You mean the Spotify that just cost Apple $2 Billion in fines, and the Netflix that refuses to develop for their new platform? You're not wrong, but those also aren't great examples.
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 Reinstates Epic Games EU Developer Account, Paving the Way for Alternative App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You mean the Spotify that just cost Apple $2 Billion in fines, and the Netflix that refuses to develop for their new platform? You're not wrong, but those also aren't great examples.
people in the gov like to make a lot of promisses and say a lot of things that sound nice during campaign but once they get elected they become for profit and not for the people who elected them...
evidence: how people in congress trade stocks 😂
Dare I say it but being pro government is just as dangerous as being pro corporation. Two sides of the same coin. Only hope for the consumer is for each to hold the other in a delicate balance.
I would say more but I don't think this is the politics forum and I'll probably get my post deleted.
That's one single example, yes -- and it's corrupt and crosses the aisle and I don't like it
But that doesn't mean the entire project of government is bad
In the same way, Apple is certainly not "all bad" - not at all
But they apparently need to put in their place a little bit, at least based upon how they are now acting.
Poor effort at analogy.
Target build up a store and the town improves.
Another company builds a store has to make all there own investment setting up the infrastructure for it.
The new store isn't requiring anything from Target unlike people requiring still from Apple.
of course they are not, i like a good bunch of their devices, i respect what they did for the developer community and how they expanded native apps and native programming language and many other things, but that does not mean we should turn a blind eye to when they are wrong or blatantly agree with everything they or anyone else does/says.
You do not open the App Store to use apps, you do not open the App Store to navigate to alternative app stores. They all exist outside the store at the OS level, like taking a product home from the store. You don't stand in the store and use your product in the store. You live in the OS and go to the (one) store to shop. You consume your product at home in the OS.
Since iOS is relied upon by billions of people and however many businesses who live inside of it and make their living on it, yet Apple controls the OS in such a draconian way by locking out alternate ways of installing apps outside of the single way that ensures them revenue, the issue of entrenchment is of chief concern. It is their code and OS and their APIs, you can holler that all you want, but businesses who rely on mobile OSs for their livelihood cannot just simply create another OS like some foolishly think, and for regular people moving to Android is also cumbersome enough that Apple is having to ease that transfer too now, despite how "so easy" the megafans here want to paint the multi-step process as.
Last edited:
Yup, and you know what's funny is that folks ignore or are ignorant to the fact that Apple's 30% cut is essentially just passed onto consumers. Eliminating Apple's ability to force these fees is pro-consumer.
For now, without knowing what went on behind the scenes, seems like it’s Epic - 1, Apple - 0. Oh well, that’s just the way the cookie crumbles.
Because Apple keeps choosing to fight the wrong battles. They are choosing to die on their App Store stance and it's going to cost them the overall war. To stretch the metaphor.
Schiller is like a grizzled old general with a grudge who's going to get his entire division slaughtered because he can't see the bigger picture.
Last edited:
Doesn't really work as can buy v-bucks outside of fortniteWhen is EPIC opening up Fortnite so other companies can sell their own skins inside the app?
Isn't that what they want?
you can also buy fortnite skins outside of fortnite game as in buy the codes outside of the game.
Headlines were the point. Sweeney presents himself as some white knight battling the evil hegemon. The trial made clear that he's much more duplicitous behind the scenes and his lack of preparation for a trial against Apple just proved he never expected to win-- for him this is a PR battle.
Those Apps are using the webkit framework and until now, there is no other framework available. Will be interesting to see what happens, when firefox ships a real native browser with custom engine.
No, it's not. App pricing is most efficiently based on maximizing revenue. A reduction in costs does not mean a reduction in price. Ironically, Epic demonstrated this with their own store.
And yet you still give them money for their products that you still buy.
I think it has little or nothing to do with having Fortnite on iOS. At this point, it's a billionaire tech guy's ego vs a trillion dollar tech company's ego. Two dogs peeing on each other's leg. One is significantly bigger than the other, but both are very big dogs. Both dogs show no interest in licking each other's face and sharing their stash of dog bones..Lol, good.
Apple Explains Why It Terminated Epic's Latest Developer Account
Apple today said it has terminated Epic Games Sweden's developer account worldwide due to the game developer's pattern of untrustworthy...www.macrumors.com
Now it’s funnier reading the comments at the article above, of people relishing over big bad Epic being banned from the EU.
Rough news day for people who don’t want Fortnite on iOS for some reason.
Last edited:
The difference with the analogy is that the iPhone is with you. You effectively are carrying the store around with you. You really don't ever leave it behind and go home and use "just" the app without the phone and hence without the store. Again, you don't have to ever use the store. And can use the phone with just the apps built in as is. Having a 3rd party store on the phone doesn't change that fact. You're still on the phone consuming the app/product you bought.
1) you don't have to purchase an iPhone. There are alternatives.
2) the best way to punish bad behavior is by not rewarding it. People seem to like the way Apple operates, let them eat cake.
3) There are people living off the grid without phones or internet or banks. What is vital to one is not to another.
We all know how incredibly popular alternate stores are on Android. Many new millionaires have been created in the past 15 years because of all the alternate stores that are available on Android. People don't want to use the Play Store anymore, they want alternates!
Oh wait...
I'd like to make a skin of me pooping an eating popcorn. Why won't Epic allow that?
We have something’s in common, but I’m a vote with your $$$ person. Companies that produce lifestyle products, while the production should be legal, if people don’t like their products buy something else. If Ferrari is overpriced, don’t lobby the government to put a ceiling on the price, buy another vehicle.
The problem again is not knowing the history of this. Before the iPhone you had Nokia and other companies selling feature phones and some smart phones. Installation of apps was convoluted. BlackBerry had Java apps which were pretty rubbish with limited memory and features. They were also easy to cause malware and exploits and so on. Downloads could come from anywhere. For a device that is your key personal emergency device that needs reliability it was a big problem.Im not going to pretend that i understand or know everything regarding the gaming industry or how much money apple developers earned and how much they paid.
But one thing is for certain, the only reason Apple has managed to charge 30% is because they had 0 competition inside of their OS, no competitive app stores, web browsers were same as safari with their unique UI Skin on top, so again they could not be better than Safari only same or worse in some cases.
If you are the only game in town that does not leave your developers or users any wiggle room or effective choice.. you either pay up or dont access billion + people that have apple devices.
From a business perspective thats foolish as you effectively reduce your revenue.
Paying apple 30% still gives you 70% of the revenue you would have not had.
But as an example, i am a web developer and we sometimes develop progressive web apps that function more less the same as native apps in the apple/google store.
On Android/Windows/Google Chrome when you install the web app it offers roughly 90-95% of the functionality you would get from the native app in their respective stores.
Apple has refused to enable full functionality that Progressive Web apps can provide to their users so currently Apple/Safari offer between 80% of the full functionality because they intentionally gimp it so it can not compete with their app store.
also, its important to mention that Progressive web apps are excluded from apple/google tax and only thing you pay is 3-5% for payment processor of your choice which is amazing for developers and companies that decide to take that route. However most companies know that apple userbase are simple people who dont know how to install/enable/use progressive web app so they launch their native app and eat up the 30% tax just to get access to larger userbase.
Over the last 3 years we have developed roughly 10-13 web apps that act as native ones and that number is on the rise, so more and more small/medium sized companies chose this route, and EU rules might make it easier, but it remains to be seen
It will be a long year with lots of re-adjustments for both Big Tech and developers/users.
Apples approach was that if they limited how apps were installed and vetted and signed they could provide low level access to the OS without so many exploits. Therefore safely allow third parties to create software that performed at the same level as 1st party software did. No one had really done that before. That’s why there was zero competition etc, because for them it was a security concern witnessed by what has happened with previous smart phones and computers already in existence.
This also had the double advantage of doing away with confusing installers and multiple urls people had to go to. You only go to one place that’s safe and can install powerful software and not compromise your device.
And the api’s were created to not let devs do things like hog your resources (no background apps etc) and so on.
In a way it was the first totally CONSUMER focussed OS. Not focussed on what devs wanted or other businesses wanted, but what the average consumer wanted. The average consumer has become jaded by how complicated computers were to maintain, install apps, etc. Apple fixed that. They fixed so many things about personal computing that I don’t think people appreciate at all.
So much so that everyone copied them and retrofitted app stores etc to their systems.
This brings me on to PWA’s. They allow access to low level OS functions from a web download. The whole concept is inherently insecure if you don’t police it properly.
So the idea that Apple don’t give every function available on PWA’s is normal for a company that right from the inception of the App Store was concerned about the user experience before the ease of use for devs.
For me, I just remember the mess that was personal computing and mobile phones before Apple. I get things aren’t perfect and there are adjustments to be made. But I’m very worried that we are creeping back to the Wild West of computing again. Where I’m literally worried about installing an app on my system. I never worry about installing anything on the iPhone. Nothing at all.
If we have more routes to install things and companies go back to how computers are the whole thing will be a nightmare.
And I literally hate the EU for not recognising this. Siding with business and not consumers.
Also championing irresponsible companies like Epic that literally lied about what their software contained to Apple and then remotely changed the code on the device. What would anyone trust a company like that? Why would you want things like this to exist?
This just keeps getting parroted with little thought. Entrenchment. Entrenchment. Entrenchment. People AND businesses, already deep in it (the next thing will be parroted: "it's so easy to leave!" or "just don't do business with Apple!"). The EC even explicitly defines it. The Play Store should be targeted too, by the way.
What in the hell are you talking about. I carry my personal phone around with me with all my private data, I don't think of it as carrying around my App Store.
That legislation (the dma) is probably the worst I’ve seen - even worse than some here.
"None of this means that alleged monopoly pricing on digital storefronts doesn't come at a price or that developers and publishers wouldn't benefit from keeping a greater share of the sale price for their games."
I have no doubt that some publishers will just pocket the difference. Some will not. Developers/publishers are not a monolith. That 30% fee may also be the difference between a viable and an unviable business.