Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Epic Games Submits Fortnite to U.S. App Store

russell_314 said:
You are right, but it doesn’t cover the 20 million downloads. That is just administrative fee to get into the App Store. Apple makes money by getting a percentage of in app purchases. That’s why they’re not losing money. If they only made $99 for each app annually, they would lose significant amount of money on the App Store.

That means they would have to change it to a per download pricing structure. They could say something like it’s $99 up to 1000 downloads then goes up from there. That would mean big developers would host their own apps. Once the most popular apps were gone from the App Store, the iOS App Store would turn into what the macOS App Store is now.
Click to expand...
But the store is the driver to sell phones. They can close the store if they believe it isn't enough lucrative.

And if app will move away from the store it's good! It means there is no value to stay in that store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macabrumorsab
xyz01 said:
The apps in the app store is also the reason they can sell iPhones in the first place, with a large margin and gigantic total profit.
Click to expand...

*The iPhone is also the reason they can sell apps in the app store in the first place, with a large margin and gigantic total profit.


Fixed it for you. Yes one cannot exist without the other, but that doesn’t mean one has to leach off the other either. They both can make a profit and work together.
 
russell_314 said:
The App Store is supported by in app purchases. Apple can basically give away free hosting for free apps with no in app purchases because they make money off of other apps. When you take that money away, they can’t continue to do this. As someone said they could just lose money off the App Store and then absorb that loss with iPhone sales, but I don’t think Apple will do that.
Click to expand...
But what is not clear is that many developers are not interested to be hosted and served by a$$le. They are happy to host and manage everything, including payments, without a$$le in the middle.

What is important is that the trend is clear...
 
diego.caraballo said:
This is exactly the point that Apple failed to clearly demonstrated during the trial.
I believe that the resurfaced old emails where Apple executives decided the infamous 30% cut out of nowhere, instead of providing a more thoughtful and reasoned explanation, were detrimental.

I do believe that Apple is entitled to a fee for the IP behind the SDK's that powers all the apps available in the platform and a fee for the app and content distribution.

If instead of defending the 30% cut, Apple had explaining the costs associated with the SDK, servers, security, and other expenses, it might have achieved a better result.

$99/year is ridiculous for some big companies and 30% of everything is too much as well.
Click to expand...
I think this is a good take. I agree that Apple can demand some sort of payment for the technology and everything that goes into the SDK, servers, etc. but 30% is absolutely ridiculous and everyone knows that. $99 is also ridiculous for someone like Epic Games who will be reaping large rewards from the technology - essentially for free. Why not just charge the standard Credit Card processing fee of around ~3%. That would still allow Apple compensation for the work and IP they have in it, and also allows other companies to actually swallow that cost or adjust accordingly.

A 30% fee is simply bad for the consumer and that cost is nowhere near justified for what Apple is providing. It is a tax on the internet and since companies don't have any other options, they have to pay the toll troll. There has to be a happy medium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedomlinux, System603, Dremmel and 2 others
surferfb said:
That's what a lot of MacRumors forum posters seem to want, as far as I can tell. Would be terrible for users, in my opinion, but I guess a lot of people disagree.
Click to expand...
Don't be afraid of freedom ...

a$$le is here because all the other enterprise gave freedom to it...
 
davide_eu said:
But the store is the driver to sell phones. They can close the store if they believe it isn't enough lucrative.

And if app will move away from the store it's good! It means there is no value to stay in that store.
Click to expand...
The App Store is not the driver to sell phone phones. It allows apps to be functional. There’s nothing saying you can’t download apps from the webpage just like every computer does.

Without restrictions, there is no incentive to stay in the App Store. Especially for large developers where even 10% is millions of dollars. It will just end up looking like the macOS App Store. It’ll be there, but not really useful.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: System603 and Naraxus
davide_eu said:
But what is not clear is that many developers are not interested to be hosted and served by a$$le. They are happy to host and manage everything, including payments, without a$$le in the middle.

What is important is that the trend is clear...
Click to expand...
Let these devs build their own platform then. Apple is not a public utility that will give away the shop.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Naraxus, Jumpthesnark, ToothBlueth and 2 others
davide_eu said:
But what is not clear is that many developers are not interested to be hosted and served by a$$le. They are happy to host and manage everything, including payments, without a$$le in the middle.

What is important is that the trend is clear...
Click to expand...
Of course they’re not. They want 100% of the profit so why share with Apple?

I think if this trend continues apps will just be downloaded like you would for a PC.
 
Stuwil said:
That is one of the reasons why they will more than likely get reinstated
Click to expand...
The only reason I see Epic getting reinstated is if Apple decides its not worth the PR hit, but given their appeal of the judge's order, I don't see why they would think it'd be a worse PR hit than the one they already got.

The same judge who is requiring link outs ruled Apple was within its rights to terminate Epic's developer agreement due to Epic's conduct, and didn't have to reinstate it. So the ball is entirely in Apple's court.

But as you said, we'll see what happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309
davide_eu said:
FUD!

If you believe that a OS isn't secure if you download software from third parties it means the OS is already NOW unsecure.
Click to expand...
It is not. Having screening from the App Store and not allowing downloads to execute versus installing anything you want increases the risk. No one with a basic understanding of computers will tell you even macOS is as secure as iOS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jumpthesnark
surferfb said:
The only reason I see Epic getting reinstated is if Apple decides its not worth the PR hit, but given their appeal of the judge's order, I don't see why they would think it'd be a worse PR hit than the one they already got.

The same judge who is requiring link outs ruled Apple was within its rights to terminate Epic's developer agreement due to Epic's conduct, and didn't have to reinstate it. So the ball is entirely in Apple's court.

But as you said, we'll see what happens.
Click to expand...
Because if they are not reinstated then that will confirm to people that they are bully’s and will do anything to get their way
That is why Tim Sweeney is confident that epic will be allowed back on the iOS App Store sooner or later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FatLouie
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back