Judge in Apple v. Epic Games Case Wants In-Person Trial Starting on May 3

[djphat2000]

No I want third party installs, my Android phone and Windows PC work fine thanks... difference is I'm not a blind fanboy.

Being a blind fanboy has nothing to do with anything.
Since when has a store HAVE to have another competing store operate within it's framework? We see today stores like Best Buy and Target operate Apple stores within their stores. This is a choice they made to partner up with Apple. They are free to do so. They don't HAVE to do so. They could just sell the products Apple sells, and sell it for what they can. At their markup, etc.

What Epic, and I guess "others" want to do is FORCE Apple to allow this to happen. Instead, they should make their own device, sell it to billions of people, and avoid the tax all together. They can do what they want.
But, they can't. They want Apples customers and their cake too. Sorry, no. You compete or you partner up. You don't get to just wine about "no fair, Apple will not let us make the money we could be making if they just let us have our own store on their platform. See Judge, unfair monopoly! Make them stop!".

So I would suggest if you want something more "open". Go buy another product. You, as the rest of the world has a choice. You don't have to purchase an iPhone or an iOS device. Why, again why is this SoooooOoooo hard for people to understand? You don't like something, you can pick something else. iPhones are not the only game in town, you can pick another vendor, pay a lower price, hack your device to do exactly what you want it to do, etc..

This monopoly BS has to stop. If Apple was the only maker of phone devices and OS's to run on those devices. You could have a point. But, it's FAR from it. If it was such a big deal to all these developers, they would have LONG boycotted Apple's App Store.

 

[Michael Scrip]

How about an alternative V-bucks store outside of Epic ? Its not fair that you can only buy v-bucks from them to use in their game.

Doesn't that already exist?

You can sign into your Epic Game account via their website.

And you can buy VBucks gift cards at many local stores.

I don't think Apple's App Store is the *only* place to buy VBucks...

 

[pasamio]

So what you‘re saying is, you want to stifle competition and prohibit people unlike you from installing applications that are not sanctioned by your device’s manufacturer, because a situation that is considered the norm on other computiong platforms makes you personally uncomfortable, including the fact that what you are describing has not happened on the single other comparable platform, the Google Playstore.

Stifle competition with whom? In the mobile phone market, Android devices are dominant almost everywhere in the world and for the tablet market the iPad was around 60% last I looked and slowly losing market share to companies like Samsung and Amazon. Near as I can tell there is plenty of competition in the market for which Apple sells it’s devices.

Apple is the monopoly controller of the software that runs it’s devices just as Microsoft is the monopoly controller of software that runs on it’s Xbox platform, as Sony does with Playstation and Nintendo with the Switch. All of these platforms prohibit installing applications that are not sanctioned by the device manufacturer or otherwise require developer registration for side loading content. Both the Xbox and Playstation this generation are essentially the same AMD CPU and GPU technology available at retail, they would be comparable devices. All four platforms (iOS, Xbox, Playstation and Switch) support downloading Fortnite from an App Store environment to your personal device, the app in question with this litigation.

If I don’t like my device manufacturer defining what will and won’t run on their device, as you point out there is plenty of competition in the mobile phone marketplace to buy a device from another manufacturer that does permit that. Apple barely have 50% of the mobile phone market in the US and even less globally (20%?). It’s a device that you can replace every few years with most carrier plans I’ve seen are two years, for Android you’re lucky to get three years of updates for the device and iOS around five years. If the device doesn’t meet your needs, buy the one that does.

Just because something is the norm does not make it inherently good. I point out that by compelling Apple to do something it does not wish to do, I lose the option to choose a platform that behaves the way I would like it to behave. For those who wish an open platform to install third party apps, one exists that is globally the dominant player.

Speaking of the mobile operating systems, Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android have different philosophies on their approach to how they manage the device and access. Apple have approached the situation by locking down their device and being prescriptive about what gets onto it whilst Google have gone with a much more open approach with their devices being more open to modification and enabling developer modes.

Though it must be said that Epic is suing both Apple and Google, so perhaps this side loading thing is just a distraction.

 

[deevey]

Doesn't that already exist?

You can sign into your Epic Game account via their website.

And you can buy VBucks gift cards at many local stores.

I don't think Apple's App Store is the *only* place to buy VBucks...

View attachment 1741411

Huh, honestly didn't know they had cards as well. That kinda throws a spanner in the works.

Wonder how much the retailer makes ?

 

[pasamio]

Huh, honestly didn't know they had cards as well. That kinda throws a spanner in the works.

Wonder how much the retailer makes ?

Target frequently does a 10% discount on their Apple gift cards or does a buy a $100 Apple gift card and get a $10/$15 Target gift card. I'm going to guess that they're generally making at least 20% to still make some money on selling the gift cards and maybe even the 30% margin I've seen referenced for Target.

 

[deevey]

maybe even the 30% margin

Reminds me of ..... oh never mind

 

[johnnytravels]

Stifle competition with whom? In the mobile phone market, Android devices are dominant almost everywhere in the world and for the tablet market the iPad was around 60% last I looked and slowly losing market share to companies like Samsung and Amazon. Near as I can tell there is plenty of competition in the market for which Apple sells it’s devices.

Apple is the monopoly controller of the software that runs it’s devices just as Microsoft is the monopoly controller of software that runs on it’s Xbox platform, as Sony does with Playstation and Nintendo with the Switch. All of these platforms prohibit installing applications that are not sanctioned by the device manufacturer or otherwise require developer registration for side loading content. Both the Xbox and Playstation this generation are essentially the same AMD CPU and GPU technology available at retail, they would be comparable devices. All four platforms (iOS, Xbox, Playstation and Switch) support downloading Fortnite from an App Store environment to your personal device, the app in question with this litigation.

If I don’t like my device manufacturer defining what will and won’t run on their device, as you point out there is plenty of competition in the mobile phone marketplace to buy a device from another manufacturer that does permit that. Apple barely have 50% of the mobile phone market in the US and even less globally (20%?). It’s a device that you can replace every few years with most carrier plans I’ve seen are two years, for Android you’re lucky to get three years of updates for the device and iOS around five years. If the device doesn’t meet your needs, buy the one that does.

Just because something is the norm does not make it inherently good. I point out that by compelling Apple to do something it does not wish to do, I lose the option to choose a platform that behaves the way I would like it to behave. For those who wish an open platform to install third party apps, one exists that is globally the dominant player.

Speaking of the mobile operating systems, Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android have different philosophies on their approach to how they manage the device and access. Apple have approached the situation by locking down their device and being prescriptive about what gets onto it whilst Google have gone with a much more open approach with their devices being more open to modification and enabling developer modes.

Though it must be said that Epic is suing both Apple and Google, so perhaps this side loading thing is just a distraction.

It was fun discussing this until you brought up the video game console comparison.
The iPhone is not a video game console - it is not a single purpose device with some extras tacked on to it.

 

[Michael Scrip]

It was fun discussing this until you brought up the video game console comparison.

The iPhone is not a video game console - it is not a single purpose device with some extras tacked on to it.

But why is it OK for a "video game" store to charge 30%... but not OK for a "computing" store?

Instead of comparing phones and consoles... perhaps we should compare the stores?

Epic doesn't have a problem with Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo taking 30%... but they do with Apple and Google.

But they're all stores, right?

 

[cmaier]

It was fun discussing this until you brought up the video game console comparison.
The iPhone is not a video game console - it is not a single purpose device with some extras tacked on to it.

Neither is a video game console. But even if it was not the case, what difference should that make under the law?

 

[deevey]

It was fun discussing this until you brought up the video game console comparison.
The iPhone is not a video game console - it is not a single purpose device with some extras tacked on to it.

Actually technically it really is - The clue is in the name. Now my computer that can make phone calls on the other hand ...

 

[pasamio]

It’s a shame, I had kind of hoped for an explanation of how the iPhone wasn’t a single purpose device known as a “phone” with some extras tacked on to it. I guess @johnnytravels doesn’t have a retort

 

[johnnytravels]

It’s a shame, I had kind of hoped for an explanation of how the iPhone wasn’t a single purpose device known as a “phone” with some extras tacked on to it. I guess @johnnytravels doesn’t have a retort

Ok thanks for calling me out. I really thought this was just a rhetorical question and you guys knew exactly that this is bs.
The iPhone is as much a phone as the iPad is a pad with some extras or the Macbook is a book with some extras (the Homepod, Airpods, what are pods even? and so on).
It‘s a name. That doesn’t mean that the name contains every clue as to what it is. Just because your name is Dick doesn’t mean that you are one either...

The iPhone is a multi-purpose device by virtue of having been turned into one through the app store. It is a computer that can run programs that enhance its capabilities beyond what the creators intended it to do.
Apple could of course simply close down the app store and start limiting the iPhone functionality to just phone and music player with some web browsing, calendar and email capabilities (remember?). I am sure nobody would be bothered if they then sold skins, wallpapers, ringtones and music on such a functionally limited device exclusively through their own store.

The question about the App Store is thus: How does do in the marketplace compared to other methods of software distribution and payment options? The answer more and more people seem to be leaning towards is: Not great.

 

[pasamio]

If the nature of the device changes through the availability of an App Store, then the consoles are there as well. The modern consoles all sport their own App Stores, have supported different apps for a while now generally focused on media consumption but not necessarily "games". When you look at the Xbox, their Store is the same across the PC, Xbox and even what remains of their mobile devices. In fact the Xbox site has a page for "console apps" stating "Get access to popular apps on your Xbox Series X|S and Xbox One console, including all your favorites, like Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, Apple TV, Amazon Video, Sling TV, Pandora, and more!"

Ability to "run programs enhance it's capabilities beyond what the creators intended it to do" could equally be held to apply to video game consoles, especially the Xbox that started life as a fork of Windows 2000 and utilised the same base programming interface as Windows provided whilst using hardware not dissimilar to a PC, and in the case of the Xbox 360 not dissimilar to the Mac G5. The statement is vague though because these tools all offer SDKs to be able to create programs that run on their platforms.

The common juxtaposition for app distribution is Steam that on the desktop still manages to charge 30%. Steam obviously is primarily a gaming platform but also offers other applications through their store as well. Microsoft has an interesting balance where their gaming products are sold at 30% whilst I believe is a 15% amount for the Windows Store (at one point they were promoting 5% but seem to have stepped back from that). Microsoft also attempted their hand at a locked down ecosystem with their Windows RT devices that mandated the use of their store but that platform ended poorly. Google's Play Store takes 30% for their apps though Android is a more open platform that permits other stores. Two of the largest alternative Android App Stores are Amazon's App Store for Android and Samsung's Store both of which take a 30% amount as well. In the broader console space the Switch and Playstation also have a 30% and all of the consoles have a requirement for payments to go through their vendors with obviously Apple requiring it for all of their apps and Google requiring it for games. Epic Games charges a variable rate down to 12% but will charge different amounts based on payment processing charges which I've seen hinted as up to 25%. Let me know if there is a major App Store that I've missed but the bulk of the App Store's seem to offer similar pricing.

Google Play Store's requirement that for utilising their infrastructure that games are required to use the Play Store's payment system exclusively is in part where Epic Games lays a similar suit against them though it appears that Google also interfered with Fortnite being offered on various devices which I think is a much more interesting claim if it can be proven true. Google's threat to OEMs who might have shipped the Fortnite Launcher is reminiscent of the charges laid against Microsoft in the 90's.