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 Threatens to Terminate Epic Games' Developer Accounts on August 28
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the digital devices didn't exist, makers of digital products would have no way to monetise them. In a world without iPhones you could still sell pizza and cab rides, but you could not sell gems for a iOS puzzle game. The same applies to movies, eBooks and music. All useless without gadgets. If you produce digital products you are absolutely reliant on the makers of digital devices and if your business relies on somebody else's products you can expect them to want money from you.
If they did Epic wouldn't be making as much money as they do off if it, or making a big deal about how much they are paying apple and google.
And look how good Epic does on that platform.... The only reason google isn't really lumped in to this is because they do a fraction of the business on android, cause they take 30% too.
Because Epic signed a contract they didn't like - umm that's not how it works.
Epic is is in textbook breach of contract.
First, I know of no country that caps income tax. If you know of one, let me know. Second, the argument for capping Payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare) is that they are supposed to be savings programs and one is capped as to how much one can receive, so one is also capped as to how much one needs to contribute.
Marginal rates have nothing to do with this, nor in fact do taxes in general. Taxes are not voluntary, one is required to pay them. No developer has to put an app on Apple’s platforms. If they do not feel they will be well enough compensated for doing so, they should not.
Wow, if they only took 30%, many people would be happy here in California. The top marginal rate in the U.S. Is 37%, add the 12.3% for state income tax and people are paying over 49% on every dollar from the point they hit that number. No upper bound.
It is a cost of doing business. It might be harder, but the App Store and Google Play store benefit the smaller players much more than the bigger ones. It levels the playing field, so that one looking at apps cannot tell how big or small the company is, nor do they have to drive people to their own web site, or convince customers to trust their payment processor. Apple and Google do that all for them.
Again, even a giant company like Epic, discovered that people did not want to go to a separate store to buy Fortnite and decided they should go back in to the Google Play store. Seems easy to get that the cost was worth it, or they would not have done it.
What they and others want is the benefit of the App Store/Play Store, without having to pay for it.
But it does create an unpleasant asymmetry, where the maker of the gadget has a privileged position to offer services. Apple is simultaneously a competitor and a regulator of competition, which gives them a business advantage. To be honest, I don't know what is "right" or "wrong" here. One one hand, Apple did make the technological platform, so it sounds logical and fair that they benefit from it. On the other hand, if they choose to offer a particular service, no outsider would be able to compete with them, which can have negative impact on the development of the platform. I think this is really what is meant when people say that Apple is a "monopoly". In regards to the App Store, Apple essentially fulfills the role of the state. So to say the "benevolent dictatorship of the United States of Apple". And we all know that giving government exclusive access to the market is not the best ideas.
In the end, I start tending towards the notion that a company who is the provider/regulator should not be able to offer services on the said platform. Following the notion that a government should regulate, not compete with free business. This means that services like Apple Music etc. should be split into separate entities who are subject of the same business conditions as any other players, e.g. they would need to give the "big" Apple a cut.
except spotify beats Apple Music, Kindle books beats Apple Books, etc.
The actual facts dispute your statement.
Maybe this is the object of the lawsuit, but the only possible outcome that I see is :
1. Apple (without forgetting the others) might be obliged to revise how they take their cut (various ways to do it as I mentioned).
2. Epic will be obliged to continue selling their stuff on the App Store and pay the new amount.
I know you could not disagree more with that, and it's OK.
I'll call it quits about this discussion. You won't convince me that 30% is a reasonable fee for everything sold in the App Store in 2020, and I won't convince you that it is not.
Yep, the issue is polarizing, considering most of the posters in this thread are probably not devs, but yet want to regulate Apples business model.
Does anybody really believe if Apple, for the sake of argument reduced the fee that anybody would see a saving? Or is this about ensuring the mythical IOS developer gets as much revenue as possible, while making use of Apples' infrastructure?
I see it this way:
- Epic want iOS devices to become as general as Mac/PC to push their store on phones/tablets
- Epic breaks AppStore rule to show they are against it
- Apple bans Fortnite but then they also terminate Epic's developer account so Epic can't update Unreal Engine on Mac/iOS
- Play safe, stop the fight, conform to AppStore rules and continue developing for iOS/Mac
- Epic doesn't like AppStore conditions, they stop working with Apple, Fortnite and Unreal Engine games are gone from Mac/iOS
Yeah, but someone needs to take the first step and it has to be someone big like Epic or Spotify. I don't see why Apple would otherwise lose on a part of an income stream like AppStore without a retaliation like this or maybe even antitrust lawsuits.
Android sucks.
There are two platforms for phones. One is open, the other is closed. Why would I choose the closed one? Simply because in my opinion Apple hardware and software is better than Android alternatives, the ecosystem is also not replaceable with anything else.
Imagine if Apple started locking down macOS to only use the Mac AppStore. People would be furious and demand them to revert it at once. At some point people would start using Windows alternatives. iOS devices to me should not be treated differently and I think with time more and more will take my side. In the end, the only reason Apple can do this is because people like me keep buying their products. Better competition would solve this problem but as I already said, Android sucks.
Nope. Epic does not give a damn about that. They want Apple to be forced to include their app store and do not care if people are forced to only buy from their store or Apple’s store.
Again, no. They broke the rules to create publicity. They could have followed the rules and still filed the lawsuit, or they could have pulled the app from the store and announced they would not be updating it until the rules changed and still filed the same lawsuit.
Still wrong. They informed Epic that if they did not cure the breach within a set number of days, they would terminate their developer account. meaning that Epic are not just putting their own revenue at risk, but those of others they encouraged to use their engine.
Once again, wrong.
Epic can follow the rules, and disable the functionality that is in breach while continuing their lawsuit. They could also disable the app and withdraw from the App Store while they continue the suit but still support their engine customers. There are a million other possibilities for them.
We agree on both points. If this were a matter of principle, they could withdraw from the store and announce that they would no longer develop Unreal Engine for Apple’s platform. They might get sued by some of their developers (depending on their contracts with them), but it would be certainly show that they were fighting for a principle, by giving up all their revenue on the platform.
This will lead a small number of people who currently care about iOS based Unreal Engine-based games to be upset. It may convince a large number of developers that they should not trust Epic, given how little care they have shown them in this fight (might be good for Unity, CryEngine and Lumberyard). Apple Silicon Macs should make casual games (at a minimum) an option for macOS.
Again you are wrong. There is already an anti-trust case against Apple over its App Store. It is over a year old. This case by Epic is just a publicity stunt.
Has it occurred to you that the reason it better is that they control it better and that if that goes away, it will end up just like Android?
However, there are other platforms, they are just smaller, as the two primary options hit the needs for most users. Those who want a stable, protected ecosystem in a walled garden pick iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. Those who really just wanted a free phone, a form factor that Apple does not support, the ability to use a stylus, customize their home screen or just say how much cooler they are because they are not sheep (because they own the dominant platform) buy Android.
Yup, but most of them would not really be Mac users, just people who like to complain. Given a choice, I always buy apps from the Mac App Store. I prefer knowing they will work on all my Macs, and that I will not have to remember where I got them to re-download them. Others have different opinions.
Not sure if you know this, but over 90% of desktop/laptop users already use Windows. However, about 90% of tablet users pick iOS. Given how cheap Android tablets are, I would guess that they do not care about apps only coming from the App Store and if Apple Silicon makes the Mac more compelling, will buy most of their apps via the Mac App Store as well (especially given the option of universal app purchases and subscription Family Sharing).
Nope. It has little to do with ”people like” you, and everything to do with the hundreds of millions who are completely happy with things as they are. There is no evidence that the number of users who supports your position has grown at all. Not only is it not true on iOS/iPadOS/tvOS/WatchOS, it is clear that it is not even true on Android where it is possible to pick other app stores and no one trusts them or cares enough to bother (hence why Epic had to cave and sell through the Google Play store). While you live in the Mac Rumors Echo Chamber, more users have not even heard of this lawsuit and almost none care about it.
I sincerely hope that those of you who want these open world like Windows and Linux will leave and go to Android and I will not have to worry about you ruining the system that many millions of users like me prefer as it is.
Better competition would solve this problem but as I already said, Android sucks.
Sorry this is not about competition. This is about a system model that is inherently different. The tightly coupled ecosystem, the concern for users’ privacy, the overall lack of malware, etc. are all by design. Google has a different set of interests so you will always be forced to choose, unless you and those like your succeed in destroying iOS so there two platforms with the same lack of privacy and high quality software, with apps that do not integrate well with the hardware because they need to go though the same APIs as other use, with limited new features built in to the system so that no third party offering an expensive add-on solution that hits .001% of users gets ”Sherlock-ed”, etc.
Surely you joke because there isn't much there, meaning you really don't use much in the way of software on your Mac except for Apple applications. Oh well your loss.
Hmmmm.... I have Microsoft Office, Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve, Affinity Designer, Affinity Photo, Affinity Publisher, Pixelmator Pro, Tumut Hype, Omni Graffle Pro, Omni Outliner and about 100 other applications, so I guess you are right, not many. Most of the rest of what I have is open source stuff and a small number of non-App Store apps that do not work with sandboxing (like TeamViewer). I think my bf still has a subscription to Creative Cloud, but I am not sure. He has mostly moved to Resolve for editing, Fusion for compositing and motion graphics and the Affinity Suite for drawing/publishing.
Xcode is one of the Mac apps I use most these days, as I find myself doing more and more of my non-development work on my iPad Pro.
But I guess you are right, not a lot of software.
Well you got a great creative/developer collection for sure. I just find too often when looking for some utility application or entertainment its not there. Still you won your point against its usefulness.
Confused. You're angry at Apple yet overjoyed at Google - who've also yanked Fortnite and who are also being sued by Epic?
Makes zero sense.
Android sucks because they went the open route. "General computing" devices like PCs could never get that popular because they were too complex for most people to use. At least Android made things a bit simpler than on a PC, but it's still a mess.Android sucks.
There are two platforms for phones. One is open, the other is closed. Why would I choose the closed one? Simply because in my opinion Apple hardware and software is better than Android alternatives, the ecosystem is also not replaceable with anything else.
Imagine if Apple started locking down macOS to only use the Mac AppStore. People would be furious and demand them to revert it at once. At some point people would start using Windows alternatives. iOS devices to me should not be treated differently and I think with time more and more will take my side. In the end, the only reason Apple can do this is because people like me keep buying their products. Better competition would solve this problem but as I already said, Android sucks.
My position is based both on working for a studio that released quite a few iOS (and Android) games, and having work for several pre-App Store/Mac App Store software development houses. That is why I understand that Apple’s model is better both for the small developer (who gets access to a market without needing to build either a sales infrastructure, nor trust with the user over payment or personal information. That leveling of the playing field is critical for the smaller developers. Secondly, Apple’s locked down environment makes piracy much less of a factor than it was on Android while I was working in the iOS game space.
This is just like Senator Durbin’s capping of Debit Card interchange rates, arguing that it would help ”mom and pop” stores and save consumers money. First, the savings did not matter to the “mom and pop” stores, as they still had lots of cash customers, and second none of those savings ever accrued to the consumer, but were all sucked up by the retailers. Worse, cutting the interchange rate meant that many banks who used to offer free accounts (paid for by the interchange fees), cut those and began charging for them.
No they are not - they are separate for very important legal reasons. An App can be rejected or removed from sale for bugs. So your interpretation would provide legal justification for Apple to terminate a developer program membership for simple bugs - which is ludicrous. No court would side with Apple in such a case.
[automerge]1597896923[/automerge]
Yes they are. And I cited the precise sections of the T&C‘s that say so. It’s not a “simple bug.” They violated T&C sections that (1) disallow hiding functionality from the app review team (which Epic did); (2) disallow violating the developer guidelines (which they violated in numerous ways); (3) require Epic to fix the issue within 30 days after being notified (which is why the date for being kicked out is the date that it is).
Read the T&C’s.