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
Doing way less of what? Companies like Apple and Nintendo do way less on their stores yet they take a much bigger cut.
iCloud is a place backups are stored, so... the person you replied to had a point. I have no idea why you had to say this.
It doesn't cost this much, but that isn't where I find issue. I think the fees are high and uneven, but the fact it is too high for some business models to absorb is what really bothers me. Apple needs to make the rules and fee structure work for everyone. That will make the rules feel less toxic to consumers that are frustrated that Netflix makes you jump through hoops to sign up for a subscription. If they made it 15%, the majority of businesses would be able to absorb this fee. If that isn't enough to run the store, they can make it up by having free apps pay a higher share. Some developers wouldn't have so many issues with Apple if they could absorb the fee. The other issue is where there is direct competition with Apple services like Spotify. That really needs a different fee structure to be fair. For comparison, the Windows store manages to only charge 5% for both payment processing and hosting. They do charge an extra 10% finders fee for apps that are not direct linked, but that is 15% total. The Epic store charges 12% for payment processing, hosting, and finders fee which is in a similar range to the Windows store. Apple may be able to get away with charging 30% for native games. I do feel it is high since this isn't a subsidized platform and file sizes are not in the 100GB+ range found on consoles, but it is more reasonable then the 30% charged for apps and third-party services. Perhaps Apple should offer a discount to games that have an ESRB rating since they shouldn't need to review those games or small file sizes that don't need to host large amounts of content.
Denying xCloud is a bigger deal to me. Apple needs to release some control. I get it that they are afraid of losing control of the platform and afraid that developers will choose not to target the platform directly if they target xCloud, but they need to get over it. To me this has more to do with rent seeking than control since Apple would still have control over native games. Let developers target native games based on the platforms merits. Competition is a good thing, Apple needs to allow this.
EDIT: I love *sarcasm* how MacRumors allows brand new accounts to react to comments. The 0-day accounts are only leaving negative reactions. You can disagree with me, but if you create an account just to leave negative reactions and pro-Android comments that is trolling.
Last edited:
You know pretty much everybody does or is legally allowed to change contracts right? How many times have you seen "We have changed our terms of use" or "we changed our privacy policy".
Wouldn't it be hilarious if Epic ends up realizing how silly they're being when they realize they are losing millions of dollars a day and then Apple ends up adjusting the cut to 31%, just for Epic games? That would be fantastic.
Fortnite is a huge cashflow for both companies, I totally understand that. But here is the part that Apple could careless about: It is just a single avenue of Apple's highway system of cashflow from the App Store. Did everyone forget all the other ways Apple makes money? MacBook's, iMac's, Mac Pro's, iPad's, AirPods, iPods, HomePod's, Apple TV, Logic Pro, Final Cut, Apple Music, Apple Arcade and Apple TV+... etc.
Do people really think Apple is going to give in to Epic on their high horse when Apple is sitting on a mountain looking down at them? This isn't some "stance" Epic is making, this is Epic wanting to make more money. Apple is the one taking a firm stance. Every single developer is charged the same exact 30%. It's not like Apple is charging Epic 31% and everyone else is being charged 30%. The same terms they agreed to is the same terms the FlappyBird guy agreed to, I don't see him taking a "stance" on the "unfairness" of Apple's terms and policies for developers.
It's not often that I actually agree with the big companies and their policies, but Epic has no ground to stand on here. They are being very childish and they are being treated like the child they are acting like. Apple literally "grounded" them for being dumb and gave them an ultimatum that I bet they will succumb too before 8/28.
Fortnite is a huge cashflow for both companies, I totally understand that. But here is the part that Apple could careless about: It is just a single avenue of Apple's highway system of cashflow from the App Store. Did everyone forget all the other ways Apple makes money? MacBook's, iMac's, Mac Pro's, iPad's, AirPods, iPods, HomePod's, Apple TV, Logic Pro, Final Cut, Apple Music, Apple Arcade and Apple TV+... etc.
Do people really think Apple is going to give in to Epic on their high horse when Apple is sitting on a mountain looking down at them? This isn't some "stance" Epic is making, this is Epic wanting to make more money. Apple is the one taking a firm stance. Every single developer is charged the same exact 30%. It's not like Apple is charging Epic 31% and everyone else is being charged 30%. The same terms they agreed to is the same terms the FlappyBird guy agreed to, I don't see him taking a "stance" on the "unfairness" of Apple's terms and policies for developers.
It's not often that I actually agree with the big companies and their policies, but Epic has no ground to stand on here. They are being very childish and they are being treated like the child they are acting like. Apple literally "grounded" them for being dumb and gave them an ultimatum that I bet they will succumb too before 8/28.
Last edited:
So, it has been 30% for many years. Google is 30%. Samsung is 30%. Consumers in general can be clueless. Take this for what you will... but why are they all the exact same if they care about Customers? You can't tell anyone that it costs 30% to operate or whatever for all three companies/services. That doesn't make sense. Google has different infrastructure and operating costs than Apple than Samsung. If any of these services did honestly "care" and were trying to "protect customers" then we would see more accurate pricing. If the cost is 5%, mark it up by XX % and tell everyone what it is. That's business. Maybe Apple should be charging 40% due to inflation and Google should be charging 20% because their "Cloud" is so efficient. Probably holds true for Epic/Steam/Microsoft in many regards too.
American Express and Visa and Discover all have different fee structures. Then comes the "online" payment platforms of Stripe and Paypal: "Hey let's all charge everyone $.30 + 2.9%", vs Virtual Merchant with a previous tiered structure for example. Now it's a standard price no matter what your actual costs are.
Spotify is $14.99/mo for the family, Apple charges $14.99/mo for a family. Should the costs be the same?
Get into devices, every devices has to be $499. Just make it $500. That $1 savings is so appealing to "Customers" that we need to reduce the $500 by $1 for what?! $1399 (MSRP) for a maxed Galaxy S20. $1449 for a maxed iPhone 11 Pro Max. $50 difference? Aside from the fact that we all now find it acceptable to have mobile phones that cost more than $2K when you add protection plans and taxes--come on. Aside from the fact that these mobile phones cost more than double many solid laptops.
Guess what? None of these companies are passing savings onto their customers. They can't be if they are all charging the EXACT SAME AMOUNT.
This whole issue should focus on the point of competition and monopolistic practices. Apple is a hardware company, a software company, a service provider, a developer, a consulting company, a retailer, media, music, health, home automation, autonomous vehicles, blah blah blah. Google, same. Samsung, same (mobile, TV, communications, screens, whatever). Amazon, same.
It's dangerous to put so much control in the hands of one company. Think about satellite security exploits that were just exposed last week (or over the past six months). Maybe the company that sells you toilet paper (Amazon) shouldn't be providing global networks with critical, secure satellite services (Amazon)?
Consumers should wake up and start taking time to understand what it is they are using, how and why things work the way they do, and that diversification of platforms and tools is not a bad thing but actually protects them.
American Express and Visa and Discover all have different fee structures. Then comes the "online" payment platforms of Stripe and Paypal: "Hey let's all charge everyone $.30 + 2.9%", vs Virtual Merchant with a previous tiered structure for example. Now it's a standard price no matter what your actual costs are.
Spotify is $14.99/mo for the family, Apple charges $14.99/mo for a family. Should the costs be the same?
Get into devices, every devices has to be $499. Just make it $500. That $1 savings is so appealing to "Customers" that we need to reduce the $500 by $1 for what?! $1399 (MSRP) for a maxed Galaxy S20. $1449 for a maxed iPhone 11 Pro Max. $50 difference? Aside from the fact that we all now find it acceptable to have mobile phones that cost more than $2K when you add protection plans and taxes--come on. Aside from the fact that these mobile phones cost more than double many solid laptops.
Guess what? None of these companies are passing savings onto their customers. They can't be if they are all charging the EXACT SAME AMOUNT.
This whole issue should focus on the point of competition and monopolistic practices. Apple is a hardware company, a software company, a service provider, a developer, a consulting company, a retailer, media, music, health, home automation, autonomous vehicles, blah blah blah. Google, same. Samsung, same (mobile, TV, communications, screens, whatever). Amazon, same.
It's dangerous to put so much control in the hands of one company. Think about satellite security exploits that were just exposed last week (or over the past six months). Maybe the company that sells you toilet paper (Amazon) shouldn't be providing global networks with critical, secure satellite services (Amazon)?
Consumers should wake up and start taking time to understand what it is they are using, how and why things work the way they do, and that diversification of platforms and tools is not a bad thing but actually protects them.
Bad analogy. If I don't like the price of wine at the restaurant, I can buy it much cheaper at the grocery store, a liquor store or online from a multitude of wine sellers websites. Where can I get Fortnite? ONE PLACE.
But the wine analogy isn't even equal to this, because the winemaker doesn't sell direct to restaurants, they sell to a distributor who also takes a cut. The only one that gets screwed at the restaurant is the customer and I, for one, skip buying wine at restaurants that are clearly doubling the price of wine for just the service of popping the cork.
Go back and re-read the specifics. Apple is blocking them for distributing a version of their app via the App Store that bypasses the App Store for payments. Not for distributing a game outside of the App Store that processes payments outside of the App Store.
I think the difference is if I’m using those apps, I’m using a service or storefront they provide, and I know who to go to when something has gone wrong.
when it’s just indie Joe Schmo and his payment system, the average customer might find it more difficult to track down and contact someone if there’s been a problem.
Even easier when you directly compete with people licensing your tech.Epic wants to be in a position where not choosing fortnight still gets them paid.
There is a choice! Get Android. This is like trying to force Apple and Microsoft into having DirectX in macOS. Or heck even in Linux. You get the product that best suits your needs. If side loading is the top of your list, there is Android. Simple as that. There is a reason why competition exists. Platforms are different, offer different features. It seems people want iOS to be Android when we have Android already.
The epic game store is pretty bare-bones in terms of functionality and didn't even support email receipts until recently.
Apple hires way more people to curate and vet apps, plus providing developers with SDKs that they can use to create better apps for users.
It's debatable whether Apple is doing enough to justify a 30% cut, but they are definitely providing way more than Epic in terms of support and features.
Not to mention developing the APIs, Frameworks, Xcode, Testflight etc..
iCloud is not a backup. It simplifies accessing data on other devices but cloud storage is not a backup. Any platform that allows you to automate the modification of previous saved files is not a backup.
I find it very strange people on this site act like this. This is like saying "I shouldn't have to get NVIDIA if I want to use CUDA. I shouldn't have to use Windows if I want to use Direct X". This is why there is competition. Android and Apple offer different things.
No there shouldn’t. That’s inherently a security problem.
Ah, but Tim won't offer you two different prices, right? You'll get an iPhone without a charger at the same price as last year...but now Apple keeps the money that they would have spent on a charger.
What about this: the iPhone is the same price, but Apple asks you at checkout if you want a charger. If you want one, they give you one for free. If not, you've just helped out the environment. Yeah, who are we kidding, Apple under Tim is never going to do that.
Calling something a backup doesn’t make it one. Until you download that file and store it on a separate device or move it to alternative cloud storage that has no automation it’s just a file.
Your analogy is just as bad.
You walk into a restaurant... or the App Store / iOS
You don't like the price of the wine... or the price of Fortnite's in-App prices on iOS.
You just go buy wine at the grocery store... or go play Fortnite on PC, where it's on Epic's turf.
Just stop, please.
Ya'll really need to stop praising Epic. Fortnight is a slot machine that doesn’t payout, not entertainment.
It depends WHAT you want to backup. If it is your contact list and phone settings It’s more than enough to backup.