Nobody ids forcing you to. Currently you don’t have an option, the judge is saying Apple must let you have that option, whether you use your rights to access that option is up to you.
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 Wins Major Victory as Apple is Ordered to Comply With App Store Anti-Steering Injunction [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple is the payment processor. They are the first party. That’s the deal the dev agreed to.
If that goes south an untrusted source will be the payment processor.
It won’t happen, because the majority of users won’t be interested in going to an external website and entering their payment details manually, so they will have to offer the App Store payments as an option.
Visa or Mastercard etc are the payment processors, Apple is the store where you pay for the goods.
The Mac App Store is a pointless system. Just like the Microsoft store on Windows. Most apps aren’t on either because it’s an open system.
Apple is the third party in a payment transaction between you and the developer. Failure to understand that is a failure to understand how words work.
And the developers did not have a choice, it's not a "deal" it's illegal abuse of Apple's monopoly.
And Apple is not magically more trustworthy than any other third party payment processor.
I guess we could dig into the developer agreement in the verbiage. But it’s too unimportant a point.
It’s the same as any other business. You elect to contract with them and do business in their terms, or not.
Well yes they are, in my book.
It's got nothing to do with any agreement. It's how words work. Apple is the third party in any transaction between you and a developer.
Nope, it's illegal abuse of a monopoly. The court agrees with me. And they found Apple in contempt for not stopping it.
LOL, whatever.
And these developers ****** apps wouldn't exist without Apple.
Apple would sell fewer iPhones without 3rd party devs. I would guess, a lot fewer iPhones. There is no way to know, but we do know that prior to the App Store the iPhone was not on the trajectory to crush Blackberry and Symbian in the way that they did.
Unless you want to try and convince apple to launch a 3rd party app free phone (which cannot ever install native third party apps, only web apps) and then compare sales of said phone to the phone with Apps we can never know which side of this symbiotic relationship is adding more value.
Apple is essentially a developer building a mall. Epic wants to occupy a retail space without paying rent. Epic could go rent a standalone building somewhere but they want the free rent instead.
Great question and we'll probably never know. In the end, he made the right decision
Last edited:
Schiller being against it internally should have raised a flag for Tim.
He chose poorly, indeed.
He chose poorly, indeed.
I wish I had a dime for every Tim Cook must go post in the internet. Actually it’s an easy clickbaity thing to say.
No matter how much one agrees with this sentiment, Tim Cook will go, but under his own circumstances.
It was pretty clear from the beginning that what Apple was wanting to charge for installation fees from developers utilizing other stores went against the spirit of the judge's ruling.
He literally sided with the two high-level Finance execs to not obey the judge's original order and one of those Finance execs was caught lying in court (per the latest report). And they all knew about it. That alone should be enough reason for the Board to start looking for a new CEO.
That doesn’t mean Tim Cook is going anywhere, not of his volition. (I could be wrong, but we will see)
They'd just hire the devs themselves that make good apps. Way too much useless junk on there anyway.
Or just basically steal the Apps, as they did with much of Invites
(sorry .. "sherlock them", the quaint Apple parlance for "theft")
I don't think you realize what you'd lose without third party apps:
No Netflix, no Facebook, no Banking Apps, very few (if any) Games, no VPNs, no private mail clients, no 3rd party calendars, no third party podcast apps, no dropbox, no kindle, no authenticators, no bluetooth utilities to control your smart home device, no ticketing apps, no ride sharing apps, no weather apps, no game emulators, etc...
I could go on and on. The third party app ecosystem is not so small that Apple could have just bought them all during the iPhone's rise. The amount of money poured into iOS app development by third party devs is not trivial and it absolutely has made the platform better.
If you want to see what iPhone would be like without 3rd party Apps (basically), go strap on a Vision Pro
Plenty of stock available at local Apple Stores.
Plenty of stock available at local Apple Stores.
It's worse than that because the Apple faithful have tried to support the Vision Pro, so it has at least a few apps, the VP would be even worse with no apps.
Epic is setting up their own online store in the EU.
The car analogy would be, epic wants set up their own online store for EU customers selling car tires compatible with apple cars and apple wants a cut.
Epic is not touching the iOS app store
Not all the time. For example, if you want to purchase in-game items like skins, you must pay Apple 30%, compared to the 3% charged by CC companies. This will allow Epic to sell vBucks with their payment processing, thus removing the 30% Apple charges.
It’s more nuanced than that. The iOS App Store allowed publishers such as epic to reap hundreds of millions of dollars. I could go on about the iOS App Store being an enabler of significant revenue.
What Apple did was to make the experience seamless and safe. Provide housekeeping data for devs, etc. Devs and Apple reap the benefits of apples investment.