Epic vs. Apple Takes a Twist As 35 US States and Department of Justice Weigh in to Back 'Fortnite' Maker

[MacBH928]

I am with Epic on this one, just because I feel Apple is growing too big and too controling, not because Epic has a valid point.

Just the other day, I was using a friend's Oppo phone.

I tried to help my friend recover some deleted data. Naturally, I went to the Oppo/Android app store to look for "data recovery" apps. My god. What a freaking mess. Every app on there was a scam. None of them did anything except play endless ads and then scan existing data. All the reviews, sometimes 40,000+ reviews were fake.

I get the argument for 3rd party app stores. But the average consumer is going to be duped so easily by low quality app stores and apps.

you are correct, and I am not against having an Apple Store or any other store that is clean and reliable, but forbidding the installation of other app stores is the problem here. Once you open both options, if your store is better then people will use that.

The truth is that Apple knows if they open 3rd party stores this means they will go back to app piracy days where people get all the apps for free then Apple wont get their 30% cut and the developers won't get paid. This is why we can't have nice things, people can't use freedom responsibly . Either completely block them or they will use their freedom to circumvent the law.

 

[0924487]

 

[jeffpeng]

I wonder when people will realize that this kind of legislation would effectively kill not only game consoles, but every kind of "locked" device. You could then sue Samsung for not allowing sideloading apps on their TVs - or their fridges, for that matter. Same goes for your car navigation system. Technically every device that is based on a CPU and flash storage can run arbitrary software, and virtually none of them allow you to do that - for a reason.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I wonder when people will realize that this kind of legislation would effectively kill not only game console, but every kind of "locked" device. You could then sue Samsung for not allowing sideloading apps on their TVs - or their fridges, for that matter. Same goes for your car navigation system. Technically every device that is based on a CPU and flash storage can run arbitrary software, and virtually none of them allow you to do that - for a reason.

I wonder when users will read the content already in threads so they can see that everything they’ve said has been discussed, dissected and refuted…over and over again.

 

[boss.king]

I wonder when people will realize that this kind of legislation would effectively kill not only game consoles, but every kind of "locked" device. You could then sue Samsung for not allowing sideloading apps on their TVs - or their fridges, for that matter. Same goes for your car navigation system. Technically every device that is based on a CPU and flash storage can run arbitrary software, and virtually none of them allow you to do that - for a reason.

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy. A classic.

But also, who cares if you sue for the ability to sideload on your fridge? Do you think that having the option to install software will make it explode? Why shouldn't people be able to decide what their car nav system (are they really still called that) runs?

 

[turbineseaplane]

Ah, the slippery slope fallacy. A classic.

That’s why we have to let Apple do whatever they want!
Otherwise life will collapse in ways we haven’t even contemplated!

Heads Apple wins, Tails we Lose
Succumb to the corporate capitalist overlords, lest enjoyable life cease as we know it

/s

 

[spyguy10709]

Hopefully, if they are forced to allow sideloading, every time you task to a side-loaded app you have to agree to understand that the app was not downloaded from the app store. Every. Single. Time. Prompt them if the app is in the App Store to download it from there, and if it's not, tell them about alternatives in the app store. Every single time the user switches to the app, even if it's already running. Make sure the user never forgets they got the app from outside the app store and it might be an issue.

why are you "hopeful" the system annoys users? MacOS gatekeeper doesn't work this way, you have to right click > open unsigned apps in order to run them the first time, then the system respects the user's choice.

 

[spyguy10709]

Fully agree. This would result in REMOVING CHOICE!

Current choice = open vs closed
Possibly new choice = open and……open.

Choice gone. Thanks!

Except it would still be your choice to not download apps from places that aren't the app store. It's just that you would have the choice to do so if you wanted.

How is having more choice, having less choice? Please, explain this.

 

[dba415]

way to

You would make a great point if the majority of phones were iPhones but unfortunately they are not. iOS accounts for less than 30%, with Android at 70% and the rest attributable to other OS.

On the other hand, Windows is now on around 74% of computers. I’m sure if Microsoft could have established itself in a similar manner as Apple with regard to the App Store they probably would have, but 30 years ago there was no way you were going to be downloading Office off a 56k modem. In fact, the strategy Microsoft used was the strategy everyone had been using since the beginning of the personal computer revolution, open systems that allow the user to do whatever they like and install whatever they want.

That’s a really misleading stat and you know it. Take out China (not sure if they are in any of these stats) and India and you have a much different story. In the Us and other European countries it’s a lot larger than 30%.

And speaking of Windows, Apple directly benefitted from Microsoft not being as greedy as Apple is now. When the iPod saved apple from going under, a key reason was the iTunes Store. Imagine if Microsoft forced apple to pay 30% out of every song that someone buys from iTunes. Are you sure apple would have still released it and that it would be successful enough to save the company? Who knows how many “next apples” apple is preventing by being greedy on the App Store?

 

[mielie]

way to

That’s a really misleading stat and you know it. Take out China (not sure if they are in any of these stats) and India and you have a much different story. In the Us and other European countries it’s a lot larger than 30%.

And speaking of Windows, Apple directly benefitted from Microsoft not being as greedy as Apple is now. When the iPod saved apple from going under, a key reason was the iTunes Store. Imagine if Microsoft forced apple to pay 30% out of every song that someone buys from iTunes. Are you sure apple would have still released it and that it would be successful enough to save the company? Who knows how many “next apples” apple is preventing by being greedy on the App Store?

It’s larger in the US I’ll admit, at 59 percent, and about right for the EU at 35 percent. In both cases larger than the estimate global figure, but still hardly a monopoly.

The figures tell me that even in the US consumers have a choice and many are choosing something that is not iOS.

Mobile Operating System Market Share United States Of America | Statcounter Global Stats

This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in United States Of America based on over 5 billion monthly page views.

gs.statcounter.com

Mobile Operating System Market Share Europe | Statcounter Global Stats

This graph shows the market share of mobile operating systems in Europe based on over 5 billion monthly page views.

gs.statcounter.com

If the ’next apple’ requires an open sourced and sideloadable environment then there is nothing stopping them from emerging in the Android space.

The fact is, consumers currently have a choice, they can choose a closed or an open system. If you force Apple to open up their system then the consumer no longer has that choice. If Apple’s approach to managing the App Store and iOS was so unpopular why are they selling so many phones and iPads all around the world? Let the market decide the way forward, not a court on the whim of companies that are already making truck loads of money and just want to make more.

 

[4jasontv]

why are you "hopeful" the system annoys users? MacOS gatekeeper doesn't work this way, you have to right click > open unsigned apps in order to run them the first time, then the system respects the user's choice.

To discourage the practice of annoying users by either not selling in the App Store, having different prices between the App Store and outside the App Store, or including different features inside the App Store vs outside.

 

[Dr@g0n]

Just the other day, I was using a friend's Oppo phone.

I tried to help my friend recover some deleted data. Naturally, I went to the Oppo/Android app store to look for "data recovery" apps. My god. What a freaking mess. Every app on there was a scam. None of them did anything except play endless ads and then scan existing data. All the reviews, sometimes 40,000+ reviews were fake.

I get the argument for 3rd party app stores. But the average consumer is going to be duped so easily by low quality app stores and apps.

Epic try to say on behalf of customer: “People want security but they also want freedom, it means people want the police to know everything the other do but dont know what they do, and they will give as much as money to help the police to know the other’s stuff =))) people want 3rd party app store but they want it to be secure as same as Apple store but they dont want it from Apple store and they want Apple to make sure apps from 3rd party appstore are also safe =))))”. Epic said on its own: “I want to have an appstore with billion of user and no fee to be on that store.” Now appstore dont allow them to be in, “okay now lets me create a appstore and you have to agreed for me to place my appstore right next to you, so your customers are mine…for free. Okay” =))))
Its good for Android because the main profit for Android isnt from the app itself, its from getting customers, data to selling or support advertising and even people put 100 3rd appstores on android device, they just need to use google advertising service. Its already a win for google because customer paid for google his data and he doesn’t even know that, Epic dont need to pay anything => Happy customer and epic =) For ios, its not how they are doing business so ios get problem.
I follow this for quite long and I think Apple should agree 3rd party appstore and focus on exploiting customers’ data, same as the way google did. Because customers are not quite care on the “security or privacy” and they are happy to watch advertisement instead of paying for it. Because security and privacy is quite difficult to measure, even Apple put alot of effort on telling people how they protect customers data, people still say that Apple lies =) so just let its free and customer have to protect themselves like the way Android did.

 

[Maximara]

Not sure what you mean about me laughing? The only way Epic can compete is by purchasing exclusivity rights - As in Borderlands 3 limited and Final Fantasy 7 Remake to name just a very small couple in a quite large list already.

You just said the magic word - "exclusivity" - you know the very thing Apple wants on the iOS regarding software on the OS. You can't have if both ways.

 

[Maximara]

This has been refuted over and over....and over again

Not doing it again.

Cheers

No it has not been refuted. You have a choice - Android or iPhone/iPad. What is so freaking hard to understand about that?

 

[Maximara]

You know what would actually prevent anti-competitive behavior? Not allowing companies to buy each other. I kind of consider what Microsoft is doing by purchasing Activision Blizzard as anti-competitive. But they keep letting major companies buy "smaller" ones. It would stop this at the source of the problem.

The flaw with that idea is it is not just companies to buying each other but when they are in the same category. More over sometime the smaller companies have to be brought out or they would simply fade from existence.

 

[Wildkraut]

Which would be a real shame.

Well, Apple is the one who has no shame, and keep dragging customers and devs constantly over the table for pure greed of profit. It’s absolutely right to sue them over and over again till they obey the law and don’t act anticompetitive anymore. They fully deserve it and will learn the hard way. The more they defend their anticompetitive behavior, the harder they will fall. Simply as that!

2022/2023/2024 will be very interesting, Apple will have to obey antitrust laws around the world.

 

[Maximara]

Yes it would be impacted. The very definition of an open system is inherently less secure than a closed system. There should be no debate here. Allowing an iOS user to randomly download something online is by definition less secure.

There are a lot of Android malware out there (NOTE: definition of malware is NOT limited to viruses). My grandma got hit with malware on her Android and now she has an iPhone. She got it because she was getting very shady Solitare and Sudoku apps.


System files are not the issue. MY files are. I have been hit with ransomware on Windows before. System files were fine, but my stuff was encrypted. But I have backups so it was not an issue. I just re-installed Windows 10 and was on my way again.

I should mention the court in the California case outline two types of security:

“Narrow” Security: Malware

"Removing app distribution restrictions could reduce this effectiveness. First, app stores
often differ in the quality of app review. On Android, which allows some third-party app stores,
the main Google Play app store is secure, but a variety of third-party stores allow blacklisted apps to operate.
A Nokia report attributes higher malware rates on Android to Trojan app:on third-party app stores. This creates a problem because, as Dr. Rubin opined, "security is only as strong as the weakest link." 527 Decentralized distribution thus increases the risk of infection giving malware more opportunities to leak through.
(..)
Thus, the Court finds that centralized distribution through the App Store increases security in the “narrow” sense, primarily by thwarting social engineering attacks."

“Broad” Security: Privacy, Quality, Trustworthiness
(...)

Thus, the Court finds that app distribution restrictions increase security in the “broad” sense by allowing Apple to filter fraud, objectionable content, and piracy during app review while imposing heightened requirements for privacy."

Case 4:20-cv-05640-YGR Document 812 Filed 09/10/21

 

[Michael Scrip]

Can't the government just make a law that says no platform can charge more than 10% for commission?

That would move the needle quite a bit.

 

[Maximara]

Why indeed!

View attachment 1950866

Not a Red Herring because Epic's CEO revealed the company's master plan

"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."

Epic's plan to clean up that confusion is to come up with a system enabling users "to buy software in one place, knowing that they'd have it on all devices and all platforms."

One Epic App to rule them all - a Sauron for a new age.

 

[Maximara]

Can't the government just make a law that says no platform can charge more than 10% for commission?

That would move the needle quite a bit.

Except everybody except itch.io is over that 10% and why 10%? Epic is admitting its 13% woun't be profitable until 2027 at the earliest. More over the government is very hands off on this kind of price fixing.

 

[Maximara]

View attachment 1950962

Considering the industry standard when this all begun was 30% Supracompetitive pricing is relevant. how?

 

[Michael Scrip]

Except everybody except itch.io is over that 10% and why 10%? Epic is admitting its 13% wouldn't be profitable until 2027 at the earliest.

Ah I see. Thank you!

So if 30% is too high... and 10% is too low... I wonder if there are any numbers between those two?

I suck at math....

?

 

[Maximara]

Ah I see. Thank you!

So if 30% is too high... and 10% is too low... I wonder if there are any numbers between those two?

I suck at math....

?

The thing is what is profitable varies. Jobs himself thought 30% was too low and it was a happy surprise that it turned out to be such a cash cow. The fact until this whole mess started only Itch.io, Humble Bundle, and Epic had rates below 30% should tell you something.

 

[Michael Scrip]

The thing is what is profitable varies. Jobs himself thought 30% was too low and it was a happy surprise that it turned out to be such a cash cow. The fact until this whole mess started only Itch.io, Humble Bundle, and Epic had rates below 30% should tell you something.

OnlyFans... 20%

?

 

[Maximara]

You're forced to -- or you forego a huge portion of smartphone customers.

Only if you only aim is at the North American market. Worldwide Apple only has 29.24% in the mobile market (and that includes the iPad). The remainder is android or some other smartphone OS.