I think it would be an interesting experiment to have Apple split the game store from the app store. This would make gaming console stores the same as the one on the phone and thus similar rules could be implemented.
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 CEO Says Apple Should Be Paid for App Review Only, Not External Purchase 'Junk Fees'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you and I just have fundamentally different philosophies about this. I came up in a world where the idea of the platform owner dictating every little thing that can be done on the platform, and especially extracting a tax on it, was a thing to be fought against.
People were running Linux because they thought Windows was too restrictive. How times have changed.
You really think the computing device that is required for participation in modern society should have the same (or from the sound of it, even more restrictive) rules than game consoles which are 100% a luxury item and not a necessity in any sense?
interesting idea but have a feeling these people that distinguish the platforms base it on hardware design intent.
then it makes no sense for you to argue that game platforms should not be treated differently than "general purpose platforms". that's my point. be consistent in your argument. either don't treat general purpose platforms differently or don't create an exception for game platforms
by your logic, games on the App Store are 100% luxury and Apple is entitled to keep full control on games and entertainment/media apps (spotify/netflix), agreed? only productivity/utility apps should be regulated/sideloaded, yes?
Many drinkers spend more than that per year on German beer.
That doesn’t mean there’s as much a need to regulate the platforms that sell the 🍺 stuff.
Of course - there is one simple but important difference:
Spotify or a very successfully gaming console might have a chokehold on distribution of one product category: Games. Or Music.
Apple has it on many, countless markets:
- games
- music
- video streaming
- other application software
- digital payments
- digital advertising
etc. etc.
The fact of the matter is “number of core platform services offered” does not matter when determining if the DMA applies. If you offer just one “core platform service” and meet the (clearly designed to hit US companies) thresholds, then the law applies to you. See booking.com as an example.
So again, why is music streaming not a core platform service? It meets all the definitions you listed above.
Also, even giving you the largest benefit of the doubt possible, there is no universe where Apple has “chokehold” on games, music, video streaming, or digital advertising. (I’d argue it doesn’t have a chokehold on any of them, but can at least see an argument for digital payments and application software).
I agree with you on PC/Console gaming, but they kind of do when it comes to mobile gaming (which everyone likes to point out is the largest and most profitable piece of the pie).
I'm not sure how this got so focused on games and game consoles. Honestly I would be perfectly fine if games on iOS were treated the same as on game consoles.
My point is more about software ecosystem freedom in general. The iPhone/iPad is so capable physically, but the software and especially its method of distribution have always held it back more than necessary.
Yes like software on game consoles (Netflix/spotify/video games/ etc...). Yet you were defending the idea that game consoles should have strict control.
Wait wait wait. I think we've gotten way off track here. Let me just state clearly what I think about software on iOS:
If it's a game, charge a commission for everything, make all the rules you want. It's a game, game consoles set the precedent. This is all just for entertainment and money, go for it.
NON-GAME software should be treated entirely differently. Treating everything like it's a game, song, or movie ignores the crucial distinction between those and actual software for general purpose computers.
I think that iOS is too critical to the lives of people all over the world to let Apple completely dictate every little aspect of the platform. ESPECIALLY when they are taking the Mac the same way.
This is the issue with how Sweeney is presenting this argument. I actually think he's wrong about games but right about software in general. He just wants a bigger cut of the money. I think we agree he just needs to get over it about this. But I do think he raises bigger issues whether he's being genuine about that or not.
By the way, Merry Christmas!
Critical implies your life will be altered in a radical way if Apple ceased to exist. Where does that put air, food and water? The word is “important”. Although the majority of smartphones are non-Apple, which shows the world’s majority can survive without Apple.
Last edited:
I always thought it was crappy that Apple charged for in app purchases for content they don't host. At the time MS at least hosted all the content (I don't think that is true now).
That's a change in your earlier argument of "I came up in a world where the idea of the platform owner dictating every little thing that can be done on the platform, and especially extracting a tax on it, was a thing to be fought against.".
Game platform owner is a thing.