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 Games Asks Court to Allow Fortnite Back on the App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Quit, or site? Otherwise, yes this completely - They're their own boss, hilarious to have an issue with it and think otherwise, purely comedic really.
“Quote” actually!
Half surprised folk aren’t also demanding Fords with Chevy engines sold by Honda with Toyota warranties... The impunity of it all, Ford only supporting cars made by them!
Please cite some cases of blue chips being found guilty of having illegal contracts.
it’s easy to say what you say, because invariably it’s based upon heresy and desire to be right.
It’s harder still to quote law and statute because they’re based on reality.
The point is that there is one commercial off the shelf smartphone operating system: Android. It has a monopoly over the smartphone operating system market, the software that runs the device. This is not to be confused with the smartphone hardware manufacturers which includes obviously Apple and Google but also Samsung, HTC, Microsoft, Motorola, Huawei, OnePlus, LG and Xiaomi. Plenty of hardware manufacturers but only one OS choice.
Prior to Android, many of those smartphone platforms used to ship Microsoft Windows Mobile or Windows Phone. Even Nokia experimented with Android devices prior to Microsoft's acquisition. The market also had Blackberry's operating system and HP tried to compete with webOS but it's hard to compete with a free operating system. Android essentially eviscerated Microsoft from the operating system market, why pay for Windows when you can get Android for free? Thus a competitor in the smartphone operating system market is removed.
So reiterate I don't think there is room for competition in the smartphone operating system market, I believe Android has a monopoly over the market and that there isn't competition in the smartphone operating system market.
I'm not sure how many more times I can write smartphone operating system market but I hope that makes sense. Two different markets: one software, one hardware.
Let's be clear that it was the series of events. It was Microsoft going to Netscape and asking Netscape to make their browser only work on Windows. Netscape declined to limit themselves only to Windows (not illegal but sets pre-text). Then when OEMs opted to start shipping Netscape with their hardware, Microsoft used their monopoly over the operating system market to threaten that those OEMs wouldn't be able to license Windows if they also installed Netscape (crossing the line). Simultaneously Microsoft took their own browser and moved it from a paid extension and integrated it into the operating system leveraging private APIs in the OS even though they'd originally considered making IE optional (the part that they conceded to). The ruling on the rest of the piece was overturned and Microsoft agreed to settle for making their private APIs it used public and some amount of monitoring.
Microsoft proactively took steps with the intent of destroying competition in the browser market by limiting Netscape through manipulation of the hardware manufacturers and also their operating system ties.
I am yet to see someone point to such malfeasance of Apple against Epic. If anything the cancellation notices shows that Apple are partnering with Epic to make it a successful company, are providing engineering resources for various projects and also provided to Epic their Developer Transition Kits for moving to Apple Silicon.
So above Microsoft was found because it set out with the intent of destroying a competitor. You can go in to the case law to see the details but there was plenty of documentation of Microsoft's intent. With the Apple App Store, Apple have consistently applied that on the device their payment system is how you get digital products for roughly a decade now. Apple haven't gone out to individuals to make software exclusive for iOS that I've seen. Apple hasn't threatened third party OEMs with not licensing it's product because it has never licensed iOS. And whilst the App Store does have deep ties into iOS, they've been there since it's launch in 2008 when Apple didn't have a monopoly over the smartphone device market, it had less than a 10% marketshare at the time. Apple haven't used their increasingly strong market position to increase their cut from 30%, in fact when they launched subscriptions they decided to make that cut 30% then a few years later they updated it so that after a year that Apple would only get 15%, reducing their profit for encouraging longer lived relationships.
Now let's take a small aside to the Epic v Google case here because if you read it, they do exactly what Microsoft did with Netscape: Google threatened smartphone manufacturers that it wouldn't license Google's mobile services software for their devices if those devices shipped with the Fortnite launcher. Google's model with licensing components on Android is very similar to Microsoft model of licensing Windows and I think that Epic has a much stronger chance against Google.
Hopefully that help explain the difference between Microsoft's situation and Apple's situation.
Last edited:
That is a fair point. Thanks for pointing this out. Yes I accept fully this is a key difference.
Stand strong Fortnite! The dominoes are continuing to fall for Apple as we have seen around the world. Stay the course. The world stands with Epic! #FreeFortnite
That sounds like the fault of the web browser and the fact you just admitted it happening while browsing shady websites.
From my opinion, if any executable file can run or be installed without user intervention, then that is the fault of the OS and/or Browser, not the user.
Good one. I think you know what I was getting at. Just buy android and don’t worry about what’s happening on iOS. It’s not for you fella.
Most numerous. Very good. Next time it might be handy to add the /s marker so we can all know you’re making a joke.
Very droll though... You’re very good - chin up!
/s
Yes, that is what Epic charge for using the Unreal Engine, not for distributing games that use it. Epic charge those royalties even if developers distribute their Unreal Engine-based games through Apple’s App Store.
Nothing prevents Epic from charging a separate fee for using the Epic Games Store to distribute those games (or even to distribute games that don’t use the Unreal Engine).
(I seem to recall reading that Epic are currently offering to discount their royalties on the Unreal Engine for developers who distribute through the Epic Games Store, but that doesn’t change the fact that royalties for using a game engine and fees for distribution are two separate charges.)
That’s correct: on macOS, you can distribute your apps outside the Mac App Store without paying Apple a penny. If you want to distribute your paid apps through the Mac App Store, however, then you have to pay Apple 30% of the purchase price, just like on iOS.
I get that you want iOS to be like macOS. The difference is that Apple never at any time advertised iOS as being able to run software from any source. In fact, ever since the introduction of the App Store, Apple have made it perfectly clear that it would be the only way to get third-party apps.
(In fact, when the iPhone was first introduced, there was no app SDK or App Store. Web apps were the only way to distribute third party software to the iPhone. That avenue still exists. As far as I know, nothing in Apple’s developer agreements prevents Epic from developing Fortnite as a web app and keeping every last penny of their in-app purchase revenue.)
Last edited:
Apple said they would let the game back in. All epic has to do is not break the elua agreement.
Yes. Epic Games need to accept their mistake and everything will be fixed, but since they are refusing to do that, too bad so sad.
Apple stands for a closed, tightly controlled ecosystem. They've always been that way from Day 1. That is in the DNA of Apple and makes Apple different from Android and other competing ecosystems. Customers who buy into Apple (like myself) knows what they're buying into. We consciously bypass Android because we prefer the Apple-way. Epic Games claim it is trying to provide consumers with more choice, but in reality they're trying to REMOVE choice from the consumer by forcing Apple to do things that are not inherently them. If Epic Games get its way in court, Apple will no longer be free to be Apple. The result can ONLY hurt consumers. That is the inherent danger in Epic Games' strategy of masking what is essentially a fight to enrich themselves with a larger share of the profits into a crusade for "consumer choice". Do not get swindled by the propaganda.
By allowing any app to run, you are giving permission to that app that systemwide changes can be made.
Heres a Scenario set in your imaginary world where you can install anything you want on your phone.
1. Someone sets up a fake App Store with some amazing game on it and advertises it on FB
2. Person downloads game via side load
3. Person tells all his facebook friends about game
4. Game contains a timed popup with "Your Phone Needs to Update" (allowing exceutable).
5. Popup appears - Enter your Apple ID to Continue
5. Credit card details are entered into game to buy funny money.
Result: Apple ID Stolen, Credit Card Stolen
It could even go further by also sending a Phishing Email to the person which would ask more personal details to "unlock their account" and as a result their life saving emptied.
This kind of thing happens daily however you are content to blame the users for Falling for some very VERY good, and in many cases, highly sophisticated scams. Very legitimate looking installers are not difficult to make.
Don't forget that there are multitudes of games and apps that attract older folk as well as kids e.g. Suduko, Candy Crush, Chess etc.
Last edited:
The people who complain about the 30% seem to loose sight of the costs associated with software marketing, updating and distribution. All of these are provided for by being on an App store. Economy of scale means this actually favors the small developer. In many case this is what allows a developer to get a start. When a developer's app. or apps. become big enough, then the 30% get much more costly than providing those services themselves. Using an App store is easier for most users and while not perfect is far less likely to result in the user's device being infected by malware. Epic doesn't want to pay and the App. Stores don't want to loose the revenue. That's business in America. There is no altruism involved by either side.
Not being able to download an iOS app. without jailbreaking is a different issue entirely. Epic is trying to link them so they get the benefits of using the App. Store services without paying for them. How long do you think you could go into a restaurant and distribute menus for your restaurant before you were asked to leave?
Not being able to download an iOS app. without jailbreaking is a different issue entirely. Epic is trying to link them so they get the benefits of using the App. Store services without paying for them. How long do you think you could go into a restaurant and distribute menus for your restaurant before you were asked to leave?
In a truly malicious scenario, the app hijacks Facebook and shares itself on their Facebook feed so that even if the person doesn't tell anyone about it intentionally, the app just posts to Facebook on their behalf. Or attempts to sign you up for other scams by accessing your messages to confirm signup connected to the phone account. This isn't even hypothetical, plenty of cheap phones ship with malware.
Yeah that is a very probable thing to happen (and I agree totally messed up); although perhaps anyone wanting to implement their own store would need to be vetted by Apple. There is a way to do it. MacOS is relatively safe. Perhaps it is something that can be chosen by the user to turn on and off, sort of like in MacOS choosing to be able to load things outside the App Store.
[automerge]1599529319[/automerge]
Good points.
That there is the problem. The OS should not allow that to happen. But here we are; in a world where software basically sucks ass and isn't fully tested.
Yes, Epic is using its own customers as pawns. They show complete disrespect for them, then lie to them saying it’s Apple’s fault Fortnite isn’t available.
That’s outrageous and despicable behavior, and it’s unacceptable. If I were a parent, I‘m sure I would not appreciate my child being used by Epic (Tencent) as a propaganda tool.
I just wanted to quote your post, because it's spot-on and exactly what I think and feel with regards to Apple. Apple is Apple because of the tightly controlled eco-system. I don't want the Wild Wild West, if I did, I would have gotten an Android phone. I wanted to be protected under Apple. A few years ago Eric Schmidt of Google went on a conference and straight-up said Android was more secure than iOS. The audience laughed, because they all knew the BS that Schmidt was telling them. We all chose to get iPhones because we knew what we were getting. I don't want to side load apps, I don't need custom icons. I want a phone that works most of the time, as well as the apps and everything else. I want it to basically take care of itself. With Apple, I know I am getting that. With Android....I know what I'm getting, and that worries me. I LOVE the Samsung hardware more than iPhone, but the OS sure as heck is why I'm Apple.
You've just put forward the entire argument for the App Store... at the end of the day alot of folk out there are NOT tech savvy enough to not fall for the occasional piece of malware/spyware, and all it will take is ONE malicious App and Apples reputation is tarnished forever.
Lets face it, if for example a Game like fortnight is ONLY available as a sideload or from an alternative App Store and it gains enough popularity, People WILL turn off their security to enable something that all their friends are playing.
If Epic or someone else stores are going to be vetted by Apple as you suggest, how much is that going to cost ?
Personally I'd say 30% of sales is fair.
Would an app that is available from the Alt App Store even be allowed on the Apple App Store ?
Might exclusivity contracts be put in place by Epic or Whomever on their stores, I know I would want that.
Wouldn't that restrict the developers audience and exposure ?
It's completely possible that the only people that will get completely screwed in the whole mess is small to medium developers who depend on 100% visibility of Potential App Store Clientele to make a buck.
The big companies will survive, but shrink. Customers and developers caught in the crossfire will be the pawns.
If apple blesses some other app store’s root certificate, then it can be abused. There is, mathematically, no way to do this without reducing ios security.