Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The biggest problem for both Google and Apple is if Epic decide to say 'sod both of you' and go it alone in creating their own app store showing users how to sideload the store app to get it on their android or iOS device and undercut both Apple and Google in their pricing.
No, the biggest problem for both Google and Apple would be if Epic decided to create their own competing hardware and ecosystem. They may have the money and the resources, but they lack the skill. As a result, they wouldn’t have the balls to do anything like that.

I mean, there’s nothing keeping Epic from creating their own Android App Store right now, yet there’s no Epic App Store. My question would be, why not?
 
No, the biggest problem for both Google and Apple would be if Epic decided to create their own competing hardware and ecosystem. They may have the money and the resources, but they lack the skill. As a result, they wouldn’t have the balls to do anything like that.

I mean, there’s nothing keeping Epic from creating their own Android App Store right now, yet there’s no Epic App Store. My question would be, why not?
They have the money and the resources to do EXACTLY what Apple and Google did when first creating their app stores. Each one has their own entry portal into the store, Apple has the App store app and Google the Play store App. Each of them enters their own app store respectively.

Epic could hire Google or Facebook servers (both offer rental packages) to host apps for iOS and android. They would require someone to write an app that would allow users to enter Epic's app store to see both ios and android apps. This app would then have to be sideloaded onto iOS devices and android devices because there is no way Apple or Google would allow such an app in their store. Epic could then go on a marketing campaign to get app developers to put their apps in the Epic app store instead of Apple or Google's.

Epic may lack the skill in creating such an app store but they certainly have the money to buy that skill. Apple and Google do it all the time, buy the skill so I am sure Epic could do the same and I am sure some Apple app store employees or Google app store employees would move over if the money was right.
 
They have the money and the resources to do EXACTLY what Apple and Google did when first creating their app stores.
When they first created their app stores, they defined the specific hardware platforms those stores run on. Apple, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, more than Google, possibly, but Google DID define a reference design that their OS and store would run on.

I doubt you’d ever see hardware even as good as an Android hardware device coming out of Epic.
 
Which was always his endgame right from the very start. Not to benefit users or empower developers, but to be able to offer his own App Store on iOS devices and charge developers a cut (which goes directly to his pocket).
Exactly! Well said! ?
 
They have the money and the resources to do EXACTLY what Apple and Google did when first creating their app stores. Each one has their own entry portal into the store, Apple has the App store app and Google the Play store App. Each of them enters their own app store respectively.

Epic could hire Google or Facebook servers (both offer rental packages) to host apps for iOS and android. They would require someone to write an app that would allow users to enter Epic's app store to see both ios and android apps. This app would then have to be sideloaded onto iOS devices and android devices because there is no way Apple or Google would allow such an app in their store. Epic could then go on a marketing campaign to get app developers to put their apps in the Epic app store instead of Apple or Google's.

Epic may lack the skill in creating such an app store but they certainly have the money to buy that skill. Apple and Google do it all the time, buy the skill so I am sure Epic could do the same and I am sure some Apple app store employees or Google app store employees would move over if the money was right.
They have a lot less money to maintain it though.

Assuming this actually happens. Apple discovers the method used for side loading and pushes an update to patch it.

Epic App Store breaks and they need to repeat the whole process again.
 
... Years ago, back in 1997 I believe, Microsoft was forced to give Apple $150M USD to prop-up Apple, to create competition. ...

... So, for anyone reading this, Microsoft was not forced to give Apple $150M. I have no idea where the poster got the information, but I’m assuming it was made up...

It was not made up, per se -- but it absolutely is a misinterpretation of events.

The time was the late 1990's. Apple was somewhat on the ropes at that point, having had some pretty significant setbacks with their next-gen OS development (dubbed "Copland") and likewise languishing badly in the hardware innovation department; that was when journalists from even non-technical publications were claiming that Apple would "one day soon" go bankrupt. Amid that, there were also some rumblings about Microsoft possibly pulling the plug from the Mac version of Microsoft Office... because obviously if Apple went bankrupt, Microsoft would no longer have a reason to care about their customer base, right?

Meanwhile, Microsoft was going through their own troubles; the DOJ was seriously contemplating the possibility of splitting up the company, due to Microsoft's very real monopoly power, and the ways in which they were perceived to be wielding it to their advantage. Microsoft's influence over the computer market was rivaled only by Ma Bell's influence over the phone industry, just prior to Ma Bell being broken up by the government a couple of decades earlier. Desktop Linux was still barely a twinkle on the horizon, Apple was basically a single-digit also ran at best, and....... well, there is no "and"; aside from Apple, Microsoft Windows basically controlled the entire desktop computer market. Thus, it was easy to see the very real possibility of Microsoft being broken apart.

So while all of that was going on, a truly bizarre thing happened at Apple: they outright bought the entire company that Steve Jobs, their previously ousted CEO, had founded after he left Apple. They also ousted their (then) current CEO, Gil Amelio, who had been driving the company right off of the proverbial cliff, and they invited Steve Jobs to retake his old position. Steve accepted -- at least as an interim CEO -- and almost immediately started making huge waves... because, as anyone who knows anything at all about his life story will tell you, that was quite simply exactly what he did best. (I won't go into all of those details, as they are not particularly relevant to this telling of the story.)

One of the waves he spawned was a truce with Bill Gates and Microsoft -- which included a $150M investment in non-voting Apple stock, and a commitment to continue developing Microsoft Office for Mac, for years to come. Mind you, contrary to what many believed, Apple wasn't actually that close to being bankrupt, quite yet... but the investment helped to dissuade the general public -- and more importantly, other software developers -- from believing that they were. As a side benefit, Microsoft was able to refer back to that investment in their antitrust hearings as a kind of, "See? We're not an anticompetitive monopoly! We even invested in our (ahem) strongest competitor!" response to that whole break-up thing that they were potentially facing.

So Microsoft was by no means forced to make that investment... but Steve did convince Bill that it would be best for both companies if they did so.

The denouement of the story is: Microsoft was not broken up, though they did have to live with some government oversight for a little while. They also eventually sold their Apple stock at a pretty decent profit. And of course, with the resulting renewed confidence in their longevity, Apple went on to produce several tremendously successful products, including the iMac, the iPod, macOS X and the iPhone, alongside quite a few other somewhat less successful products. The rest, as they say, is history.

(Source: I lived through the 90's, and I voraciously read all about it at the time. Also, you can Google "Microsoft antitrust case" and "Microsoft investment in Apple" if you're interested in putting the pieces together for yourself.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unregistered 4U
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.