Epic Games CEO Renews Attack on Apple and Calls for Single, Universal App Store

[DaRev]

In all seriousness the current state of tv streaming is a joke.

With so many different services have different exclusives it’s more expensive than ever if you need multiple providers.

If I want to catch a full football season I’d require Sky + Sky Sports, BTSports, Amazon Prime.

Then there’s shows only available on Netflix, then those only available on NowTV and only available on Disney+.

I worked for a cable provider and people would complain about paying for 100+ channels they never watch and why won't we ala cart, and I would tell them, just wait, we already have Netflix and HULU, soon you will be able to get an app subscription for every channel you want and your bill will quadruple to get the 20 channels you want, instead of the 100+ of which you watch 20 channels.

 

[bgillander]

Let's face it, Apple is using it's monopoly power to force developers to use their app store in order for them to install apps on user's phone(and have to pay a tax to do so). How Apple got away with this for so long is beyond me. Imagine if MS locked down Windows and Apple iTunes had to pay MS 30% for every music and app store transaction that occurred on MS windows. Woulda been unheard of. iPod may never existed and digital music downloads may be $1.50 per song vs. $0.99/each.

Bottom line, Mobile Phone OS is no different that desktop OS and the restriction imposed for owners of iPhones from being able to install apps outside app store is outrageous and can't last forever.

The difference is that phones started off as a monopoly of the telecoms, so you had to buy your ringtones from AT&T, Verizon, etc.

Being a free market and since it is very obviously not a monopoly, you should vote against the current situation by buying an Android phone, not complain against the choice that you are not forced to buy. Those of us that prefer the App Store will keep buying iPhones because that is our choice.

I’m not against government regulation, but big picture wise, Sweeney’s argument is a perfect example of the slippery slope to a true monopoly (and current case wise, it seems like he is practically arguing Apple’s case against allowing other stores.)

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I sort of see what he’s saying. I connect my various digital video purchasing services such as iTunes, Google Play, etc together through Movies Anywhere. Movies I purchase in one store are available in all apps, not just the one I purchased them in. It’s a great concept: https://moviesanywhere.com/

The way this works is through a "https://moviesanywhere.com/" approach. Everyone is acting like it's some crazy idea, but movies have already figured it out. I buy a movie on Vudu and I can watch it through any of my linked movie "stores" the same can be done for games.

Well, it’s kinda a crazy idea. Videos are effectively all the same no matter where you get them. There may be a difference in resolution, color depth or file format it’s stored in, but you can “play” the movie “Justice League” on an 8K high definition screen with surround audio or a telephone screen and have essentially the same storytelling experience.

Software is a lot more complex than a simple color video with audio, it’s written for the device it’s meant for. And, even cross platform games still have to be written specifically for each individual device. If it was very easy to support multiple different devices as it is with videos, moviesanywhere for games might be a thing that could work. But, even with that, a company supporting “video” content is done once they provide the raw files to the service in question to compress. Games require a significant amount of support after the sale (usually more than it cost to develop in the first place) and, if you want to add in DLC? That’s more effort. As long as there’s this huge delta of difference between video and games, there will be a huge delta of difference in how they can reasonably be expected to be offered for consumption.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Years ago, back in 1997 I believe, Microsoft was forced to give Apple $150M USD to prop-up Apple, to create competition.

Microsoft was forced to give Apple $150? 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 in order to make a point and the hope is that you won’t do a google search to confirm.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

There's my proposal how Apple could think about their app store price plans for developers to perhaps shut up this callings for regulations. Then let free market works.

P.S. The numbers may vary.

View attachment 1911683

No, this would not shut up the developer’s calling for regulations. Consider that in ANY partnership, a 50/50 split is usually the best you can hope for, though you may have to deal with 40/60 or worse depending on the size of the company you’re partnering with. For any random developer jumping onto the App Store of a company the size of Apple getting a 70/30 split? That’s a pretty good split.

Anyone that would seriously complain about a 70/30 split would complain about ANYTHING, so even your chart would be rejected. This is why the vast majority of developers are deploying their code, cashing their checks (from around the world) and not saying a lot about this whole thing.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I still can't get it how Epic and Apple couldn't agree on fair share from probably millions of dollars of people wanting to play Fortnite on iOS and iPadOS. It doesn't make business sense to not agree on that.

Is there some other reason? Like Apple want to block Epic to make their own metaverse and put it in app store? Or is it the clash of egos of Tim and Tim? Anyone knows?

Apple had already agreed on something with Epic and Epic broke the terms of that agreement. There’s really no reason why Apple should expect that Epic would ever adhere to any terms of any new agreement. So, it’s just not beneficial for Apple to work with them on anything.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

To 3., and thats why we need new laws to control this. Nobody should be able to ban anybody from a platform with a user base size bigger than X(tbd). X needs to be defined, and maybe they have to add more parameters as definition.
That's what Apple will face in the EU with Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, and in the U.S. probably, too.
Not only Apple!

This is not what you TRULY believe, right? Let’s say you create an platform (hardware, OS, whole thing) that’s ONLY for sharing cat pictures. Because cat lovers would really enjoy seeing pictures of ONLY cats, they appreciate that you have very stiff moderation for removing any picture that’s not a cat (memes, other animals, etc.). You’ve created algorithms and have a large staff to ensure that cat pictures get posted quickly and anything other than cat pictures get removed or, better yet, rejected before their posted. Not only that, their kids enjoy pictures of cats, too, and they know they can leave their kid unattended with the device knowing all they’ll get are cat pictures.

Unfortunately for you, people go CRAZY for it. For whatever reason, your hardware sales top X(tbd) in year two. Now, where you banned anyone that posted other animals, you have to accept that content now? Further, if someone posts porn, pre-X(tbd) you could reject the pic and ban them, but post-X(tbd) you have to accept them? All moderation disappears post-X(tbd)?

 

[theotherphil]

All these comments. Sweeney won't be getting this idea past any regulator. He is using this for media attention and it's clearly working. Ignore him, he'll go away.

 

[MowgliWolf]

I woke up this morning, in level 3 covid restrictions, half my family nearly in tin foil hats, most of my daily reality taking place among a deeply divided and polarised world of hysterical overreaction, health fears and conspiracies and over politicisation of everything.
The first thing I thought was - yeah Tim Sweeney is right! What I really need right now is a universal App Store, that’ll fix EVERYTHING! Then I went onto the Epic Games store.

 

[Homme]

Let's face it, Apple is using it's monopoly power to force developers to use their app store in order for them to install apps on user's phone(and have to pay a tax to do so). How Apple got away with this for so long is beyond me. Imagine if MS locked down Windows and Apple iTunes had to pay MS 30% for every music and app store transaction that occurred on MS windows. Woulda been unheard of. iPod may never existed and digital music downloads may be $1.50 per song vs. $0.99/each.

Bottom line, Mobile Phone OS is no different that desktop OS and the restriction imposed for owners of iPhones from being able to install apps outside app store is outrageous and can't last forever.

They are not a monopoly and even the judge which resided the case said so

keep dreaming if you think they are a monopoly

 

[Abazigal]

From a consumer point of view, I like the universal app store idea. Buy once and use across all ecosystems.

An example would be Todoist, a task management app which is available on multiple platforms and the web, and is subscription based (the only way it is worth the developer’s while to support so many versions of their app).

It’s possible, but are people willing to pay extra for the developer’s time and effort in doing so?

 

[Abazigal]

A locked down experience can be had on anything that allows more... all you need to do is choose to not use or install anything from outside of the App Store, it really isn't a hard concept.

No one is forcing you to sideload

Until Facebook launches their own App Store and decides that you can only get a particular app through them.

Never forget the stunt Epic tried to pull with Fortnite on android.

 

[Boris Bronson]

In all seriousness the current state of tv streaming is a joke.

With so many different services have different exclusives it’s more expensive than ever if you need multiple providers.

If I want to catch a full football season I’d require Sky + Sky Sports, BTSports, Amazon Prime.

Then there’s shows only available on Netflix, then those only available on NowTV and only available on Disney+.

And they wonder why piracy has made a resurgence.

 

[Wildkraut]

This is not what you TRULY believe, right? Let’s say you create an platform (hardware, OS, whole thing) that’s ONLY for sharing cat pictures. Because cat lovers would really enjoy seeing pictures of ONLY cats, they appreciate that you have very stiff moderation for removing any picture that’s not a cat (memes, other animals, etc.). You’ve created algorithms and have a large staff to ensure that cat pictures get posted quickly and anything other than cat pictures get removed or, better yet, rejected before their posted. Not only that, their kids enjoy pictures of cats, too, and they know they can leave their kid unattended with the device knowing all they’ll get are cat pictures.

Unfortunately for you, people go CRAZY for it. For whatever reason, your hardware sales top X(tbd) in year two. Now, where you banned anyone that posted other animals, you have to accept that content now? Further, if someone posts porn, pre-X(tbd) you could reject the pic and ban them, but post-X(tbd) you have to accept them? All moderation disappears post-X(tbd)?

Well, I do, but this fictional cat platform scenario is kinda non-sense, because it does not anticompetitively interlock multiple business types like Apple does, and has no multipurpose device that serves as a gateway to core technologies used in our economy, infrastructure, and the web.

Anyway, it would be different if this cat platform became heavy weight like Facebook, able to influence citizens(cats) on multiple topics. Yes, you just described Catbook, then yes regulations must apply here, too. That’s exactly what Facebook was at the beginning, just a single purpose platform, but they stretched to multiple business types and must face regulations, just like Apple and Google.

 

[Wildkraut]

Hands up for anyone that uses the App Store and ONLY the App Store for App Discovery.

ok

NOW, hands up for all the rest of you that use YouTube, Reddit, you know, the INTERNET to discover new Apps.

Ok. NOW… second group… could you reach out to those few in the first group and help them out? They’re still typing “App that lets me do taxes” in the App Store search instead of Google.

Baby steps.


I LOVE how cheap flying got in the US after there was competition. And the SERVICE has never been better! Why, just last week, I only had to pay less than $5 for a water instead of free!

Here get your free water, I rarely have to buy water.

Freewa - Free water project

Freewa is a Croatian product – a web platform, a mobile app for mapping free drinking water locations worldwide, and an eco water bottle with a bag. By buying a Freewa bottle, you're turning an idea of clean drinking water free to all into reality. Let's prove together that initiatives from...

freewa.org

 

[mazz0]

A locked down experience can be had on anything that allows more... all you need to do is choose to not use or install anything from outside of the App Store, it really isn't a hard concept.

No one is forcing you to sideload

I think you’re wrong for several reasons:

1. As soon as installing from outside the App Store becomes possible there’s a high likelihood that you’ll be obliged either to make use of it, or to do without certain apps or services, because they will be exclusive to other stores. You will be free to choose one of these two options, but either way you lose.
2. Not everyone is as tech savvy as we are. If my mum had the option of other stores, I don’t think she would be well placed to judge their relative trustworthiness. Frankly I’m not sure you or I would be either.
3. She also may be vulnerable to being tricked by spoofing, or other social engineering attacks. Heck, as any information security manager will tell you, even us nerds aren’t immune from falling for such tricks on occasion. I don’t want to have to even think about this, and currently I don’t.

The open, wild-west approach can be had on any non-Apple device… all you need to do is choose a different brand, it really isn’t a hard concept.

No one is forcing you to buy Apple.

 

[Arsenikdote]

I think you havne't looked at the data recently, Let's talk US marketshare since that is what matters if you live in the US. Apple marketshare is in mid 50%, google has the remaining. So Apple/Google is a Duoploy, which is no differnt than a Monopoly. Compare that to Verizon/ATT/tmobile. They can't go running around screwing users, they are highly regulated private entities.

You made the original point about Microsoft. Maybe that original attempt to show your point was flawed? Microsoft was a monopoly. As stated, if you wanted a home computer you had one practical choice, Microsoft Windows. Microsoft did not charge application creators 30%, but they also didn't provide ANY mechanism for those creators to get visibility or accessibility to the users. Software distributors did, and they charged more like 70%. So no one screamed at Microsoft and no one cared really about the developers to screen at the distributors.

Today Apple and Google both provide the services of the old distributors and ONLY charge 30%. So from a developer standpoint you are better off. No one is going to do the distribution work for free, so someone will always pay something. Apple and Google are not a monopoly or a duopoly in that sense.

From a customer perspective, if you want a smartphone you can have Android which can side load and Apple which can't. You have choice. You get the benefits and drawbacks of each ecosystem when you make your choice. The ability to make that choice is not a duopoly.

 

[mazz0]

This is not what you TRULY believe, right? Let’s say you create an platform (hardware, OS, whole thing) that’s ONLY for sharing cat pictures. Because cat lovers would really enjoy seeing pictures of ONLY cats, they appreciate that you have very stiff moderation for removing any picture that’s not a cat (memes, other animals, etc.). You’ve created algorithms and have a large staff to ensure that cat pictures get posted quickly and anything other than cat pictures get removed or, better yet, rejected before their posted. Not only that, their kids enjoy pictures of cats, too, and they know they can leave their kid unattended with the device knowing all they’ll get are cat pictures.

Unfortunately for you, people go CRAZY for it. For whatever reason, your hardware sales top X(tbd) in year two. Now, where you banned anyone that posted other animals, you have to accept that content now? Further, if someone posts porn, pre-X(tbd) you could reject the pic and ban them, but post-X(tbd) you have to accept them? All moderation disappears post-X(tbd)?

I want one!

 

[Abazigal]

A locked down experience can be had on anything that allows more... all you need to do is choose to not use or install anything from outside of the App Store, it really isn't a hard concept.

No one is forcing you to sideload

I like to have my cake and be able to eat it too.

 

[bobenhaus]

Have you heard from YouTube creators? They hate it.
There are several complaints from very famous YouTube creators who all say that they wish YouTube had actual competition, because of just how horrendous Google treats its creators.
On YouTube, it’s Google and only Google who decides what’s monetized and what isn’t, it’s Google who decides what belongs on their platform and what doesn’t, and it’s google who decides what is fair use and what isn’t, and more than not they don’t know what the words “fair use” actually means.
Is that really what you want for applications?
People flipped out when Apple kickes Fortnite out of the App Store only on their phones and tablets. Imagine the outrage if they kicked Fortnite out of a universal App Store across all platforms.
Not good.

My idea would be digital store kinda like Steam that all companies and individuals contribute their digital works.. Anyone would be able to login and purchase, steam, read, play kinda like a library, All in one store

 

[philryan]

In all seriousness the current state of tv streaming is a joke.

With so many different services have different exclusives it’s more expensive than ever if you need multiple providers.

If I want to catch a full football season I’d require Sky + Sky Sports, BTSports, Amazon Prime.

Then there’s shows only available on Netflix, then those only available on NowTV and only available on Disney+.

That’s called a market.

If you want to buy shirts, shoes, belts, jackets, and hats, let alone sports gear, you might go to different stores.

 

[Ethosik]

PCs have all these...

I hate when people try to make smartphones and tablets seem like anything beyond just the next step in computers.

They are absolutely computers, they should be treated like them...

Nope not mine. I don't have a webcam for privacy reasons. And I don't take my 50 pound desktop workstation to the bathroom, or when I get in my car.

 

[Skewlovevism]

So he wants to eliminate competition and have one monopolistic app store.

Sweeney’s brilliant thought process.
“Apple is bad for being a monopoly. Monopoly is bad for customers and developers. Let’s create a one big true monopoly for everyone”

But there might be a simple solution. Does anyone here, have a very duck tape?

 

[Skewlovevism]

Why stop at a single store? Let’s require a single OS that will work on every device. That way everyone can be miserable

I nominate MS-DOS

 

[Seoras]

Why stop at a single store? Let’s require a single OS that will work on every device. That way everyone can be miserable together.

We had that already. It was called "Windows". The people who created it weren't smart enough though to think of an App Store that policed software to stop malicious software.
Instead they left it to 3rd parties to provide crippling virus protection software that killed all performance and made your machine take 10 minutes to boot (when it didn't need the latest patch, add another 20mins).
It was miserable...