Then why did they release a statement saying they can’t update the game
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 Sought Side Deal for Fortnite Prior to Lawsuit, Apple Says in Court Filing [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did YOU read the update? Epic is basically asking for full root access to devices.
Hell no. What happens when Tencent buys another 10%?
Epic is basically trying to dictate the design and security of iOS which is crazy. They also explicity ask for the right to be on the store but not pay apple anything AND have their store with full root access on the store again with no cost.
Because they won't turn off the feature that is causing them to be blocked. Apple has said... repeatedly, all epic has to do is turn the feature off and they will be back on the store. Epic is holding their customers hostage and blaming apple despite the fact that they did what they did knowing exactly what would be the result. And now they are saying "nothing we can do, apple won't let us update". But they could have an update out today and they know it.
Where are Epic's letters asking the same of Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo?
Last edited:
Why? In the email Sweeney sent to Apple he said he hoped Apple would make these options available to all developers. Now I think he’s pressing his luck with alternate app stores inside the iOS App Store but isn’t it a common negotiating tactic to ask for more than you think you’ll get?
Epic is blatantly greedy! They signed the developing contract and sales of there product knowing damn well what was in it so no sympathy here.
Because they think Google puts in all kinds of warnings making it so people will be afraid to side load apps.
I don't know. I think if Apple made it more clear what the implications would be for changing ”Allow apps downloaded from App Store" and ”Allow apps downloaded from Anywhere” I think we would have Mac users in both camps, i.e. some that are App Store only and some that are also outside of that – hopefully people who knows a bit more what they're doing.
It also seems to me that Apple are trying so secure macOS (especially since Mojave and Catalina) by letting the user acknowledge and grant apps permission to do even the smallest thing. So, I there seems to be ways to make things secure even without forcing users to go via the App Store. I don't see why Apple – as an option that is clear - could allow that on iOS and iPadOS too. But it should be supper clear what it means and something deeper than an ”on” or ”off ” switch.
This is exactly what happens in the hotel industry.
"We hope that Apple will *also* make these options equally"
Why *also*? Why not just a blanket "hope Apple will make these options equally available to all iOS developers"
It sounded like Tim snuck this in as an afterthought. If Tim Sweeney truly cared for equality, it wouldn't say "Competing payment processing options...in Fortnite and other Epic Games", it would say "Competing payment processing options for ALL APPS". Sounds like Epic would have taken a special deal without equality for all.
And prevents Android licensees from pre-installing competing app stores.
I have a bit more sympathy for Google, as they don't make their profit from selling the phone or the OS.
Last edited:
There are no exclusive agreements with these when it comes to the App Store.
It isn't a class action lawsuit. There's probably a legal reason they worded it like they did... but IANAL
Epic would like to weaken iOS security and gain root access to make it easier for their Chinese overlords and Russian hackers to steal the worlds data.
Good point, if Epic truly cared about equality, they would spearhead a class action lawsuit. They're just in it for themselves.
Which happens every day in hotels and on flights.
I disagree with this analogy. It’s more like if someone walked into the Apple Store and used a MacBook to go to the Amazon website, and ordered something. Apple didn’t pay for a stock of v-bucks that are being sold in Fortnite.
I also don’t agree with Epics tactics.
Epics main interests are of course for themselves, But you should have read Sweeny’s letter in full before commenting
I am neutral in this fight between the two. It’s popcorn for me. I’m just saying, each side has their version. It’s important to get an idea of the full picture before claiming one way or another, and that wording in Sweeney’s email means the knee jerk reactions against him aren’t informed reactions
Apple has a right to their store and platform. Epic has a right to anticompetitive practice criticism.
Umm..I believe most kids play on consoles or PC. I don’t know why any gamer would settle for less.
If I bought Forbes magazine from a Walmart store and then decided to subscribe to Forbes to get it in my mailbox every month does Walmart deserve a portion of that subscription? Because that’s what Apple is arguing; that they deserve a cut of any commerce of digital goods that happen within an app.
I think apple’s court filling is a response to Epic’s demand their impending ban be “revoked”. Apple’s argument is “they knew this would happen, if they didn’t they wouldn’t have asked for permission, which was denied, first. Therefore no exception should be made for them and the same policy everyone else adheres to should be upheld”. The rest of the story has no bearing on the limited scope of what is discussed here.
From a customer perspective, it does look like omitting information, but legally speaking, I think it is sound. It might double as trying to sway public opinion though, but why shouldn’t they try when Epic has been doing exactly that since the beginning.