If you don’t like it, switch to an Android phone. It’s not hard, there are alternatives.
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 Says 'We Won't Make an Exception' for Epic Games in App Store Dispute
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you don’t like it, switch to an Android phone. It’s not hard, there are alternatives.
Yes...a company worth 2 trillion will be easily defeated. Keep thinking that.
They actually lost quite a few lawsuits recently this year:
ð apple loses lawsuit - Google Search
www.google.com
They actually lost quite a few lawsuits recently this year:
ð apple loses lawsuit - Google Search
www.google.com
I didn’t say they would/wouldn’t lose the lawsuit. I said that they wouldn’t be affected much by it and wouldn’t go down. The company is worth 2 trillion, for goodness sake.
That’s also what makes them vulnerable... they’re too big... they may end up being split.
You should be cheering for people NOT writing native apps and writing them for the web.
Which EPIC could do and totally circumvent the store entirely.
As I mentioned above, the App Store was a late addition that was never originally intended with the iPhone.
I like how you bring up HTML5 as an example of something that was held back by incumbent software and in the same breath appear to be begging for Apple to make it easier to lock users into their platform via native App Store apps for less money, instead of actually using the open web standards you use as your example....
People can already write apps for the iPhone without using the store. Its how it was originally designed!
If Apple are anti-consumer and anti-developer, then how do they have the most vibrant developer community on the planet orbiting around the iOS App Store?
As an indy developer, how do you think you'd get your app to an audience of 100s of millions or billions without a central store that is preinstalled on every iOS device?
You're going to manufacture and ship boxed copies? You're going to try and game Google search results to get people to find your app and then download it from some crappy little website you made?
Really?
I went looking and I couldn't find the reference for this one. I've seen companies in the past charge more for IAP purchases and I know you can't refer folk outside of your app but I can't find the specific guideline that says you can't make your IAP more than the price someone would buy it from your website. Do you have a reference for this?
Sure, sure, an instant messaging app on the web. a fitness tracker app on the web. a VPN app on the web, a clock app on the web, a game app on the web (we will learn what Javascript is capable of), a two-factor authentication app on the web.
Google doesn't charge you **** for Android Studio, SDKs, whatever. And they charge you a one-time $25 fee to publish apps in Google Play (compare Apple's $99 per year).
Couldn't find pricing for Windows dev tools (VS Code is free btw). Please provide source.
Another guy who couldn't comprehend the distinction between App Store (a distribution store) and iOS (an operating system).
Apple even understands this distinction. Your Software License Agreeement is for iOS, and you need to agree to a separate Terms and Conditions for App Store.
Microsoft couldn't distinguish IE from Windows and they were found to violate antitrust laws.
Last edited:
If you were really building anything worth being an app, you need a website anyway. In fact, many apps have their websites to show various information. I'm not gonna download (surely won't pay for it) an app from a nobody who can't even make a functional website.
Last edited:
The verdict of antitrust lawsuit won't be decided by which company market capitalization is bigger.
That is just how the contract is defined. I don't think there are laws limiting how the payment is calculated.
This is just something I've heard from a number of podcasts recently.
It's Apple saying people who use the app store cannot have a worse experience (more expensive) by buying there as opposed to elsewhere.
Hopefully someone "in the know" can quote Apple#s working exactly on this point.
I must admit it is a little dated but I went hunting and found a 2015 article about how Spotify emailed notifying folks who used iOS they were paying more. I think if Apple were requiring the use of the App Store as the only way onto the device and also then defining the price of the items sold on the market that this would be a much stronger case for their monopoly and interference. The guidelines say pricing is up to the developer within reason but marking up the price 30% for Apple users to cover the increased cost of doing business on the App Store seems reasonable and seems like something that if Apple explicitly blocked would be grounds for an anti competition suit because Apple not only controls the market but is also attempting to control the prices.
According to Newzoo, US players of Fortnite, PUBG and Apex Legends are 71% Console gamers, 17% PC, and 12% Mobile (although expenditure from each is not clear, by the way).
If this is correct, it could mean that contrary to the belief of many, iOS didn't make Fornite a success, nor it is responsible for Epic's major source of revenue. Even if Mobile (not only iOS) is the largest user base for potential users.
This would explain why Epic is using this tactic at this time, given that just recently the major tech companies are being put under the scope for their practices (that's debatable), so Epic is suing the company responsible for the smaller source of their revenue given the love/hate for such a massive company like Apple, so the risk is "minimum".
If Epic wins by allowing the iOS be open to other forms of installing software, this would make a precedent of then being able (by suing others with the same principle) to make Console platforms be able to install software from a source different than their stores, for example.
Epic is already doing their Store on PC because the rules there are different, but this would allow them to then have their own stores in each platform.
It's nothing personal, is just business. Citing "in retaliation" in their campaign against Apple, they're trying to shift the perspective and opinion, even if they did indeed break their own agreement beforehand on purpose.
If this stands for a real appeal or not remains to be seen, but I really doubt it, but something clear is that Epic is not doing this at this time on a random date, it's a calculated effort to well, make more money, in which case can you really blame them? At least they planned ahead with their counter suing, but I'm not sure if they saw coming the fact that Apple is removing ties with all Unreal on Apple devices if they don't change their mind. Again, it's nothing personal, just business.
If this is correct, it could mean that contrary to the belief of many, iOS didn't make Fornite a success, nor it is responsible for Epic's major source of revenue. Even if Mobile (not only iOS) is the largest user base for potential users.
This would explain why Epic is using this tactic at this time, given that just recently the major tech companies are being put under the scope for their practices (that's debatable), so Epic is suing the company responsible for the smaller source of their revenue given the love/hate for such a massive company like Apple, so the risk is "minimum".
If Epic wins by allowing the iOS be open to other forms of installing software, this would make a precedent of then being able (by suing others with the same principle) to make Console platforms be able to install software from a source different than their stores, for example.
Epic is already doing their Store on PC because the rules there are different, but this would allow them to then have their own stores in each platform.
It's nothing personal, is just business. Citing "in retaliation" in their campaign against Apple, they're trying to shift the perspective and opinion, even if they did indeed break their own agreement beforehand on purpose.
If this stands for a real appeal or not remains to be seen, but I really doubt it, but something clear is that Epic is not doing this at this time on a random date, it's a calculated effort to well, make more money, in which case can you really blame them? At least they planned ahead with their counter suing, but I'm not sure if they saw coming the fact that Apple is removing ties with all Unreal on Apple devices if they don't change their mind. Again, it's nothing personal, just business.
And then they can sue car manufacturers and toaster manufacturers and industrial machine manufacturers and demand their own app stores be allowed there, too.
Because apparently the concept of “computing appliances” is now illegal in the eyes of the deep thinkers who think Epic has a point here.
Yes! You are indeed right.
But my car manufacturer not only created my car but more or less invented the ,gas station’. So when i bought my car i knew from the beginning that my car only drives with gas from that particular gas station.
if i where a ,gas provider’ (wich im not) i’d probably just stop selling my gas through that particular gas station with the reason ,it’ being to expensive for me instead of the whole drama. Wich i do not understand because the whole contract is no new information.
I actually do not give my money to Apple indeed. I pay for Tidal, Netflix and so on ... outside of the Apple Store.
I won’t support Apple their 30% greed.
Now I do not play video games like Fortnite, but I would also do the same if it was made possible.