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 Seeks Early Motion to Reject Epic's Claim It's Being Denied iOS Access
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’m not sure Google will agree with you that Android is an essential system. I don’t need it. I don’t even need a smartphone. I just want a smartphone. Big difference.
Developers aren't important to me. Only me as a customer is important. Developers are untrustworthy and dishonest until proven otherwise and should be given no benefit of the doubt. They should be treated as second-class citizens.
Apple will almost always make decisions which is better for me than most developers.
I want Apple to be a benevolent dictator which protects me from the excesses of the developers. I want them act as a shield against any developers so I know they don't know who I am and they don't have any way of contacting me.
As such the current status of developers in the Apple ecosystem suits me fine.
I don't see a problem if Apple is the only one doing this. It provides more diversity.
Why do you everyone to do the same ting?
Also, I consider Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo devices to be general purpose computers also. They aren't limited to a number of fixed programs.
The trial is ongoing now! Where have you been?
This motion is just to dismiss one of ten claims while the trial is happening. Even if Apple wins this motion, there are still nine claims to be decided. The trial doesn't stop.
Apple shouldn't be forced to have a "fair" pricing model. Fairness shouldn't play any role. Apple should decide what they want and developers and customers are free to accept or decline.
“Out of media storage” Is an error that Apple literally restricts how much media should be on the Apple watch, I’ve never had this problem until the Series 4 but when I got the Series 6 i thought it would had been fixed but at the end of the day after going through 3 series 6 watches, a tier level 2 chat agent told me they limit 8 go to media storage on the watch, the thing is sometimes some playlists that have tons of songs will get by the process.
But I like joggin with the watch while I live behind my phone and can’t stream it media that way but still, come to find out there’s a lot of posts regarding this issue on the apple community forums. Mother truly knows best I guess
It’s exactly the same the other way around. The “very existence” of the “popular hardware platforms” rely on the software other companies and organizations develop for them. A hardware platform without software is nothing but a doorstop.
If you have the opportunity to file a motion to dismiss and you believe you can put together arguments to do it, then legally you try that. If it fails then you've spent a few tens of thousand on drafting documentation that you'll likely be preparing for the main litigation anyway and if you win you've saved yourself a court case (or part thereof) to go argue.
They've filed this motion to put in front of the judge the statement they believe that Epic hasn't made the case that they're being denied iOS access based on the testimony of Epic's witnesses. They're putting this in front of the judge as an attempt to outline "hey judge, none of epic's witnesses said iOS was an essential facility and they all said that Epic has access to iOS, nobody said we've denied them access until they broke their contract. we don't think they've made the case for this, you should drop it". It's not different to the earlier attempt to get rid of the Microsoft testimony: "hey judge, we know this person said all of this stuff but they also didn't produce any of the evidence to back it up that we requested in discovery and maybe that's because it's not actually true".
It's one thing to replicate the App Store and another thing to be successful at it. You include an example of another competitive app store in your example of Google Play (originally Android Market launched in 2008 a year after Apple's own app store). Arguably Google's platform has the more dominant position in the marketplace being the majority player in almost all global markets and level with Apple in the US. Plenty of folk have replicated the App Store, not all are successful. Even Epic admits that creating app stores is possible pointing to the myriad of app stores that are in the Chinese market as Google's services are banned.
There are a few differences:
- MS had a much bigger bigger market share, more closely resembling a monopoly than iOS does. For broad cross-compatibility with other users, Windows was almost a necessity at the time, whereas now you can get by perfectly well whether you use iOS or Android.
- IE itself is a utility product that was integrated into Windows, rendering an alternative browser almost pointless. And the necessity for web developers to support IE's non-standards-compliant implementation went a long way towards breaking the web for non-IE users.
- While Apple do produce some games, they don't produce any game that is a natural competitor to Fortnite, or preinstalled in iOS, or more easily accessbile in iOS than Fortnite, or undercutting Fortnite in price, nor does anything Apple does in iOS hobble the usability or distribution of Fortnite outside of iOS.
Without getting into specifics
This is a wastes of time for everyone including the Fortnite players that want to play this game on iOS
Epic is only worried about $$$$ and has lowered itself to a court battle to try to have its way
Nobody wins in this case regardless of the outcome as the customer will suffer
This is a wastes of time for everyone including the Fortnite players that want to play this game on iOS
Epic is only worried about $$$$ and has lowered itself to a court battle to try to have its way
Nobody wins in this case regardless of the outcome as the customer will suffer
This issue aside, I am sure that you have heard of presumption of innocence. The fact that you think that Apple is guilty because they are trying to dismiss things or even avoid going to trial (which they are now) is, I'm afraid wrong! No just in this case, but in life. That is not how society works.
The burden of proof is in the prosecution. If they fail to address one of the claims or any of the claims, the defence is in its right to try to have it dismissed. Why would a judge/jury give a verdict on something that the prosecution fails to address?
I would disagree with that assessment. I use a mac for work, and the only programs, and reason I need a mac instead of iOS, is for a few programs I use for app development purposes, such as xcode and IntelliJ. Everything else that I use on a daily basis, from Slack and Teams to VPN software, is available for iOS.
Granted iOS is crap for window management, and in its current state I would never use iOS as a daily work machine, but I could.
Sure, the success of any platform is contingent on attracting customers, but Apple is the one that developed the iPhone and populated it with a handful of apps, only later throwing the doors open to the App store after it was already a raging success. There is no chicken-and-egg paradox in this question, the iPhone, iOS and the app store clearly existed and were popular before Epic distributed Fortnite there, so it's ludicrous to claim that the very existence of the app store is dependent on Epic. iOS was a success because it's easy to develop for, has great reach, and is more profitable for most devs because 'an iphone user and his money are easily parted'/'iphone users are wealthier and happier to pay a fair price than thieving scum android users' (or something like that). Epic just want to keep a bigger slice of the pie.
Even 60% is nowhere near monopoly, it’s majorly of the market, similar to what Amazon in US. Amazon has very similar rules to AppStore, it is a platform owner, competes with his own products and controls payment system.
And really, if the US is THAT concerned, then just limit the sales of the iPhone in the US! Fantastically easy to do and Apple customers maintain their desired walled garden.