Epic‘s reaction was likely also influenced by the court saying that Apple is free to never let Epic back on the store, and, in fact, Apple can ban all of Epic’s affiliates if it wants to (i.e. Unreal).
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.
Epic CEO: Judge's Decision 'Isn't a Win for Developers or for Consumers,' Fortnite Not Immediately Returning to App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Epic‘s reaction was likely also influenced by the court saying that Apple is free to never let Epic back on the store, and, in fact, Apple can ban all of Epic’s affiliates if it wants to (i.e. Unreal).
Apple would be foolish to punish other developers for Epic's mistakes. That's a way to loose developers that won't ever come back.
I'm not happy with the govt telling Apple how to do business, but Epic getting wrecked makes up for it a little.
And here's a writeup by Macstories on the case.
www.macstories.net
As the writer is himself trained in law, I believe he would have a more objective take on the matter. Well worth a read.
What Does It All Mean?: A Look at Judge Gonzalez Rogers’ Decision in the Epic Versus Apple Trial
Yesterday, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers decided Epic Games’ antitrust lawsuit against Apple, delivering a ruling in favor of Apple that comes with significant caveats. Although the Judge found that Apple‘s operation of the App Store isn’t an exercise of monopolistic power, she...
www.macstories.net
As the writer is himself trained in law, I believe he would have a more objective take on the matter. Well worth a read.
Last edited:
Except with a club membership it eventually expires and you renew it if you like or you don’t and that’s the end of it. Maybe you didn’t like Sam’s Club and switch to Costco. With phone ecosystems, there can be incredible barriers to switching platforms and Apple themselves acknowledge this. It’s not as simple as saying I don’t like this I’m leaving and buying an Android, (i.e. shopping somewhere else). Aside from paying for a new phone, if you have loads of apps you paid for or accessory devices like an Apple Watch or HomeKit devices, you may have to spend considerable sums to switch platforms and get back to where you were. That’s a very different scenario than simply not renewing your membership to Sam’s Club or Costco.
Last edited:
And yet those very same lawmakers a totally silent on the cable company monopolies which do far more harm than Apple or Google could ever do.Maybe, but i think major law reforms for digital goods, devices and linked services will also happens in the U.S., of course those laws won’t only affect Apple.
If I remember correctly there are additional non-EPIC related antitrust investigations ongoing in the U.S, too.
edit: yes there is…
Apple Ruling Shows Need for App Store Law, Lawmakers Say
Some lawmakers said the ruling supports the need for legislation to break the hold that device makers have over their app stores.www.bloombergquint.com
The problem with that comparison is iPhone and Android programs use totally different formats much like even though Macs and PC both used Intel you could take a PC program and expect it to run on a Mac without some changing of the code or running an emulator.
I know what I’m talking about, I run a website that serves millions of visitors a month. It’s cheap when you know what you’re doing, and Apple does. We’re obviously not talking about traditional shared hosting here…
Of course the total cost of operating the store is high, but for an individual app, not so much.
The original comment I replied to was all like: "so you want global cloud infrastructure for freeee?!"
No, they don’t. Nobody is asking anything for free and nobody’s getting anything for free, either. This person made it sound like Apple has access to some crazy expensive gLObAL cLouD inFRrasTrucTure, that any small business or even an individual can spin up in a matter of minutes and only pay as they go. These things are scalable.
I don't see how Apple is calling this a victory. Looks like "success is illegal" if they're being told how they can run their own platform. Guess they're happy they aren't being told to allow third-party app stores.
The App Store must operate at a very high margin. They won't shift costs elsewhere; they'll just make less profit.
🤣🤣🤣
It isn’t a monopoly. That’s like saying McDonalds has a monopoly on Happy Meals
🤣🤣🤣
No alternative IAP systems
No side loading
No alternate app stores
Not a monopoly
Worst case they have to let apps have links to their websites to tell people how they can buy stuff elsewhere, but even then, depending on how it’s interpreted they might still be owed a cut.
Most of the developers don’t even have the means to set up their own payment systems, so they’ll stick to apple. The real threat would have been the third party app stores, and that has been denied.
You know you are free to not buy Apple products right? Like, it’s entirely voluntary and there are multiple alternatives to every product Apple sells? The only thing keeping you “locked in” is your own choices.
While it’s not over, what really changed? Customers can navigate to another website for payment, giving out their cc details? Is the price going to be 30% lower than iap? Probably not. Apple seemingly can collect commissions on any payment that originated from the app, even external payments.
Not 30% lower, but still it could be lower than what they’re charging today. Large companies already have payment systems set up, so they can start almost immediately.
As for apple collecting from external payments, remains to be seen how much they can charge, surely not 30%, maybe not even a commission on every sale, it could be a fixed fee.
For a $.99 purchase, maybe down to $.95?
The court didn’t limit their commissions and apple could still charge what they were charging previously.
One would hope but since customers already are paying X I bet they won't come down much. If they do and large amounts of IAP move off the App Store it will motivate Apple to aggressively find other ways to increase App Store revenue. My guess the best strategic move for developers is to make a small drop, if any, to bolster their competition argument without upsetting Apple.
It will be interesting to see how Apple responds. One idea I had posted earlier is to offer a bonus on iTune gift card purchases and redemptions. That could drive customers to use them for IAP since they would effectively get a discount for using them. It would cost Apple very little while shoring up the IAP model. This would also put pressure on developers offering payment processing outside of the App Store to lower prices.
A win for consumers no matter how they chose to pay.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t it actually more expensive to use a third party payment option for an app costing $1?
I am glad Epic failed in their case. If they got their way then all consumers would have to monitor subscriptions individually than under one ecosystem. That raises security issues and is not efficient for consumers. Either build your own store or play by the rules. Apple has made developers tons of money and they appreciate the ecosystem Apple provides.
As a parent who solved your situation by using parental controls, I hope that there will be a simple way to prevent this new link from being presented. It should be something I can opt out of and disable in restrictions.
I agree. There is something really bizare about the idea Apple is a monopoly in the standard meaning for the word. They don't control the majority of the smartphone market (android does) and by the broad way it is being used "monopoly" would apply to anyone with an exclusive deal, or Nintendo.