Yes, and the CEO of Epic tweets out a lie regarding the reasons behind it. What he is not saying is that the EU now knows Epic has given assurances over their compliance with their agreement with Apple, and any violation will result in final termination. He wants to paint this as the EU forcing the hand of Apple when in fact Apple probably wanted this leverage all along.
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
Many did like what these companies were offering, but Apps are king, lack of third party Apps killed both Palm and Blackberry, no one wants a phone that you can't do much with.
Yes, the entire part of town that they built and maintain. And if you don't like it, there is a whole "open" other part of town where you have a bunch of really great options.
It's like moving into a neighborhood with a HOA and then getting upset you can't paint your house purple. Do I think it's ridiculous an HOA says you can't paint your house whatever color you want? Absolutely. But you knew that you couldn't when you bought the house!
Do I think it's ridiculous Apple is kicking and screaming about this? Yes. Do I wish they'd allow side loading? Personally, for me yes - but I think it's going to lead to more issues with normal users than people who want it realize. Do I think the EU should be able to force them to? Absolutely not. Do I think that my (or Apple's) opinion matters here? No - the EU is going to do what the EU is going to do.
i think you did not even read the law, you are just salty and sulking because a gov made apple give choices to their users and forced apple to allow competitors to use their product.
im frankly done replying here because its pointless.
We will all see what this year brings and who was right who was wrong.
They didn't break any in the first place. Apple just didn't like Sweeney's comments on social media.
I actually think the CTF would have been legally fine if Apple hadn't carved out an exception for Apps distributed exclusively through their own store under the old terms. That exception amounts to an attempt to steer developers away from alternative stores.
Granted I think the CTF is too high, the cost gets exorbitant too fast - if it were something like $0.01/download or $0.10/100 downloads it might be more reasonable since that would scale better while still earning them lots of money for iOS SDK Development.
Apple maintaining a monopoly over app distribution, including restricting what developers can say in their own apps about payment methods, is not comparable to public health measures.
But you haven't considered my newest Target analogy yet! 😜
Exactly. And if I'm thinking of this correctly, since the EU knows about those assurances...it puts the EU in a tough spot if Epic decides to screw around again. It would be very difficult for them to justify taking Epic's side in that instance without painting THEMSELVES in a bad light as well.
I don't think this is a win for Epic or the EU. I think it might end up being a win for Apple, because this basically just painted Epic and the EU into a corner if Epic blows it (as they have a history of doing).
Last edited:
There are a laughable number of people who apparently believe a company can operate with impunity just because they made something lol.
Literally not even 24 hours later they reverted and people will say it was not because of the EU Commission
They didn't break any? You might want to mention that to the courts then, considering past rulings have stated otherwise...
Sideloading an app on an iPhone doesn’t use any of Apple’s resources. Neither does creating an app have to use any of Apple’s resources, other than under duress from Apple.
Because everyone (except you, apparently) knows enough about government processes to know that the government didn't start a probe, finish it, analyze and discuss their findings, and then make a decision in less than 24 hours.Literally not even 24 hours later they reverted and people will say it was not because of the EU Commission
Its important to say what US courts have ruled is valid only for the US and other regions apart from the EU.
I wish MacRumors would add a 🥱 reaction. Everyone knows this is a Hobson’s choice.
Epic does the same exact thing. Makes games exclusive to their store and block them from going to the most popular platform, Steam, they take a percentage from each sale, etc. Just because Epic takes a smaller piece of the pie doesn't automatically make them the saints they claim to be, nor does it mean they can dictate how another company runs their platform. Epic operates the Epic Game Store at a loss. It's not profitable. Not every company wants to make bad financial decisions like that.
People will argue that the SDKs and tooling are Apple's resources, which, reasonably, they are. However, I think Apple has already largely blown it when it comes to charging for the SDK and tooling because the categories of apps that have to pay (ostensibly for SDK access) vs which get free access to everything is an incoherent mess.
No he simply tweeted that he instruced his people to launch the probe which was more than enough to get apple to revert, as i said.. the mere mention of investigations under DMA will make Apple and any other company revert back you just watchBecause everyone (except you, apparently) knows enough about government processes to know that the government didn't start a probe, finish it, analyze and discuss their findings, and then make a decision in less than 24 hours.
A phone call between Brussels and Cupertino was apparently sufficient. And a conversation between Apple's management and their legal departement (or legal represenation).Because everyone (except you, apparently) knows enough about government processes to know that the government didn't start a probe, finish it, analyze and discuss their findings, and then make a decision in less than 24 hours.
Hopefully someone takes them to court on this in the EU as unethical and anticompetitive.
Problem with your counter argument is that you are still using Apple’s resources to develop your app. So in the target analogy let’s say you are selling soap. Target has created the tools and resources for you to make the soap, sell the soap, and get paid for the soap. But charges you a fee to do all that. But now you want to take all of targets resources and continue to make the soap, but you don’t want to pay target for any of it. For your counter claim to work, you’d have to creat your own soap using your own resources taking all of target out of the equation.