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

Epic Games vs. Apple Trial Begins With Opening Remarks Underway

Kierkegaarden said:
Monopolies are not illegal.

Besides this fact, consumers can go elsewhere — Android controls the vast majority of the mobile market.
Click to expand...
Never said anything about the illegality of Monopolies

Monopolies however are BAD for business and BAD for the consumers. there's a reason why there are anti-trust regulations (and they used to be better enforced)

Monopolies are bad for us. we would all benefit with competition in the space. Competition in business keeps the company honest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and ipponrg
LordVic said:
Never said anything about the illegality of Monopolies

Monopolies however are BAD for business and BAD for the consumers. there's a reason why there are anti-trust regulations (and they used to be better enforced)

Monopolies are bad for us. we would all benefit with competition in the space. Competition in business keeps the company honest.
Click to expand...

The trouble is from an end user's perspective, Apple is absolutely correct.

In reality, we see a new sort of “monopoly” arising - the aggregator. The reason why companies like Apple and Amazon have grown to be as big as they are is because they do genuinely offer a great user experience for the consumer.

Millions and millions of people buy Apple products because they vote with their wallets and have decided that Apple products really do work best for them. Through the iPhone, Apple has aggregated the best consumers, which they use the attract the best developers to their platform.

Buying an iphone is like joining a union. There are annoying parts, but as a whole it gives users a collective voice to force app makers to behave. If there are rival app stores then the user base can be divided, losing power to app developers.

I like that apple forces app developers to update their apps for new features. I like that they force apps to support their privacy protecting authentication. I like that they are strict about background usage. I like that they audit UIs, and enforce quality standards. I like that I can rely on apple pay working in every app. It is why I paid for an iphone over a cheaper alternative.

So in this context, I am not really seeing the benefits of increased competition in the app store for me. Maybe that makes me selfish in that I seem largely unsympathetic to the plight of developers, but it doesn’t help that the face of the app coalition is made up of largely irksome companies like Epic, DHH and Tile so yeah, there’s that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: secretbum, jeremiah256, BKDad and 2 others
I7guy said:
Try refunding too many times Amazon. https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...stomers-who-return-too-many-orders/636089002/
Click to expand...
Apple and Amazon are probably not the only ones. I don’t buy anything from Amazon apart from Kindle books. I got banned from AppStore refunds because I purchased a TV Series box set which was on sale in the iTunes Store. When I got the Bill they had charged me the higher (wrong) amount. I complained to one of their customer services managers who was extremely rude to me and promptly banned any further refunds on my account. I did complain to Apple about the treatment I had received but never heard back from them. That was a couple of years ago and I haven’t purchased anything from iTunes since in protest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech and BKDad
sime0n said:
All these Apple fanboys acting like the AppStore is some big favor Apple is doing for us. I love Apple devices but you are kidding yourself if you think they deserve 30%.
Click to expand...
If you came to an agreement with someone that you’ll buy a house through them, but, as part of the sale price, they’ll take a 2% cut, do they DESERVE it? Point being, contracts are contracts. If you enter into a contract with someone, it’s not about whether they deserve it or not. It’s about do you uphold contractual agreements that you’ve approved. A lot of folks do, some folks don’t. When you don’t, there are usually consequences. That was just as true “way back when” as it is today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlphaCentauri
soaddk said:
Epic: "There's a name for businesses that set prices without regard to costs: Monopolists."

Also Epic: Charges $5 for a PNG file that wraps around a 3D object. Let's talk about prices without regard to cost, shall we.
Click to expand...
But those are artisanal PNG’s and those 3D objects are farm raised, lovingly crafted 3D objects. :)
 
sideloader said:
I bought i-device when Fortnite or Parler was in the AppStore. Then these apps were removed.
Click to expand...
They didn’t adhere to what they agreed to when they joined the AppStore. So, if you’ve got a beef, you’ve got it with those companies that thought it was ok to sign agreements and then change the terms of the agreement “just ‘cus they wanted to”.

BTW, Parler’s been approved to be back on the AppStore, so that’s still on them.
 
diamond.g said:
But then what happens to the folks using Stagecraft and UE for AppleTV+ programs? Or folks using Apple hardware plus UE for special effects overall?
Click to expand...
Ever since this started, companies that are able to have been actively seeking alternatives to UE, some even finally starting to spend money to see if in house efforts might be safer for the future of their company. If UE goes away AND those companies want to stay in business, they’ll figure out a way to use something else.

I have to say if MY company depended on another company that seems perfectly ok with flouting contractual agreements, I’d be trying to separate myself from that company.
 
Unregistered 4U said:
Ever since this started, companies that are able to have been actively seeking alternatives to UE, some even finally starting to spend money to see if in house efforts might be safer for the future of their company. If UE goes away AND those companies want to stay in business, they’ll figure out a way to use something else.

I have to say if MY company depended on another company that seems perfectly ok with flouting contractual agreements, I’d be trying to separate myself from that company.
Click to expand...
Okay, but what bout assets like megascans, where are they getting those from now, or are they making their own?
 
cmaier said:
no. I don‘t remember the exact quote, but the word “transcend“ or “transcendent” was one of the first few words.
Click to expand...
I think his thought process was the concerts held via fortnite during the pandemic lockdowns. Going from a "game" to a "lifestyle" app.
 
cmaier said:
no. I don‘t remember the exact quote, but the word “transcend“ or “transcendent” was one of the first few words.
Click to expand...
I’m sure what he meant to say was, “Well, we saw our customers doing this Battle Royale thing and it seemed pretty easy, so we reused assets from another game and copied them. BAM, instant money. Sure, we were competing against companies who depend on us for technology but… So?”
 
cmaier said:
yeah, he said it was a "metaverse." Very pretentious.
Click to expand...

By this standard, iTunes "transcended definitions" in the year or so Ping added a social network component.

But clearly at the heart of it iTunes was a music store, and Fortnite is a game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PC_tech
tubular said:
By this standard, iTunes "transcended definitions" in the year or so Ping added a social network component.

But clearly at the heart of it iTunes was a music store, and Fortnite is a game.
Click to expand...

i honestly have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
 
cmaier said:
i honestly have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
Click to expand...

I guess I put it badly. If I take a car and put a can of Coke in its cupholder, I can't say that "because it's now both a car and a cupholder, it transcends categories." It's still basically a car. If Sweeney is arguing that Fortnite is fundamentally anything but a game, albeit a game with a few non-game elements hung onto it, it's hard to see that argument succeeding.
 
tubular said:
I guess I put it badly. If I take a car and put a can of Coke in its cupholder, I can't say that "because it's now both a car and a cupholder, it transcends categories." It's still basically a car. If Sweeney is arguing that Fortnite is fundamentally anything but a game, albeit a game with a few non-game elements hung onto it, it's hard to see that argument succeeding.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see.

In any event, it's pretty irrelevant. If fortnite were a magical ice cream panda, it wouldn't help Epic's case.
 
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