Judge Grills Tim Cook on App Store Policies as End of of Epic Games v. Apple Trial Approaches

[Wildkraut]

It doesn't matter. If I want Visual Studio Enterprise, I need to pay. It doesn't matter what else is available or that I can just use Notepad to write my code. I use Visual Studio, so it costs. And you do know it would cost money to move to different platforms right? Point is, this could eventually lead to Apple not making up the costs and eventually need to charge for Xcode like Microsoft charges for Visual Studio.

Yes competition is a beautiful thing. Apple has this with Android you know.

Yes, because you want, but not because you're forced to use VisualStudio, Apple Devs are forced to use Xcode.

 

[alex2792]

I don't know how severe Apple might react if Epic has a positive outcome out of this.
They were exposing protection of their IP as a very important reason for their business model (and they have all the right to do that no matter what anyone thinks about it,) so if they wanted to they could go as far as kick out everyone, and just like they created the Apple Arcade section in the App Store, they might end up with Apple Utilities, Apple Creator, etc. and just go with customized business options for very select developers of apps/services they deem worthwhile for macOS, iOS, iPadOS and tvOS. Dramatic overkill solution, of course... but Apple Arcade being a separate and different model than the regular apps section makes you wonder "what if?"

Nobody would buy an iPhone without the apps so pulling that stunt would get Tom Cook fired in a nanosecond.

 

[nylon]

Which is absurd. This restriction of advertising and preventing linking WITHIN YOUR OWN APP is pure nonsense.
It's just a money grab from Apple.
If they were just "facilitating the payment as a processor", their fee would be more inline with the industry standard for card processing fees. Which is between 1%-3%.
No card processor could ever get away with a 30%, let alone a 15% fee.
Federal regulators would be all over them in a heartbeat.
Tim was pretty direct in his response that the in-app purchase restrictions are not based on what's best for the consumer.

They can link within the app as well as long as they also offer an in app mechanism. Epic has all the options available to them.

1. Sell V-Bucks exclusively on Epic Store and sync to account on iOS. (Apple gets no commission)
2. Sell V-Bucks via IAP as well as via Epic Store. (Apple only gets commission on IAP purchases)

What Epic is saying is we want access to your platform and users but solely on terms that benefit us financially.

The analogy that the App Store is simply a payment processor is not valid. It's like saying your grocery store is just a payment processor for the various goods sold within. As for the percentage I have no issue with Apple taking a lower cut but that is not what Epic is arguing here. Epic is saying you can't have a cut full stop but I should be able to sell goods in your grocery store.

 

[Ethosik]

Yes, because you want, but not because you're forced to use VisualStudio, Apple Devs are forced to use Xcode.

No, people WANT to develop for iOS. I am writing a pretty big game right now, I do not recall anyone from Apple to force me to write it for iOS too. I am writing it for Windows only. I can CHOOSE to make an iOS version if I want. And I can use Visual Studio for Windows or Mac to build it, I just need an Apple device to compile it if I am on Windows.

 

[grandM]

Yes, because you want, but not because you're forced to use VisualStudio, Apple Devs are forced to use Xcode.

Actually only to get it onto the store. And we love Xcode.

 

[Wildkraut]

Apple is a USA company, and this is a USA court case. Other countries are not involved with this issue. In the USA, a smartphone is not essential to even live.

Nonsense, Apple is a USA company operating globally, this ruling will also affect other countries, despite being a USA court case. On top there will be an EU case, to finish them with FATALITY.
As the European Commission said, they are watching closely the EPIC trial.

Just like the FDA comes almost yearly to our company here in Germany to verify us, because we also operate in the U.S., not just our German TÜV.

 

[ececlv]

If you bought a magazine at Walmart and then after you got home decided to get a monthly subscription to that magazine should Walmart get a cut of the monthly subscription? Once I download an app is it still part of Apple’s store?

Thats silly. If you bought a magazine and then went back to walmart to order a subscription surely walmart would want a cut. If you order a subscription from an app on the developers website they dont have to pay apple

 

[rjohnstone]

Not entirely true. App updates are handled by the App Store itself and the files come from Apple's servers. So hosting space and CDN quality distribution costs money. My CDN costs alone are $500 a month for Cachefly.

I'm pretty sure Apple isn't spending $100 million just hosting Fortnite.
There are other methods for recouping those costs. Most hosting companies charge based on volume.
Apple could do so as well, but as we know, it wouldn't be as profitable.

 

[Rogifan]

That would never happen at Applemart since they would prohibit including subscription cards or even mentioning that you can subscribe.

I think it’s still a legitimate question to ask if an app is still part of Apple’s store once it’s downloaded on to someone’s device.

 

[Ethosik]

And game programmers.

Was it Wired that wrote the article about being a game programmer? It was out a few years ago.

I kept thinking: What? Really?

I ended up getting a job at a university to program for a number of research projects. The guy that was the programmer before me, would come in, and work for a week, apparently non-stop, and then disappear for a week, and then occasionally 'pop in', and 'fix' things that didn't work.

The first item on my 'job requirements' was 'Access during normal business hours through the week'. I read that, chuckled, and mumbled that has a big story behind it. The guy interviewing me, somehow heard me say that, and asked if it was the 'availability clause. Um, yeah. And I got the whole story. Yikes...

I got the job.

They loved having 'The Programmer' not having to be waken up to fix something, and having to call and leave a message, and hope he called back. (He also slept in the restroom, apparently, for a week after I was hired. They changed the locks on all of the offices, and he finally stopped showing up, in the restroom...

A game programmer wannabe? Wow...

Day job, I work in the healthcare industry writing enterprise level software and am a senior developer 10+ years of experience. After each day, I get home and work on my big game project. You are right though, I would NOT consider being a game developer for any company. But since I am doing it solo, its much better.

 

[jgdeschamps]

Nobody would buy an iPhone without the apps so pulling that stunt would get Tom Cook fired in a nanosecond.

A lot of people, including myself, don't buy the iPhone for the apps. I use it for email (stock Apple Mail,) phone calls, conferencing (FaceTime and MS Teams,) messaging and banking apps. My colleagues' iPhones are also basically stock, except for banking and probably Instagram, TikTok or Twitter. All of them basically free apps.

 

[Abazigal]

Judge Rogers said that Apple could monetize in other ways, pointing out that games make up most of the in-app purchases. "It's almost as if they're subsidizing everyone else,"

And that gets to the heart of the case. Why should a company like Uber get a totally free pass to have an in-app signup to their private payment system and generate literally $Billions in revenues while Epic can't? Apple is unfairly penalizing consumers in one particular market to the benefit of others.

Not really.

IAPs are priced to maximise revenue. As such, even without that 30% cut, IAP prices are not going to decrease anyways (they have zero marginal costs); the developer will simply pocket the difference.

This is why I feel Epic has severely overplayed its hand. Consumers simply don’t care about a 30% fee they will never see (for the reasons stated above), and they don’t actually dislike closed, sandboxed app ecosystems (which is also why Epic brought Fortnite to Google Play after initially withholding it and forcing users to sideload it).

I don’t think Epic wanted this to end up in the courts at all. Epic likely hoped that Apple would have caved in to developer and consumer pressure by then. Pressure which again, never materialised for the reasons stated above.

If and when Apple wins, Apple will have even less incentive to make further concessions to developers because they will see their legal victory as evidence of their unassailable authority over iOS.

And the sheer tragedy of it all? It will have been Epic’s reckless gamble that led developers down that path.

 

[Rogifan]

Thats silly. If you bought a magazine and then went back to walmart to order a subscription surely walmart would want a cut. If you order a subscription from an app on the developers website they dont have to pay apple

Once I download an app to my phone and launch it am I still in Apple’s store?

 

[bwillwall]

A smartphone is in NO WAY essential. I still know many people - family included that still use flip phones by Jitterbug. Some people only need calling and MAYBE texting. My grandpa does NOT text at all.

Stop.

It's not 2009.

A smartphone is essential to your life the same way the internet or a phoneline is. Yeah, you can live without it, but not many do and that's for a reason.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Which is absurd. This restriction of advertising and preventing linking WITHIN YOUR OWN APP is pure nonsense.
It's just a money grab from Apple.
If they were just "facilitating the payment as a processor", their fee would be more inline with the industry standard for card processing fees. Which is between 1%-3%.
No card processor could ever get away with a 30%, let alone a 15% fee.
Federal regulators would be all over them in a heartbeat.
Tim was pretty direct in his response that the in-app purchase restrictions are not based on what's best for the consumer.

American Express charges the highest, at that time (maybe someone charges more now) and answered the question of why so many stores don't accept their cards. It's the cost. But American Express does a lot more for their cardholders and I appreciate their 'value add'.

And have you looked at your credit card fees lately? The past due fees, bounced check fees, bad card fees, and all of it are ridiculous. BIG MONEY! They rape people for as much as they can get when they think they can get away with it. It's called Capitalism.

I tink I was paying somewhere around/north of 8% for Amex card processing. Oh, and paying more for times when the card wasn't available. It's a racket, and don't kid yourself it's not.

 

[ececlv]

Which is absurd. This restriction of advertising and preventing linking WITHIN YOUR OWN APP is pure nonsense.
It's just a money grab from Apple.
If they were just "facilitating the payment as a processor", their fee would be more inline with the industry standard for card processing fees. Which is between 1%-3%.
No card processor could ever get away with a 30%, let alone a 15% fee.
Federal regulators would be all over them in a heartbeat.
Tim was pretty direct in his response that the in-app purchase restrictions are not based on what's best for the consumer.

Card processors charge both a fixed and variable rate. Say 20 cents plus 2%. So on a $1 sale, that rate can easily be higher than 20%

 

[Rogifan]

Not really.

IAPs are priced to maximise revenue. As such, even without that 30% cut, IAP prices are not going to decrease anyways (they have zero marginal costs); the developer will simply pocket the difference.

This is why I feel Epic has severely overplayed its hand. Consumers simply don’t care about a 30% fee they will never see (for the reasons stated above), and they don’t actually dislike closed, sandboxed app ecosystems (which is also why Epic brought Fortnite to Google Play after initially withholding it and forcing users to sideload it).

I don’t think Epic wanted this to end up in the courts at all. Epic likely hoped that Apple would have caved in to developer and consumer pressure by then. Pressure which again, never materialised for the reasons stated above.

If and when Apple wins, Apple will have even less incentive to make further concessions to developers because they will see their legal victory as evidence of their unassailable authority over iOS.

And the sheer tragedy of it all? It will have been Epic’s reckless gamble that led developers down that path.

And of course Apple knows that 30% on micro-transactions mean nothing to individual customers because the amount is so insignificant. But when you multiply that by millions of customers it adds up quickly. There’s a reason Apple’s services revenues have grown so much.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I'll keep buying my V-Bucks at the grocery store... the way God intended it...

 

[HiRez]

Sometimes judges will, consciously or unconsciously, give the side they think is winning a hard time, to I guess make it seem like they aren't getting off easy. Not sure if that's the case here, but it happens.

 

[trifid]

I love this judge, keep the grill going!

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Day job, I work in the healthcare industry writing enterprise level software and am a senior developer 10+ years of experience. After each day, I get home and work on my big game project. You are right though, I would NOT consider being a game developer for any company. But since I am doing it solo, its much better.

It's usually better to work for yourself. It tends to not pay as well, but at least you have a boss you like. I retired and now 'work for the wife', and, well. I love it! (She has to be the worst boss I've ever had, but the fringes aren't bad)

 

[T-R-S]

Sorry but pay to play games are stupid - people are just wasting their money - I had a friend hooked on "Game of War" in 2 years he spent $14,000.00 playing that game. It's sad for some with addictions.

 

[Abazigal]

And of course Apple knows that 30% on micro-transactions mean nothing to individual customers because the amount is so insignificant. But when you multiply that by millions of customers it adds up quickly. There’s a reason Apple’s services revenues have grown so much.

You misunderstand my point, which is that from the customer’s perspective, it doesn’t matter whether that IAP is 5% or 30% or even 50%. The final price of that IAP would be the same either way, and there’s little evidence that any cost savings will be passed on to the consumer.

At the end of the day, I do believe that Apple puts the customer first, and that is sometimes at odds with what developers want, and that’s why we are seeing the friction we are today.

So as a consumer, why wouldn’t I support Apple keeping a cut of IAPs when I know that said money gets ploughed back into maintaining and upgrading the App Store, which in turn ensures a better user experience for me?

 

[chucker23n1]

Why on earth would Apple conduct surveys on developer satisfaction, I can't imagine anything more tacky than a company sending out a survey.

Uh, what?

Companies whose APIs I use send me surveys all the time (and I occasionally make surveys for our customers). Sometimes, it's annoying; sometimes, it's a useful way to influence future direction.

 

[mariusignorello]

It's amazing that a person who didn't create anything can destroy a service and a company because he personally thinks they should act differently - although no law has been broken.

And it’s amazing how when someone doesn’t like you or what you have to say they can get you fired from your job and make the world hate you.

We’ve allowed cancel culture to be a thing for far too long. People need to mind their own business and stay in their lane rather than trying to tell each other what to do and how to live, much less get them fired when they don’t give in.

Not to sound like I’m on a high horse or anything, because my opinion is equal to everyone else’s in value, but since when did one person’s opinion become enough to ruin someone else’s life? People have been given too much power in all of the wrong areas.

Rant over but I felt like this kind of ties into this case. Complain, bully and belittle someone (or a company) into giving in or ruin them.