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 Sends Emails to Fortnite Players Blaming Apple for New Season's Unavailability
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wouldn’t know, but I assume Fortnite players can still use the game that exists on their phone and possibly (though less likely) even re-download it if they’d bought it before the ban.
So “screwing customers” is a bit melodramatic.
While I could point out that developing a game does have real costs (e.g. salaries for the developers), my understanding is that Fortnite succeeded far beyond Epic’s wildest dreams, so that at this point they are, for all practical purposes, simply printing money when they design and sell new skins.
While I don’t begrudge Epic their success, I’d have a lot more sympathy for them if they reinvested some of that windfall into developing their abandoned new version of Unreal Tournament, instead of disingenuously trying to wreck the App Store as the thin edge of a wedge designed to get the console makers (from whom the vast majority of Epic’s income comes) to lower their own 30% fees, which is surely Epic’s true goal.
Last edited:
Which then gets reported through Web sites like Macrumors and further disseminated through social media.
I‘m Mark Zuckerburg made sure it was featured prominently in the Facebook news feeds of every iOS device.
There’s no reason to act as if you were insulted. Many people in the Apple ecosystem use to spend money on it too. There are probably studies comparing spending in the same region per user base but at the end of the day it’s first and foremost an opinion that you used to go all of the rails with.
I think It’s pretty obvious that Apple cares about profit. Market share did not get them to the success they have. Sure they had more at the beginning of the smartphone market over a decade ago as it took the copycats a while to get anything out worth mentioning.
Well said all elements,computer hardware (Macs, phones, tablets, watches), software and services combined make Apple these days and they all have an important role in that experience.
Last edited:
It is reasonable and the highlighted is about 33% true. It’s security, customer experience and $$$.
And now the quarterly earnings calls and company valuation do the talking, market share is irrelevant.
Sorry mistyped that. I guess $2100 was what I meant to type there.
Point remains. Few in India can even afford a basic SE. That is why Apple doesnt care about marketshare, they wont sell something that budget
Apple has proven market share is irrelevant to it's success. Active devices are the relevant metric for Apple.
Here is the thing. What give you or even me the right to say 30% is good or bad? If it was as bad as people on this site say, there wouldn't be as many apps on iOS as there are. So why is it bad? Why do you get to decide how a company operates when you are not even an Apple employee, let alone in upper leadership. Even if it was 50%, what gives us the right to say its wrong? If 90% of the developers are happy with it, what's the problem?
I am not saying "NEVER go below 30%", obviously any developer would be happy with a decrease. But to everyone saying 30% is ridiculous need to explain why. Not just say 30% is bad. And justify why you get the right to say its bad.
Some might say even 5% is bad! People wishing that some government entity to come in and say you can only charge X percent are not thinking about the consequences. This is like forcing Kroger and Coca-Cola to only sell Coke Zero for $2 instead of $3 or higher.
Epic has a history of anti-competitive behavior - Satisfactory and Borderlands 3 were Epic Store exclusives on PC. I think it was Metro where you could pre-order on Steam, then became an Epic Store exclusive and was removed from Steam. They will do the exact same thing on iOS if they get their own store.
Bottom line, there is an alternative to the 30% cut - get an Android phone. I do not know when people starting getting this angry at companies for different costs/prices. Toothpaste A costs more than Toothpaste B. There are people that buy the cheap non-named brand groceries for cheaper costs. I always buy the named-brand ones. Does that mean we need to force Jif to change the price of their peanut butter to match the price of a non-named brand peanut butter? But I want Jif for that price! That is essentially what people are stating here. Android DOES exist, similarly that non-named brand peanut butter exists. But you want Apple/Jif instead! Sorry, that is just how things are.
It will be very very bad if the government forces a company to sell/offer something at a specific price.
Developers: If you are not happy with 30%, leave iOS the right way (as in don't break the rules and act like a immature child like Epic is doing here, just pull your app off iOS and send an email to Apple that you are protesting). This will speak to Apple faster than years of court trials and other legal actions do.
And I fell into that trap. I got Satisfactory and Borderlands 3 because I wanted to play them immediately. Now I am regretting my decision and am on the fence of spending another $100+ to get those games on Steam. Epic's attitude here makes me never want to run the Epic Store on my PC again.
How? If alternative stores are forced on Apple, how can someone have that same locked down experience and still get Fortnite? What about when Adobe decides to make their own store, how do you get Photoshop and keep that locked down experience? What happens when Epic buys exclusivity on new apps (like they do on PC with Borderlands 3) and you absolutely cannot get it if your phone is kept locked down?
Yes they are easy to verify as a Google search will show you in 1 minute.
They are, however, not "broad". They are common knowledge.
What do you think is a premium brand? I mean, how on earth could you even consider a brand in the premium segment **not** to be a wealth indicator?
You do realize everything is going towards services right? Windows 10 is basically the same as it was from day one. Microsoft is focusing more on Xbox, Office 365, Windows 365, OneDrive, Azure DevOps, Azure in general and more.Apple needs to concentrate on new computer centric products and stop going over the top with services. All of this is starting to take away from what Apple is renowned for IMHO.
You clearly do not understand the problem. There is only ONE app store, there is no app Store A and app Store B. ios developers can not move to app store B because there no such store exists, only store A and the conditions of store A limit what ios app developers can do. There is no other store when they can go 'ok, that store does not allow me to to this, I will therefore goto store B, or store C or store D'. Whilst the 30% is an issue for many app developers, the biggest issue is that Apple will not allow other payment systems to be used in the app store, ALL of the app developers have to use apples payment system, regardless of the fact that other payment systems exist. Preventing over payment systems to be used is monopolistic and antitrust which is what it is doing to Epic, the fact that they have banned their developers accounts proves just how much monopolistic tendencies Apple has in that if you do not abide by their rules, they can kick you out full in the knowledge that they know there is no other ios app store they can go to. Which means app developers are put under immense pressure to put up with Apple's store rules or lose their livelihood (some developers only develop for ios). Governments do not take kindly to companies preventing other options from being used. Microsoft tried it, preventing other web browsers from being shipped or even installed on new systems by the computer manufacturers and look what happened to them.
Governments around the world have been looking into the app store but they have been dragging their heels. I feel Epic was waiting on one government to start the bull rolling but as no government did, Epic decided to push the issue forward themselves.
No there is not. Android exists. There is not only one app store.
Cross platform households and cross platform developers do not agree with this “opinion “ there is not competition.
Another way to think about this:
If Apple kicks you off iOS, are you just sitting there thinking "There is no way I can get my mobile app to people"? No, there is Android.
If Walmart will not sell your peanut butter, are you sitting there thinking "there is no way I can get people to buy my peanut butter"?. No there is Target.
So no there is not only one App Store in existence. What people are comparing here is, wanting Target branded products in a Walmart. Wait, isn't that itself anti-competitive? Walmart has no Target branded products in the store.