Microsoft Supports Epic Games, Says Apple Blocking Access to Unreal Engine Would Harm Game Creators

[tann]

The thing that people do not seem to realize in this whole thing is that the point of this "movement" is to show that Apple is being unfair to developers as of now ...

Not for the 30% vs 15% ... not because this guy is smaller or bigger than this other guy ...

Apple says ... developers abide by the same rules ... fine ... if that is true than why are there companies like the ones I’ll name below able to use their own stores (bypassing the 30% or 15% commission to Apple) to sell their products and bypassing the apple built-in store ?

It’s funny because the companies I’m going to name below all benefit from the same services provided by Apple to all the other developers on the apple store ... advertising, marketing reports, iCloud infrastructure and what ever else Apple provides.

Uber --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
Lyft --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
Target --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
Walmart --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
Burger King --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
McDonald's --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS
Amazon --> Pays 0% to Apple while operating their own store on iOS

Must i name them all ... I hope Epic uses these examples to show that Apple decides who can bypass their commission strategy and who can not.

Like I said earlier ... all these companies benefit from Apple technologies to be on Apple's iOS Store ... so why wouldn’t they be required to also pay the 15% or 30 % cut to Apple ?

Well said. Honestly no one has come back with a solid rebuttal to these points.

I think when the App store was launched, and the initial years, 30% flat cut could be argued as acceptable, things were new, novel and we were in new, unchartered territory (kind of like where XCloud is now). But now things have settled and guess what, Apple and Google between them are the gatekeepers to almost every device used by every person in the world and because of that what they both do is fairly being more scrutinised.

If over the course of history the status quo was never challenged, the world would be a much different place.

 

[Wildkraut]

Because it's in the contractual terms that Apple has the right to terminate Epic's developer account if they ever did anything of the sort that has led them getting banned.

Just so we are clear, Apple isn't banning games using the Unreal engine. Epic is the company trying to escalate the matter further by insinuating that development on the unreal engine would be affected were this to happen. Epic is the one choosing to drag their developer partners down into a war that nobody wants to be a part of.

We’ll see what “rights” they has, looking forward 3pm.

 

[2010mini]

So because of Epic's willingness to violate the TOS, and Apple's unfair TOS, the smaller guys using the Unreal Engine get to suffer. I'm conflicted. I support Apple enforcing their TOS that Epic agreed and signed, but I don't agree with the actual TOS either. If Apple allowed users to install apps through outside sources like they do with macOS, this wouldn't be an issue. Before people complain about security issues, why does macOS seem to be doing fine? If Apple doesn't want to adjust their TOS, let Epic host their own apps on their own infrastructure and let users download and install them that way.

macOS isn’t ’fine’ it has lots of security issues from non-AppStore approved apps.

Epic got popular not just because they developed great games. But also because they’ve had access to Apple’s user base.

 

[MacOH21]

Wasn't Epic also ripping off dance moves from artists (for IAP) and refusing to pay the artist royalties?

 

[mrcloaked]

Lock down the Mac.

 

[cmaier]

Link to the hearing video stream, today at 3pm pacific:

Join our Cloud HD Video Meeting

Zoom is the leader in modern enterprise cloud communications.

cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com

 

[robinp]

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

As for commonly used expressions, "cutting off your nose to spite your face" would seem more appropriate here

 

[robinp]

Apple need to stop this 30% blanket.

Instead the developer fee should be tiered, if you're a one man band, $99/year, giant conglomerate with 100k employees? Much pricier.

Then pay to host the app, charge for the bandwidth used for downloads / updates.

Charge for the overheads of the store (e.g. review costs, development costs etc).

Allow any payment type, and push IAPs as a much better, cleaner and secure way of handling in app payments.

That is how I think it should be. The App stores on both iOS and Google are now absolutely essential to life as we know it and having 2 companies ruling them with whatever TOS' they want is a bit scary.

If IAP via apple and the 30% cut becomes optional, no developer would offer it. But what they want isn't necessarily what's best for customers.

 

[Ramchi]

So, I'm working as a freelancer most of the time and have some own projects. I have to say 30% was cool in the beginning just because the AppStore was a huge change for every developer.

But the professional development of an app is expensive. The maintenance is expensive - since iOS changes rapidly and constantly. It is just normal the I'm spending ~60K for app development I could have earned as a freelancer in the time the development takes.
So Apple eats up a huge part of my income - and Apple doesn't care that every time Apple changes something I have to update the App again.

And when I hear about the special 15% deal Amazon Prime made - Yes I want this deal too! You don't? Anyone doesn't? Totally nice if you write a little app in your spare time and Apple helps you to make money and start a business. When you start to do it in a professional way, things change immediately. Customer feedback, new features, crash reports, testing with new iOS releases, adapting to new iOS versions, 3rd party frameworks break, new technologies get introduced, old technologies disappear.

No, producing and maintaining an app is expensive and 30% is a huge cut - too much in my experience. You need a subscription service or advertising to deal with the costs over many years. An app just isn't write once and forget - it is never done.

Unfortunately people think that providing services through mobile apps is just fun and someone just keep eating 30% irrespective of the business circumstances is cool! Apple can charge license fee for developer tools and beyond that charge the customers for using their App Stores, not the developers. They can take 100% on those charges instead of eating the pie in every transaction.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

"A manufacturer’s own products do not themselves comprise a relevant product market” and a “company does not violate the Sherman Act by virtue of the natural monopoly it holds over its own product"

Maybe you can articulate this better that others seem to be able to. In what market does Apple hold a monopoly?

If I make an iOS App, how do I distribute it? If a customer wants to get an iOS App, how do they get it?

That quote from the court on the Sherman Act doesn't apply here, because the app is made by the developer, not Apple.

There is nothing else on the planet like this. Any other platform that allows for third party software allows for that third party software to be purchased from a store (whether physical or digital) not operated by the company that made the platform.

There are two entities that function similarly two Apple: governments, which charge sales tax. Is Apple a government that has to find a way to finance things for the public good? No? Ok. Lets move onto the other entity similar to Apple. The Mafia charging businesses "protection" fees. Don't worry - it's fine, businesses can just operate somewhere else where the Mafia isn't in control, right?

 

[cmaier]

Unfortunately people think that providing services through mobile apps is just fun and someone just keep eating 30% irrespective of the business circumstances is cool! Apple can charge license fee for developer tools and beyond that charge the customers for using their App Stores, not the developers. They can take 100% on those charges instead of eating the pie in every transaction.

As a developer, i prefer that apple charge me rather than the customer. If customers have to pay to use the App Store, they won’t, and then my apps won‘t sell.

 

[Ramchi]

Tencent, 40% owner of Epic, is a Chinese company valued at about 750 billion dollars. Epic makes its money by exploiting impressionable kids to pay for digital tat. More than video games used to cost, a lot more. So it's a huge company, whose business model is based on exploitation, fighting another company.


You are intentionally misquoting me. Nothing you were quoting here is anything I have side, quite the opposite.

I am not supporting EPIC per se but the overall scenario for the developers parting their fortunes in every single IAP.

Tencent shares in EPIC doesn’t make them a credible case and I tend to agree on that without lots of details in that. May be I would consider changing if something not sinister in those details.

 

[ervingv]

Definitely they should! But comparing an iOS device to a game console is a bit like comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended) A better analogy is should Apple and Microsoft prevent you from installing 3rd party apps on your Windows or Mac and force you to use ONLY their App Store. An iOS device like an iPad is much closer to a personal computer (actually I think it IS technically a personal computer) than a PlayStation or Xbox.

I agree. Some people here don't get it.

 

[ervingv]

On Windows 10S, you can only install apps from Microsoft App Store.

The console analogy is actually quite apt, as both presents a similar walled garden.

The console analogy is actually not apt. Smartphones are closer to Mac and PCs than to consoles. Windows 10S allowed you to change the version to regular Windows 10 to run apps outside the Store; no such option on iOS.

 

[ervingv]

I am so sick of people saying Apple is a monopoly. Apple is not a monopoly in any sense of the definition of "monopoly". For starters, they do not have a majority market share in ANY market. If customers and or developers do not like the terms of service that Apple offers, they are free to purchase an Android phone from one of dozens of different manufacturers and developers can choose to develop their apps for one of the many other platforms out there besides iOS. Customers that CHOOSE to purchase an iPhone, where the App Store rules have been the same for over a decade, are and should be well aware that they are choosing to purchase a device that is part of a closed ecosystem (ie everything goes through Apple). Same goes with developers.

They are.

 

[ervingv]

If IAP via apple and the 30% cut becomes optional, no developer would offer it. But what they want isn't necessarily what's best for customers.

I don’t know why they have to add a fee on iOS but on the Mac/PC you can get apps from anywhere without paying Apple 30 percent.

 

[Wildkraut]

macOS isn’t ’fine’ it has lots of security issues from non-AppStore approved apps.

Epic got popular not just because they developed great games. But also because they’ve had access to Apple’s user base.

Well, macOS is fine, just not secure against extreme stupidity. But hey, “try and error” is part of life, else you would still sit there in diapers.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Except they didn't ask Apple for a larger cut. They asked Apple to allow them to provide customers with the ability to bypass Apple's IAP and pay directly to Epic. It's right there in the original article.

Apple and Epic could indeed agree a side letter "ONLY" between themselves that allows Epic to add their own direct payment option for IAPs, but as soon as they implement it, it would become public by definition. That's exactly what Epic wanted, and exactly what Apple doesn't want since it would set a public precedent for all other developers.

Do you not understand that adding their own IAP payment processing was a poison pill designed specifically to force this lawsuit?

As I said, if Apple and Epic had come to an agreement for a lower revenue share, Epic would never have made this version that cuts Apple to 0%.

There’s no version of reality where any random developer gets to unilaterally decide Apple deserves a 0% revenue share. Epic will lose today in court, because they’re wrong. Full stop.

Epic will almost certainly fold and revert to the proper IAP process before Friday. If they don’t, who cares? Good riddance, have a nice life Epic.

 

[InnocenceMyth]

Such utter hypocrisy for Microsoft to support Epic in getting an injunction. It's one thing if they support the larger lawsuit (but very stupid, considering their own business practices) but if they feel Apple can't enforce its own TOS, why should anybody comply with Microsoft's?

 

[GreenPixel]

They are.

They are what? A monopoly? Care to share your logic/arguement? The person you responded to explained very well why they aren't. I'd be interested in hearing what market you think they are a monopoly in.

 

[jimbobb24]

Well, I'm a small independent developer and I disagree. The 30% is fair for what is offered from Apple's side: tax documentation, billing arrangements in different countries, visibility on the App Store, detailed metrics on usage, and more...

I dislike how 'independent developers' are OK with this until they suddenly become huge companies with million dollar budgets (and profits) - then it's suddenly 'unfair' because what they're paying Apple now amounts to millions of dollars (even though it's still the same 15/30%). It's disgusting actually, and I'll be really annoyed if the big developers pay less proportionally than the smaller ones - that's really unfair (you know, like the US tax system... great model that).

Except the top earners in the US pay most the taxes. Anyone can look this up. Why are people so wrong...so obviously wrong even in their pointless throw away comments.

But - you actually have a good idea. Apple could really help small developers by lowering their fees to 20% and kicking the big developers up to like 31%. Not quite like the US tax code which is much much more progressive but still would be a nice gesture.

 

[BuffaloTF]

you can? There is the EA Store and what not on my XBox One as we speak

There's no EA Store on Xbox.

There's EA Access, a subscription service that Microsoft gets a 30% cut from.

 

[smetvid]

There is no reason to threaten to terminate their developer account now that Fortnite is gone.

Why?

Do you even know what's in the agreement? The developer agreement states a developer will not try to scam Apple. Thats in the contract for the developer account itself and not one specific app. This isn't a random bug or oops in one app. Epic clearly decided to break the contract and violate the agreement they signed to abide by the rules as an Apple developer. Apple has every right to terminate the developer license but they are not unreasonable and if Epic stops this PR madness Apple would even allow Fortnite back in the store.

 

[cmaier]

The console analogy is actually not apt. Smartphones are closer to Mac and PCs than to consoles. Windows 10S allowed you to change the version to regular Windows 10 to run apps outside the Store; no such option on iOS.

Why? Who says they are closer? Apple clearly, from the very beginning, has considered iphones to be computing appliances.

 

[cupcakes2000]

You make excellent points, but I fear you are replying to a strawman. I don't know of any developers, or anyone in business tbh, who is chill with giving any company any cut of their revenue. Overhead is overhead, but no good business person is going to look at an extortive fee and say "it is what it is"

What an absolute load of twaddle. Any freelancer who acquires work via any 3rd party agency pays a commission. In any industry anywhere in the entire world. An AppStore or any marketplace is no different.
This is part of the overhead you speak of. And, in fact, if you’re unable or unwilling to try to negotiate a different rate it actually is what it is. You decide whether it’s beneficial to your own business and then accept it or not.