While a likely factual statement it really has little to nothing to do with the issue.
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 vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While a likely factual statement it really has little to nothing to do with the issue.
And also, this may not end in a loss for Apple either. (or it could) Waiting to see how this plays out.
This is exactly the problem.
Others see Apple’s success and say “we want some of that”….just without having to put the hard work in. Apple’s success is not easily replicated because controlling every aspect of a business isn’t easy….even so far as designing and fabbing your own processors/ co-processors because what you need isn’t available off the shelf. No other company does this because it is extremely hard and extremely costly and extremely risky. When it pays off though, it pays off big. When it doesn’t, well it costs a lot too.
People being people, they succumb to envy. They think the rich, who take those risks, should just give up their wealth to others who are “less fortunate”….like they somehow decide how rich another person or company can get. The “less fortunate” are generally not willing to take the same risks or apply the same work ethics.
Just look at the first 50 or so replies here….lots of envy and hate towards a company “who has become too big”, “makes too much money”, “should reduce their fees now that they’re big”, “30% was ok when they were small but it should be reduced now that they’re so big”.
It’s all emotion, feelings and beliefs….as if laws, facts and logic doesn’t exist.
That’s exactly what those AG’s are doing. They’re stating their personal opinions based on their beliefs. Facts, logic and the law has already played out in court.
You seem to be the one adding trademarked names to your market definitions. Apple is part of a duopoly in the market of smartphone platforms.
Personal opinion based on their “belief” in wrongdoing, offering zero concrete evidence. All they are doing is an “appeal to authority”…”hey listen to us, we are a collective of AG’s“.
How about they submit a case to the courts offering some concrete evidence that can be ruled upon instead of offering an assertion “because Apple is clearly doing wrong, look at how much money they make”?
Yes, those are all characteristics and values well-known to be held by the Republican AG's cited in this. ???
Give me a break, Republican's live to serve big business, and for them the bigger the better. Your argument holds literally zero water with anyone even faintly acquainted with U.S. politics.
Thanks for explaining your Netflix point. I'm not familiar with the change you're referring to, but I don't use Netflix that often.
Most of what you're talking about, however, need not happen here. Apple's AppStore provides all sorts of benefits that Apple's customers like and some that developers like. Most developers will prefer the centralized AppStore model (which is great for helping people discover apps and gives people considerable assurance that the apps purchased there are safe) if they can use it for a market-competitive fee rather than the steep fee imposed by Apple in the absence of competition. Some developers might be fine springing for the 30% fee for App Store purchases but will also want to make the same app available separately, and without paying a fee to Apple in that situation (this is common on the Mac, for example). Some will indeed choose to make their apps available only outside the App Store, in which case we either avoid the app or select some degree of risk. And Apple has plenty of ways to limit that risk that don't involve a centralized App Store model.
Don't get me wrong -- antitrust enforcement can be messy and can have unintended consequences. But in a large majority of cases, those consequences are enormously overstated by the defendant, and can end up being quite positive for the end-user. I suspect that requiring alternatives to the App Store wouldn't dramatically transform the App Store.
I'm sorry, but this is a bunch of nonsense.
No offense, but you're apparently purposely skipping over very valid commentary and discussion.
Nah, not worth it. Many posts aren’t worth the cost of the bytes getting transmitted. But thanks for the suggestion.
Because you are WRONG.
It’s perfectly fine to admit that you are WRONG. I have admitted being WRONG before. It is good for the soul.
Last edited:
"What the world really needs now is a single store that works with all platforms," Sweeney said in an interview with Bloomberg. "Right now software ownership is fragmented between the iOS App Store, the Android Google Play marketplace, different stores on Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo Switch, and then Microsoft Store and the Mac App Store."
That is the Epic dream and that is what this all really about. 'One store to rule them all' ala Sauron
But iOS programs run on M1 Mac unless they are expressly prevented from running so unless it is one of those your comment doesn't make sense.
Last edited:
Nice deflection from my question. For the record, I disagree with Sweeney's prescribed solution there as well.
Matpat had a theory video related to the Balkanization of what is out there - Film Theory: How Disney+ is DESTROYING Streaming and it isn't pretty.
I think when the sates are made aware of how much sales tax revenue they will lose when independent developers handle their own payments and distribution for digital apps and related services and are no longer subject to the “nexus rule” they will drop this idea quick.
I think the best way around this is to allow people to side load apps in a sandboxed area in the OS that has no access to the main OS, security features, or personal information. Make the whole experience awful. That way, developers who want to gain the benefits of Apple's ecosystem without paying for it get their money's worth.
You are essentially describing how all Apps already work*
*(until you give them specific access to personal info/location/photos/etc)
I'm saying the apps shouldn't even be able to request access to things like the camera, contacts, etc.
Why?
A user who sideloaded an app is choosing to do that.
The user should be able to allow access to their own information, on their own device to an app THEY side loaded...
Apple doesn't own my phone.
Maybe we should be getting the phones for free if we are to be "subjects" of "megacorp" in this way?
Apple owns the operating system on your phone. You're only licensed to use it.
It's weird to see people actively wishing for Apple to implement a punitive and hamstrung experience just for the sake of being petty.
No deflection. In fact, it is still generally illegal to jailbreak game consoles with the reason being it is only for pirating games so the comparison is on shaky ground from the get go.
WHat's that got to do with anti-competitiveness.
And besides, in case you haven't noticed, the Apple app store is a trash can too. I simply don't bother trying to find apps without a specific recommendation from someone.
They have this weird belief that Apple is a petulant 3-year old rather than a multi-trillion dollar corporation.
