Or maybe retail stores sell products at cost price as they played no part in creating them ?
Apple handle the marketing, payment processing, global logistics, distribution and provide a storefront of those digital subscriptions.
V bucks are a virtual currency that can only be spent in-app. Without the app they are worthless, and without the app to you most likely wouldn't be purchasing them.
You can come up with the best product in the world, but unless you get it into the right stores it will flop.
Firstly, Walmart and Amazon would probably want a bigger cut.
If everyone knew that all they needed to do was hand over 30% of sales to GUARANTEE that their products were stocked by Walmart / Amazon there would be a line of manufacturers queuing up for that deal.
*Apple's wholesale prices for computers and tablets have very small margins, but accessories can be upward of 40%
Last edited:
You can get exactly same milk, same taste, same box, same ingredients at Target and Walmart.
You can't get same app for iOS anywhere else than appstore. Android may have it but it's simply not the same. Might have identical functionality but it's still not the same.
I don't understand why is it so complicated for people to comprehend this lol.
The Amazon App is just an extension of their online store which ships a physical product.
Epic offers a virtual product for free knowing that the customer will keep buying a secondary virtual product though the app rather than offering a fixed price, all-inclusive game which could be a simple one-off 30% sale.
Epic makes billions if dollars continually selling that secondary virtual product under the guise of a free App.
Bottom line though, they've known the rules for years and decided to break them brazenly without any thought for customers who already spent a bucketload of Money with them.
Last edited:
That is stretching the truth a bit. Most store do not carry the exact same brands of everything. Also, Walmart sells Great Value as their store brand, and Target sell’s Good and Gather as their store brand. It is true that they cary some of the same brands, but thats only because there are multiple brands. Sounds like you are saying the Apple brand of Fortnite is better than the Android brand of Fortnite. I would argue Targets store brand is better than Walmarts just like you argue Apple’s is better than Android’s. If there were other “brands“ of Fortnite that were the same, I’m sure they would be in both stores. That is not the case though. Not sure why that is so hard for people to comprehend that.
Last edited:
Epic is just coming off as that girl in school who got dumped by the quarterback and is just trying to make the qb’s new girlfriend’s life impossible because she cant get her way. So stupid for such a big company im pretty sure they pay more that on other platforms like playstation etc. if you want to sell a product on someone else’s store than pay the percentage! Besides, we all know thay most be making the most money from ios users, if there’s anyone eho will be more hurt from this is Epic they’ll loose a badongahonk of money
Welcome to life.
If you think this is bad then don't try and deal with Walmart if you're a wholesaler or manufacturer...
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
What you (and Epic) are advocating is for the government to force Target to carry milk because Walmart does. And not just any milk, but the same brand of milk that Walmart does. And to charge the same for milk as Walmart does.
This is wrong, period.