They are beholden to market forces, the consequences of their decisions and the laws of the countries they operate in. Their rules need to align across two critical vectors of those 3 "first principles" and they need to choose a path that doesn't run afoul of either of those two, as it impacts the third. Apple isn't some sovereign state it's a company
Seems pretty clear to me. Apple is forced by law to do a thing because a developer felt like they didn't have a choice and had to develop for iOS. That shouldn't happen. Developer should just leave iOS and the court wouldn't even bother with Apple. Makes perfect sense to me.
Epic games is an unknown vendor? If people are so worried about transacting directly with an app developer why are these apps even on the store? They’re not shady if Apple gets it’s 30% cut but suddenly become shady if Apple is not in the picture?
The best solution is to make iOS like macOS. Developers can create apps for iOS and macOS if they want to or not.
So you're saying the judge was wrong? That either they don't know the law or they're corrupt in some way? Because if not, Epic is fully within their rights to do what they're doing. You might not be happy about it, but thankfully the law doesn't live and die by the vibes of a random dude on the internet.
nope. terrible. no one wants iOS to have 10 different autoupdating services running in the background with epic games custom notification interface coming from the bottom right of the screen and dealing with an activity monitor to end hidden processes.
Yes, so somehow when it’s a physical good we’re discussing (and I have my quibbles about considering Uber to be a physical good; you’re buying a ride in a car, not the car itself) there are no security or privacy issues and you’re not using Apple’s IP but if it’s a digital good then there are and you are and Apple needs to be the one handling payment? Except if you’re a big enough brand or direct Apple competitor - then you get carved out and don’t have to use Apple and thus don’t have to pay them a commission. All of this seems incredibly arbitrary or Apple making it up as they go along.
the laws were changed and it's no longer the market forces talking but the laws talking.
If Apple took 30% from their physical goods and services (which can't easily be duplicated), none of those companies would develop a native app.
Why would you have to keep entering your credit card? Are you really purchasing that many things from random apps where you don’t have an account on file that would include your credit card info?
I use more than one third party app in my iPhone.
Phew good! Because macOS doesn't have that
I suppose it’s not entirely arbitrary.
Netflix, Spotify and Amazon (Kindle) don’t offer IAP now. It was Apple’s decision to create the ‘reader’ app category which allowed some apps to be on the store without offering IAP. I remember the Hey email app tried to do this and Apple wouldn’t let the app in the store unless it had some basic functionality that didn’t require a subscription. Of course Apple doesn’t need Hey; it needs Netflix, Spotify and Kindle.
creative cloud updater
And Apple wants 30% of every Epic micro transactions that happen inside their iOS app(s).
