Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There's just one thing I don't understand.
Epic broke the terms. Apple removed the app. Apple then told Epic they have limited time to remove the direct payment feature, otherwise Apple terminates their account.

Now, what if Epic doesn't want the app back in the store? Apple basically tried to FORCE Epic into submitting new and fixed Fortnite back to the store. The way I see it, Apple terminated Epic's account (removing all other non-Fortnite apps of Epic), because they refused to submit a fixed version of an app that was no longer there, regardless of whether Epic even wanted Fortnite back on iOS or not.
The problem was the app that is already on everyone’s phones is violating the rules, and apple couldn’t let that stand. So Epic could pull its app out of the app store and be fine. Except that everyone already has the existing app. So that left apple no choice other than to ban epic or to force the existing app off of everyone’s phones.
 
When you buy the game at Walmart, do you pay any fees to Wal-Mart for IAP purchases? Do you? Does Wal-Mart require that IAPs were processed by Wal-Mart only. AAPL fans love ridiculous analogies which actually prove that Apple behavior is greedy at best and unlawful at worst.
Walmart isn’t selling anything for free that is later supported in iap tho.
 
Regardless if facebook says or doesn't say buy from them to save, according to you, they should be able to say what ever they want for the sake of censorship. So Dell should not only put that sign up in Best Buy they should also say. "We know you came here because of the flyer Best Buy paid for, please use their sales staff to answer all your questions, but do not buy here because Best Buy only pays their employees $2/hour, and they kicked a gramma out once. You will save big buying direct on our website and we will make more money too." So what do you think the HP sign, who has a computer right next to it should read. What about every other product. That's a great way to run a company. I would love to be a merchant in your store.

I hate to break this to you but all retailers have similar clauses in their merchant contracts that prohibit this and its not censorship.

I have never mentioned censorship once. That's not what I'm saying.
 
I'd support a law forcing Apple to allow sideloading.
In principal I would, but the problem is I can’t guarantee the security of my phone. Also, that would completely complicate matters for every other app. At the moment, if you want an app, you go to the App Store. If sideloading were available, you have to go to someone’s website, and download it like a traditional computer, and the majority of regular consumers don’t know how to do that. So even if sideloading were available, the majority of developers would still want their app in the App Store, and would still complain about the 30% cut. If the app wasn’t in the App Store, they would get way less exposure.
[automerge]1598665150[/automerge]
Epic should just put Fortnite in Cydia.
 
I agree about the convenience... but not having an option kinda sucks.
I own android and iOS devices and I pretty much stick to the Play store for Android apps.
But there are occasions where I want to load something that isn't available on the store and I trust the source that is offering the app.
What a good example. "I own android and iOS devices..." Evidently, you didn't/don't think Android or iOS could satisfy all of your needs/wants. So, you purchased products from different manufacturers/providers/developers. Sensible use of your choices. ;)
 
People will blindly side with Apple, and I must include the disclaimer that I do enjoy their products like so many of us here, but I own their products they DO NOT own my mind: I think this is shamefully authoritarian.

Shows Tim is one big gigantic power tripping, bean counting FRAUD when push comes to shove.

It was completely absurd to make the statement that what Epic is doing is 'putting the entire App Store at risk' more or less -- for what? A fair shake? More agreeable terms? Putting up a fight without rolling over, even if they lost?

Total hyperbolic gaslighting nonsense. I hope others become brave enough to challenge the crappy terms (that they do ultimately agree to, no one forces them -- that much can't be argued otherwise) but there is strength in numbers.

This just sets the scary precedent that no one dare better question Apple at any point. Epic was made out to be an example, a rather epic one.

I also don't give a crap about Infinity Blade or Fortnite personally but that's totally besides the point. In fact that may be part of the point - their offerings don't blind me to my overall convictions and opinions.

That’s not what Epic is being banned over. They deceitfully introduced an obfuscated feature that deliberately went against an agreement they signed, in order to paint themselves as victims and, thus, try to garner some extra support from the court of public opinion, politicians and regulators.

Their points might (and, indeed, may) be completely valid and warrant a lawsuit, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with doing PR campaigns to make your case; what’s inexcusable, here, is the blatant disregard of one’s legal obligations and especially the deception. Sure, Apple may be greedy and overbearing, but Epic basically one-upped them did a double-whammy of sleaziness with a side of recklessness.

If Epic as a company and Sweeney had something even remotely resembling an ethical compass and a bit of common sense, they could’ve forced the exact same outcome by submitting a Fortnite with their payment system unobfuscated, wait for Apple to reject it and proceed to unilaterally withdraw Fortnite altogether from iOS (or, heck, even from macOS, too) on principle; it would be harder to have iOS users on their side, but they’d have a much stronger case, they’d preserve their developer account and all their other games and, more importantly, wouldn’t jeopardize the entire Unreal Engine developer community.

Please, tell me in all fairness: how would that not be a better outcome for Epic in this context? They could still have their little lawsuit, cry and moan about their rejected payment system and paint Apple as the villain without exposing themselves as the equally greedy manipulators they are.

Instead, they just lost an important part of their case and barely scraped by because the judge showed them some leniency concerning UE, and rightly so, as it involves a lot of third parties… which should be looking into alternatives as we speak, since no matter how awesome it is from a technological standpoint, its purveyor doesn’t conduct itself as a reliable business partner (as it doesn’t respect contracts and uses important assets and its users respectively as weapons and shields/pawns). It’s utterly disgusting and, yes, I think Sweeney should, and likely will, resign. Also, if you do believe IAP commission rates should be lowered, or that there should be third-party app stores for iOS, or whatever, you should be appalled at Epic’s strategy, as it may very well backfire and set back those goals instead of advancing them. Duh.
 
I'd support a law forcing Apple to allow sideloading.
So would every nation-state and criminal enterprise with an interest in weakening iOS’s security model.

BTW, you can side load now. Pay apple $99 per year, convince your favorite software vendor to give you the source code, and compile it yourself.
[automerge]1598666180[/automerge]
Wow, that's some real Daniel Eran Dilger-level emotive propaganda language.
No it’s not nearly that bad.

Plus it’s true.
 
🤷‍♂️ What’s going to happen w/ the Unreal Engine now? Will it be available on the Mac App store?
 
In progressive countries we pay proportionally more income tax the more we earn - it’s only fair. For that we get universal healthcare, good public transport & pensions. Perhaps Apple should apply that idea to their App Store - millions of small developers (like me) will be very happy and the big greedy ones can suck it up.

But the USA also needs to overhaul its company & income tax system, and add a decent *living* minimum wage. With the way everything is going on in the USA, I don’t think you’re capable of doing it which is really sad for you, because it’s one of the ways the USA will get out of the horrible hole it’s in...
When we toss out the current regime that might be possible. It wasn't perfect but we WERE on the right track before all of these corporations headliners cranked the wheel and sent us careening into a canyon, figuratively speaking. Now back to our regularly scheduled program already in progress.
 
Wow, that's some real Daniel Eran Dilger-level emotive propaganda language.
Not really. It was quite blatant.

Instead of “Shortly after Epic blatantly disregarded App Store policies” it could have said “Shortly after Epic unilaterally and deliberately violated App Store policies to force a legal battle, thus throwing all their Apple customers under the bus and demonstrating just how little they care about them”
 
Wow, that's some real Daniel Eran Dilger-level emotive propaganda language.

Errr, did they not? Their alternative IAP system, carefully hidden so as to skip past App Store reviewers and remotely activated later on, is a textbook case of a trojan horse. It could be malware, or any other nefarious, policy-breaking “feature”, for all it matters, and not some cute easter egg. That’s why such a deliberately mischievous practice, especially if it entails breaking agreements, should always warrant a ban on principle. No ifs, no buts. Interestingly, it wouldn’t surprise – nor bother – me in the least if Apple outright banned any other smaller devs if they did something so blatantly unmistakable like this (emphasis on “unmistakable”, lest you think I agree with App Store review’s sometimes trigger-happy and arcane nature, which I don’t), and it’s funny how Epic still paints itself as a victim and you guys still defend them when Apple was VERY tolerant of a company that conducted itself in this way, giving them several chances to reverse course without further consequences, even while (or maybe because, whatever) they were being sued. Call Apple greedy all you like, but about the only thing you can’t call them in this particular case is heavy-handed (no, really; you lot seem to forget how Steve Jobs nixed partnerships with a lot of companies over extremely milder stuff by comparison, and if he was still alive, this s***show would be 10x more fun to watch or wouldn’t even have happened in the first place, as he’d have ripped Sweeney a new one – or at least strongly hinted at that – right after the first side letter, I can pretty much guarantee you that). Epic probably got away with it for so long only because they were too big and enmeshed with the ecosystem, because of UE, to be given the boot right away (that, or there is indeed a grace period for developers to reverse course from inside their developer accounts, and I take no issue with that, either).

Seriously, consider the following analogous scenario: if any other company (say, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc.) deliberately did this kind of thing with an app that dealt with personal information or documents, would you be so permissive and chill about it? Would you really side with the wrongdoer? Would you even trust them? The only reason you people are giving Sweeney a pass on this is because this is a stupid game we’re talking about and you may be hoping for some savings (ha! How naïve of you… Of course Epic would eventually eat them up instead of passing them over to you). I, as a user, would rather have Apple protect me and my privacy from unscrupulous developers and enforce a zero-tolerance policy on these shenanigans, lest their inaction set a dangerous precedent and eroded trust (in this case, on Apple and iOS themselves), capisce? Yes, even if I played Fortnite and made a lot of IAPs.

The ban is over something much bigger and serious than that, with ramifications most of you useful “anti-fanboy fanboys” aren’t even considering or willing to admit. Epic may be 100% right about the entire financial angle, but I wholeheartedly applaud Apple’s ban (which has much less to do with IAP commissions than you people claim; there were some negotiation attempts on Epic’s part over those and Apple stood their ground and ignored them, sure, but Epic fired back in about the worst, stupidest way they could). Yes, to make an example of them, absolutely. Because such “business practices” rank even below those of Microsoft back in its evil days, and you should know it takes a lot for a longtime Apple user to say something like that. It’s one thing to rob other companies’ and people’s IP and falsely paint oneself as an innovator (and booooy, did Epic do that, too, as if all the rest wasn’t bad enough); aggressively deceiving others and breaking contracts, treating their users and customers like trash and using them as pawns by deliberately denying them service or putting them at risk, etc.? That’s a different ball game, and it takes a very special and rare combination of evil, entitled and stupid to get to that point.

As for the lawsuit, which is not even what this article is about, I don’t give a damn about it either way. Yeah, sure, lower IAPs, force Apple to allow other stores, knock yourselves out. I just hope it doesn’t make my mobile platform of choice more vulnerable, and if that entails, conversely, Epic losing, throwing a tantrum, taking their UE ball with them and us having x% less games on the App Store (yes, including on the Mac), screw it. I honestly don’t care anymore at this point.
 
Last edited:
Did anyone happen to compare the cost of add-ons pre direct purchase to post, when they were in violation? I’m curious what percent of the savings epic actually passed along to the consumer...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mainyehc
Good job Apple, promote a game (PUBG) that is developed using Epic's Unreal Engine. Epic could just stop development of the unreal engine on all Mac platforms; that would kill off a ton of A level games that rely on Unreal Engine.

FYI you have to download the Epic Game Launcher for MacOS to install Unreal Engine. And not from the App Store. Download is directly from Epic.

I think Apple has more to lose, but then again Apple products are not what you buy if you are actually serious about gaming. Gaming on anything with a Apple logo sucks and is not a cost effective plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mi7chy
Stores always take a cut. You sell Fortnite at Walmart, they take a cut. You sell in-app purchases in the App Store, then Apple is totally reasonable to want a cut. If you think you can thrive without the marketplace/middle-man, then by all means sell direct to consumers...but don’t try to have your cake and eat it too, using someone else’s marketplace but bypassing them in sales.

Forget stores, you live in AMERICA and they take a cut. You simply set foot in this country and all of a sudden a giant chunk of your paycheck goes who-knows-where. If Apple really want to get all Uncle-Sam on Epic, they'd set up a tiered tax-system like the US. Huge companies like Epic would get 'taxed' at the highest rate (i.e. 37% for 2020 federal income tax). I really think that's what Apple should do. To tax a highschool student with his first app the same as the likes of Epic Games rolling in millions is a bit weird.
 
Not really. It was quite blatant.

Instead of “Shortly after Epic blatantly disregarded App Store policies” it could have said “Shortly after Epic unilaterally and deliberately violated App Store policies to force a legal battle, thus throwing all their Apple customers under the bus and demonstrating just how little they care about them”

Yeah, or it could have been written the way an actual news reporter, rather than a propagandist, would write it.

The use of "blatant" adds nothing to the piece, except to manipulate the emotions of the reader in favour of Apple, and against Epic, just as your version does.

Why not write it as "Epic chose to break what it believed to be a legally unenforceable term in its developer contract, in which Apple blatantly rips off developers by forcing them to pay outrageously large sums of money, for services that cost only a minuscule fraction of that in an open competitive market."

Just as true, in fact more so because it contains more information, and more context, but not so effective as propaganda for Apple, and clearly slanted to cause the reader to sympathise with Epic.

Just because a contract contains a term or condition, does not mean that term or condition is enforceable or legal. If you're in California, and have a no-compete cause in your employment contract, guess what, it's unenforceable, and you're free to work for your former employer's direct competitors, regardless of their objections.

Epic's stance is no different. They believe Apple is not providing them with 30c of value in download hosting and transaction processing for every dollar they earn from the customer, that they can provide that download hosting and transaction processing in-house for a fraction of what Apple charges them - like Apple, they want to "own the technology they rely upon", and Apple has obviously not agreed to their previous requests to allow them to do this stuff inhouse, hence triggering a lawsuit.
 
Last edited:
Can someone explain to me why Epic's position is valid given that they are 100% OK with Microsoft and Sony taking the exact same 30% cut on Xbox and Playstation?

I've heard the vague claims that they have a strategic partnership and it's different... The only difference I see is that MS and Sony HAVE TO sell their game consoles at a loss to attract enough marketshare. OTOH, Apple is able to make devices that they can sell for not only a profit, but the biggest profit margin in the industry. iPhone and iPads sell themselves and have since their inception.

Just because Apple is able to make a device that people want to buy w/o massive incentives, why should that allow Epic to want a bigger piece of the pie than the 70% they're getting from Microsoft and Sony? Doesn't Epic understand that the gigantic marketshare and gigantic user base on iOS devices is a massive benefit to them already? Why are they OK w/ subsidizing Sony and MS's losses on their consoles by taking only 70%, but are demanding 100% of the revenue from Apple?


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).

Epic is not doing this to make the App Store more competitive, they’re doing it to have the precedent of having their own way of installing software to Apple devices, which later they could use to demand other platforms do the same, specially Consoles which is where their main revenue comes from.

Suing Apple is just the more convenient way, since is already a company being criticized by its “monopolistic” practices and the least effect on their business.
 
When Google joined Apple in banning and throwing EPIC to the gutters.... we all knew that EPIC's game was over.

FPS shooters are a dime a dozen. Some small company will come up and make a better Fortnite clone soon, if it didn't happen already.
 
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).

Epic is not doing this to make the App Store more competitive, they’re doing it to have the precedent of having their own way of installing software to Apple devices, which later they could use to demand other platforms do the same, specially Consoles which is where their main revenue comes from.

Suing Apple is just the more convenient way, since is already a company being criticized by its “monopolistic” practices and the least effect on their business.
Exactly. All of this is just an attempt to set up their own store on iOS, so they can have the customer data for themselves. User data is the gold mine. It's hilarious seeing people defending Epic as if they were saints.
 
Yeah, or it could have been written the way an actual news reporter, rather than a propagandist, would write it.

The use of "blatant" adds nothing to the piece, except to manipulate the emotions of the reader in favour of Apple, and against Epic, just as your version does.

Why not write it as "Epic chose to break what it believed to be a legally unenforceable term in its developer contract, in which Apple blatantly rips off developers by forcing them to pay outrageously large sums of money, for services that cost only a minuscule fraction of that in an open competitive market."

Just as true, in fact more so because it contains more information, and more context, but not so effective as propaganda for Apple, and clearly slanted to cause the reader to sympathise with Epic.

Just because a contract contains a term or condition, does not mean that term or condition is enforceable or legal. If you're in California, and have a no-compete cause in your employment contract, guess what, it's unenforceable, and you're free to work for your former employer's direct competitors, regardless of their objections.

Epic's stance is no different. They believe Apple is not providing them with 30c of value in download hosting and transaction processing for every dollar they earn from the customer, that they can provide that download hosting and transaction processing in-house for a fraction of what Apple charges them - like Apple, they want to "own the technology they rely upon", and Apple has obviously not agreed to their previous requests to allow them to do this stuff inhouse, hence triggering a lawsuit.
Like I said it was quite blatant. I consider that to be a rather descriptive word. I don’t think it has the loaded connotation that you do.

Blatant: openly and unashamedly 🤷‍♂️

PS Interestingly, Epic was surreptitious in the manner they went about violating the agreement.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ader42
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.