Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I really hope Epic doesn't go back on this and stops supporting iOS devices on Epic engine. iPhones and iPads need to become real general computing devices, not the locked things we have now that are limited by whatever Apple thinks is good or bad for us.

It would be much easier to petition Apple to promote iPads becoming real general computing devices than to hope for a developer to keep working with Apple when Apple doesn't make it worth it.
 
That makes no sense. That's like a burgular suing a houseowner because the burgular got hurt while breaking into the house. Although I have heard stories of sillier suits actually going to court in the US. Which is scary in itself. And makes the legal system look like a complete joke.

Maybe. But if you don't like certain laws, peacefully disobeying them and challenging your punishment in court seems reasonable to me.

Microsoft had 95% of the desktop market and that's what got them in hot water with the DoJ. Apple has less than 15% of the smartphone market. That doesn't even remotely qualify as a monopoly.

Actually, apparently around 50% is what courts have found might constitute a monopoly:

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/com...ws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined

And in the US market (which is whose laws and where the suit has been filed under), Apple's share is around 46-50%:

 
EXACTLY! It's just to low for the bigger names. Small developers should pay 30%, but big names like Epic should be paying closer to 50 to 70%. They use more Apple resources to provide their product than the smaller ones do. Epic's items are all 100% markup anyway. V-Bucks don't cost Epic anything to make and since you can't resell them they don't have to compete with a secondary market.
I think the other way around, but each to his/her own way.
Good luck Epic!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
I think the other way around, but each to his/her own way.
Good luck Epic!

Now I am confused. You said "and 30% for all scales of sales doesn't sound right for big companies" and I agreed with you. Now you agree it sounds right? I mean, either they pay more or they pay the same. It would be morally wrong to let them pay less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ader42
So a student who barely passed High school can go back to college at age 60 to study the history of fashion for free?
If he don’t become ashamed sitting in between all the youngsters, yes.
Passed is passed, and allows you to register.


In a few other EU countries,too.
 
If he don’t become ashamed sitting in between all the youngsters, yes.
Passed is passed, and allows you to register.


In a few other EU countries,too.

Why would anyone ever work? Just go to college for 70 years and die in a dorm room.
 
Epic picked a fight with Apple over the status quo that Epic has been happily going along with until now. Having a bee in one's bonnet is not going to win one's case in court.

As the poster mentioned, regardless of who is in the right, collateral damage could cause more harm to Apple than Epic. You should try considering what the poster said, but I guess just falling back on Epic's wrongs will work in the short term, at least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Fair argument, I guess.

[EDIT]
I haven't developed an app with a game engine. I assumed it was more of an add-on framework/library and didn't need to be certified by Apple.
Assuming at most the unreal engine includes a dynamic framework inside the app bundle, it would need to be code signed. This code signature is that of the publishing developer and NOT epic. Epic do not need any code signing or publishing abilities to maintain Unreal Engine for Apple platforms. It might however be very convenient to have direct access to tools and provisioning for the purpose of testing on physical devices.
 
Now I am confused. You said "and 30% for all scales of sales doesn't sound right for big companies" and I agreed with you. Now you agree it sounds right? I mean, either they pay more or they pay the same. It would be morally wrong to let them pay less.
???
I clearly said in my original post what my thought is on this subject.
I don’t plan to discuss further on this issue as what I believe is totally not in line with your thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
🤣 There is a time limit iirc. studying 70y long makes no sense, too. But its free, as it should be...

But from what you’re saying it sounds there is nothing stopping you from doing it. I’ve been in college for 20 years, but I’ve paid for it myself. There is more than a lifetime of material I want to learn. I could easily do 70 years.
 
create their own console and compete with Xbox and PS. Then ask Microsoft and Sony to allow their apps on there without any fees. See what happens.

Apple is not stupid enough to make the same mistake twice (ahem Pippin).
[automerge]1597711357[/automerge]
In all the times we seen Apple facing a lawsuit, has anyone seen Apple saying "we are yanking your entire access to its App Store and app development tools"? If I am not mistaken this is new, and dangerous.

I think there is more to what’s going on than the article has researched here.
 
Actually, isn't that how our legal system works?


You can't simply sue because you don't like a particular law or policy from a company. You need to demonstrate how that law or policy harmed you -- and in this case, it seems like Apple is only adding ammunition to that part.

How does taking 30% of sales harm businesses? This is like saying the taxes that gets taken out of my paycheck is harmful. There are some costs/fees involved.
 
Simple math.. they were charging 9.99 for some in-game stuff... and losing 30% so thye 6.99... now they sell the same for 7.99 (20%) less... that's $1 more for EPIC... who wins? Epic? I could care less about Fortnite to be honest but I think its silly for a game developer the size of Epic to be this childish.
 
Apple is not stupid enough to make the same mistake twice (ahem Pippin).
[automerge]1597711357[/automerge]


I think there is more to what’s going on than the article has researched here.

Not to mention, Apple has not always been successful stepping into new market categories. What was the name of their revolutionary music social media platform again, ping? How long did it last.

The argument that Apple can just step into a market and succeed is so tired it's a joke at this point. That ability died on October 5, 2011. There's nobody left at Apple that has the skill to successfully make such a move.

-Apple tried to make their own sapphire glass, they failed.
-Apple tried to make a smart speaker as successful as Alexa and Google Assistant, they failed (and apparently are doing nothing to fix Siri's reported fundamental flaws.)
-Apple tried to get into social media, they failed.
-Apple tried to make their own mobile advertising platform, it failed
The list goes on and on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
Simple math.. they were charging 9.99 for some in-game stuff... and losing 30% so thye 6.99... now they sell the same for 7.99 (20%) less... that's $1 more for EPIC... who wins? Epic? I could care less about Fortnite to be honest but I think its silly for a game developer the size of Epic to be this childish.

Are we to believe they will always charge less than they would have via Apple? Of course not. They want to charge $9.99 but they are buying good PR for $2 a sale.
 
They already do think that way.

This is changing. Apple Arcade has some genuinely fun stuff on there, and if you pair a controller the 4k appleTV can do double duty as a casual gaming console quite competently. The hardware is better than the Switch, for instance.

If you're in the apple ecosystem and a casual console gamer, the need for a dedicated console is disappearing fast. We're not there yet, but I can foresee that in 2-3 years time, its possible that we will be.
 
Assuming at most the unreal engine includes a dynamic framework inside the app bundle, it would need to be code signed. This code signature is that of the publishing developer and NOT epic. Epic do not need any code signing or publishing abilities to maintain Unreal Engine for Apple platforms. It might however be very convenient to have direct access to tools and provisioning for the purpose of testing on physical devices.

As part of the ban Apple could exclude code developed by Epic or they could argue that getting royalties from other developers violates the ban and they could send letters to developers explaining that use of unreal code isn’t authorized.
 
This is changing. Apple Arcade has some genuinely fun stuff on there, and if you pair a controller the 4k appleTV can do double duty as a casual gaming console quite competently. The hardware is better than the Switch, for instance.

If you're in the apple ecosystem and a casual console gamer, the need for a dedicated console is disappearing fast. We're not there yet, but I can foresee that in 2-3 years time, its possible that we will be.
And let apple dictate which games am I allowed to play, depending on which developer they choose to piss off each month? I’ll pass.
 
And let apple dictate which games am I allowed to play, depending on which developer they choose to piss off each month? I’ll pass.

Would you prefer Nintendo style and developers are allowed a limited number of games they can release per year?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.