Apple Threatens To Terminate Epic Games' Developer Accounts on August 28 (macrumors.com) 267
Apple is planning to terminate Epic Games' entire access to its App Store and app development tools, Epic Games said today. Apple told Epic that by August 28, all access will be ended. From a report: That includes Epic's access to the development tools necessary to create software for the Unreal Engine that Epic offers to third-party developers for their games. In response, Epic has filed a court order asking a Northern California court to stop Apple from removing Epic's âOEApp StoreâOE access. Further reading: Epic Games Sues Apple.
Apple should know better (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
The contract might allow for removal of an offending app, but does it allow Apple to shut down Epic's access to development tools? Even if it does, I think Apple is unwise to go all scorched-earth on Epic. It will reinforce Epic's position.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
if your customer and business partner sues you, it might be legally safer to cut all ties with them so you don't provide them possible evidence.
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
In the generic case that sounds nice, but when you're operating a market where your "customer" is not a "business partner" but a member of the community who is using services you make available to the public, then no you absolutely do not normally retaliate in any way. Especially if the accusation is unfair business practices related to the market you're running! That's just nuts.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
So Epic snuck the alternate payment method into an update, had it approved with that functionality disabled, enabled it later, and is refusing to push an update to remove it or even to disable the functionality server-side.
You know, ironically, that kind of proves Epic's point.
One of Apple's major selling points to why people should like the walled garden is that Apple curates the programs in it, protecting customers from malicious actors who might try and do bad things with apps.
Except... they don't really do much of any curation. They seem to run code through some sort of static analysis that looks for "bad patterns" but that's about all they do. Part of the whole TikTok thing is that apparently TikTok snuck "bad code" into their iOS app and did a bunch of spying that they weren't supposed to, even on iOS. And Apple's approval process didn't notice.
The very fact that Epic "snuck" code in that was later activated remotely kind of proves that Apple isn't doing anything to prevent that from happening, despite the fact that it's been used several times in the past to sneak actual malware into the App Store. I remember that it turns out that Apple gave Uber effectively root access to iOS, and Uber used that to spy on Uber users, even if they deleted the Uber app. Apple never noticed (or flat-out didn't care) until the tech press caught Uber doing it and it became a big deal.
What other secret code has made it into the walled garden? Who else is spying on iOS users? If Apple can't tell that code is only activated by a remote server, what else is hiding in the App Store? Why should users want to pay the Apple Tax if it doesn't buy you anything?
Re: (Score:3)
Um....no.
The TikTok thing is the fear that they'll hand over info to China. Not that they collected info they were not supposed to have.
so spying on user's keystrokes is ok if "your" guys are doing it?
not that it matters, anyone trusting his phone for any sort of privacy anywhere in the world is screwed anyway, which incidentally makes these discussions pretty amusing.
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't enforcing anything, unless they mark the app's signing key as malware.
If Apple suddenly decides to arbitrarily revoke users' ability to use software that they have paid for over a petty contract dispute, that would be a major breach of user trust on Apple's part. That feature was intended to be used only in situations where the app harms users, not just when the app happens to be inconvenient for Apple.
Re: Apple should know better (Score:3)
And that in part is the beauty of the anti-competion laws. They are about the pattern and practices, and often can be triggered even if the abusive company is meticulous about the rules.
Even if they are within their contractual rights and allowed to remove Epic (or any one) the laws let the trier of fact (judges and juries) review the larger practice of bullying.
For the better part of a decade it has only been a question of if government regulators or private lawsuits would stop it. Congress is holding hear
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Interesting)
So Epic snuck the alternate payment method into an update, had it approved with that functionality disabled, enabled it later, and is refusing to push an update to remove it or even to disable the functionality server-side.
And you think Apple is retaliating? They should just let Epic flout the rules forever, because enforcing the rules is retaliation?
What a lot of people are getting wrong about this is that there are "rules" and there are "laws". "Laws" beat "rules". Apple can only set rules. They cannot create laws. Epic can ignore any rule Apple creates if that rule disobeys a law. This is exactly what Epic is arguing. Apple retaliating certainly strengthens the case that Apple created a rule that is breaking the law.
Re: (Score:3)
In the generic case that sounds nice, but when you're operating a market where your "customer" is not a "business partner" but a member of the community who is using services you make available to the public, then no you absolutely do not normally retaliate in any way. Especially if the accusation is unfair business practices related to the market you're running! That's just nuts.
You are confused about what an economic market is. The App Store is not its own economic market. Software is the economic market here. Though Apple engages in the software market, Apple does not "operate" the software market. Epic can not win this lawsuit, and they dug their own grave by violating the terms to which they agreed in order to be an Apple software developer.
Otherwise, your argument is utilizes a fallacy, begging the question. Apple is not retaliating, but merely following their written policy
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're trying to prove that you're not violating antitrust and unfair competition laws, it's by no means legally safer. Retaliation is generally frowned upon.
Re: (Score:3)
Retaliatory behaviour is unlikely to increase a judge's sympathy for Apple.
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
unlikely to increase a judge's sympathy for Apple.
Apple does not require "sympathy" if they have the legal rights required to take the actions they have decided upon, then the simple fact is that Apple can do those actions, and it will not be b/c of the exercise of their ights that anyone would have any leg to stand on against them..
The allegations of unfair business practices are in all likelihood to turn out to be frivolous. Apple does not have a monopoly here in computing devices, nor even in smart phones or smart phone application stores.
"native apps for Apple iOS" are also not a distinct product market from Native Android apps, etc.
The iOS platform is Apple's baby, and restrictions that exist for obvious reasons have been there from the beginning and well disclosed, as in The "free" or low-cost development tools, extension framework, and app ecosystem are Not free for Apple to develop and maintain the safe and secure environment that Apple has created and wishes consumers to expect when using their product and the app store - You don't get to just stop paying for your services and/or stop following service terms because you as a developer have become bigger and more greedy, and the rules are no longer convenient for you now that Apple has made you successful.
The software development tools Apple has provided and their efforts to run a secure app system, keep malicious tools out, and maintain user trust are significant and require adherence to the rules from all developers.
It's been a published fact to consumers buying Apple devices from the very beginning; this was never sold as an open platform or a general-purpose computer. And moreover... Apple is a competitor and disruptor who has obtained buy-in from consumers to the detriment of retailers and companies such as Blackberry, etc, who still have a product. Matter of fact they, Apple have lowered the costs for consumers by partnering with developers directly to distribute apps that provide functions traditionally found in computer software programs.
Its been well-advertised that when purchasing an iPhone that apps available are through either the web browser or Apple-approved iOS apps/extensions. As a matter of fact, when the iPhone launched in 2007 was 100% Apple apps with no 3rd party development capabilities, and Apple introduced the opportunity for developers to partner with them in 2008.
The success of Apps after many years has lead to some developers such as obviously Epic in this case becoming greedy, but that does not mean the developers get to suddenly change the rules now leveraging bogus "unfair competition" claims and suddenly discount the importance of the platform that has created a great deal of their success and basically deserves to be fairly compensated for the revenue opportunity Apple is creating for the developers.
If you want in Apple's walled garden, then its NOT FREE due to Apple's significant costs in maintaining all this - you don't get to bypass paying them... You had to sign a contract that means following their rules, and all the software tools required in order to develop extensions to Apple's iOS software ("native apps") are under that contract, so of course if you breach it.. Apple can revoke the permission they gave you to have access to their tools for extending, programming, and distributing native plugins to the Apple iOS.
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
Nothing about antitrust law enforcement requires a monopoly.
This straw man and question begging has been overused. and I am challenging it. Please describe how Apple is crushing market competition by violating anti-trust laws.
Ask yourself how many companies offer software for selling digital goods on mobile devices. What? That market basically doesn't exist?
In order for Apple to have violated anti-trust laws here, they would have to restrict competition by preventing developers from selling on Google Play Store, LG SmartWorld, Huawei App Store, Sony Apps, Amazon AppStore, Aptoide, F-Droid, GetJar, AC Market, SlideME, Uptodown Market, Itch.io, Cydia, neXva, Bemodi, AppBrain, 1Mobile, Appolicious, Kongregate, and AppLand. There are too many other fortresses and ways for developers to attack them for Apple to somehow unfairly restrict or prevent those endeavors.
You're thinking way too narrowly about antitrust laws. Antitrust laws prevent a company from taking its success in one area and using it to stifle competition or increase prices for goods in another area. For example, Apple Arcade exists now, which effectively closes the door on any competing streaming game service or other rental service ever becoming available on iOS, because they would have to absorb Apple's fees and still turn a profit, which is unrealistic. So the possibility of, for example, having a cross-platform Facebook gaming system is completely nonexistent, and along with it, the possibility that developers creating games for such a platform, by competing with native games, could drive down the price of games for consumers.
The other thing you're missing is that Apple effectively prevents its customers from buying apps from all those other stores you mentioned. Sure, they could technically buy the apps, but they can't hope to actually run them as long as their primary device comes from Apple. So there's a fairly strong tying complaint, too, IMO. And by preventing competing app stores from being possible on iOS, they are effectively guaranteeing that no one can compete with them to drive the cost of those fees down.
The argument that users bothered by the fees can always buy a different phone are not even slightly compelling, because that would require that customers A. be aware that they are probably paying more for apps than they would in an ecosystem with multiple competing app stores, and B. consider cheaper apps to be more important than all of the other things that they like about the iOS operating system or its hardware. Customers should not be expected to waive their right to antitrust protection merely because they like some other aspect of a store, platform, or company.
This is not to say that having competing app stores is a panacea. Done badly, it's a disaster. Any decision like that should be done carefully, methodically, with an eye towards making sure that apps from one store don't have unacceptable levels of access to data created by apps from another store, etc. But then again, Apple desperately needs to support multiple users on iOS anyway, and once they pull that off, allowing users to create secondary accounts tied to other app stores becomes downright trivial. So that's not an argument against multiple stores, just an argument against requiring such support with an unrealistic timeframe.
Re: Apple should know better (Score:3)
Anti-competition laws are written to address large patterns, and were crafted that way intentionally. They are about bullying and abusing market positioning regardless of other laws and contracts.
Even if Apple follows their contracts to the letter, the act can still be used as evidence of abuse.
Companies can write and follow contracts meticulously, follow the letter of the law for business and civil processes, and still be found with anticompetitive practices.
Re: (Score:2)
How does it affect other developers? No more updates for Unreal on iOS? Unreal pulled entirely for Apple systems?
Re: (Score:2)
Some speculation on my part, as I haven't used Unreal on Macs, but... I don't think this necessarily affects all third party developers using Unreal. Remember, the Unreal engine is just a bunch of source code, and I'd imagine you can sign the final package using your own Apple-provided developer credentials.
Technically speaking, you also don't need developer credentials to develop middleware for iOS and macOS. I've got a fully working game engine on macOS for my own project, but I don't have a developer
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
A judge should definitely issue an order that requires Apple to keep their account active, not ban access to Xcode and the SDK, etc.
If (and only if) the judge believes that Epic Games has a valid case, then I think an ideal order would give Apple two options:
Re: (Score:3)
lol? so epic has everything to win and nothing to lose while apple can only lose both ways because theres no punishment for somebody else to do the same thing, not even a fine for epic for pulling that shit.
If Apple wants to punish Epic, they can always countersue. But in a lawsuit brought by Epic, there are only two options: either the judge orders Apple to restore their accounts or the judge does not. There's not a third option in which Epic is punished. If the judge doesn't issue such an order, that's a de facto punishment, I guess, but if that happens and Epic eventually wins, Apple's liability will be, not to put too fine a point on it, epic. Just saying.
What I suggested is entirely reasonable if the
Re: (Score:2)
And did your comment add anything? Presumably you do have a background in law, so enlighten us.
Apple should know better (Score:2, Insightful)
To be honest, we all cannot speak for the outcome. Epic have paid armies of expensive Lawyers. Both sides think they clearly think think the risk/reward is good enough.
#FreeFortnitr
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
By actually enforcing the contract Epic signed when creating their developer's account?
Indeed. The entire point and purpose of trust-busting is to invalidate such contracts in the presence of monopoly power. Whether that applies here is the matter under contention, but Apple is sure acting like a company confident of its market dominance, with no need to cater to the whims of consumers or partners.
Re: Apple should know better (Score:5, Interesting)
https://www.legalmatch.com/law... [legalmatch.com] unconscionable contract is one,bargaining power between the parties.
Just because two parties enter a contract doesn't mean the contract is valid. Arguably Apple's position is so powerful that they are able to add unconscionable conditions that a court could (although admittedly very rarely) invalidate.
Saying that you have to agree to this contract or else miss out on more than half of the revenue in the entire market is such a disproportionate position of power that Epic argues is anti competitive.
Epic really should know better (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe this illustrates Epic's point about Apple, but how is this helping their business?
Apple is really showing Google and Microsoft that Epic needs to be put in their place or their whole app revenue model is at risk if Epic can get away with avoiding their App Stores and their cut of 30%.
I can't see how this works out in the end to Epic's advantage in the long run - I can't see them winning this battle and, when the dust clears, they might be lucky if Apple only wants a 40% cut of their in app purchases and maybe Tim Sweeney's head on a spike at Apple HQ as a warning to anybody else who has this idea.
Re: (Score:2)
In the long run the it might hurt Apple more if they're also sued in the EU and Australia for example, who went against Apple before already.
Re:Epic really should know better (Score:4, Insightful)
The claim wasn't that it is helping Epic's business.
Then why are they doing this? If they're fat and happy, why are they daring the company with more free cash than any other company in the world to sue them?
In the long run the it might hurt Apple more if they're also sued in the EU and Australia for example, who went against Apple before already.
And how has that changed the way Apple is doing business? I saw this when I was at IBM in the '80s with the US Government's anti-trust lawsuit.
When you're that big, getting sued isn't saying you're doing things wrong or it's going to change the way the company works - it's the cost of doing business.
Re: (Score:3)
They already did something like this with Valve's Steam by having pulled games off Steam and making them Epic store exclusives. In the process they pissed off a lot of people. But as it turns out while the vocal minority is complaining loudly about them on the internet, the money is still rolling in for Epic. Their game Fortnite is making t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
No, they want to be able to open their own shitty and poorly-featured app store on iOS like they did on PC, so that they can get that 30% from other companies.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
People buy phones for the apps. Yes, iPhones have a new appeal a jewelry, but that only goes so far. A high school kid who spends all day playing Fortnight won't want a new iPhone, and the game is immensely popular with that age group. How big of a deal that will be long term is anyone's guess, but people form lifelong brand affinities in the late high school and college years.
Re: (Score:2)
You're assuming that Fortnite will never return to iOS.
Maybe I should have been clearer by explicitly saying that *when Fortnite returns" they might be lucky if Apple only wants a 40% cut of their in app purchases.
Don't forget that Google (and Microsoft) are in the same boat as Apple on this - I wouldn't be surprised if Epic's Sweeney isn't getting letters from Google & Microsoft's lawyers telling him not to even think about pulling the same shit with them as they are with Apple.
Epic's customers may fin
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Assuming Epic finds a reasonably quick fix for Android, they don't have that big of an incentive to return on Apple's terms. Of course, that is an assumption, but I do expect there will be an easy-to-sideload Epic Store app for Android soon.
One advantage Epic has here is that they're privately held (and making tons of money regardless). There's no activist shareholders to come after them if revenue takes a dip for one quarter. There are large investors who may get insistent, of course, but a private comp
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Apple should know better (Score:5, Interesting)
That has never been true. Android has significant market share, however, so Apple is not a monopoly. They may, however, have monopoly power, which is a lower bar and requires only market dominance, or monopoly in a region or the like. It's not clear that they do, but they're acting like they do, which won't help.
100% monopoly (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple has both a 100% monopoly in Apple Pay and Apple store. It has already been found to be the case in Russia.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Apple has both a 100% monopoly in Apple Pay and Apple store. It has already been found to be the case in Russia.
That's like saying "Target has a monopoly in Target stores."
Apple should know better (Score:3)
Lol the the customers knew they were getting fucked is not going fly. I bet if Apple had to hand 20% of the purchase back to those customers few would be saying "God no Apple deserve this".
And seriously stop trying to push the console angle it is not relevant until Stradia and Xbox are allowed in the store...kinda ironic.
Apple should know better (Score:2)
Except development don't work like that. The same game works across all platforms. Not releasing the game on both halves your revenue, while your expenses are essentially static. That and the duopolies game theory means neither will ever drop their prices.
The change of platforms only makes sense if the handsets are free, and your apps are transferable.
#FreeFortnite
Re: Apple should know better (Score:2)
Re: Apple should know better (Score:5, Insightful)
Google doesn't prohibit side loading. If Apple allowed their customers full autonomy over the devices they own, none of this would be a problem.
Consumer pro tip: When they say it's about "protecting the user," it's about the money.
Re: (Score:3)
This is clearly not true. Google doesn't prohibit side-loading, and as the GP said, Google threw Epic out for breaking the rules too. Epic TRIED to make a go of it as a side-loaded app, but nobody wants to do that. That means that being in the store has some value, which Epic doesn't want to pay for. If this were only about side-loading, Google wouldn't be in this fight at all. Epic wants Apple and Google to do all the footwork, but then give all that value to Epic for nothing.
It's probably not worth 30%, b
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is stuck (Score:2)
They have to be absolute assholes about this. If they give in on this, then they automatically admit guilt.
I am usually pretty pro apple. But they suck balls on this front. Screw em.
Re:Apple is stuck (Score:4, Informative)
lots of devs do their own billing on the App Store outside of apple. it's not that big of a deal and has been going on for two years or so. Some even give discounts for outside of App Store billing. apple even has standard rules on how to do this. Epic can't seem to follow rules like others.
Re: Apple is stuck (Score:2)
Epic can sell virtual coins on their website, they just can't do it in the app. That wouldn't be breaking the terms. Hence why you can't sign up for Netflix on iOS, you can sign up on a website and then return and sign in to see your subscription.
Apple is stuck (Score:3)
It is time for Netflix to get on on this action. I can't believe it's lawyers aren't sharpening their pencils.
Re: (Score:3)
... Some even give discounts for outside of App Store billing. apple even has standard rules on how to do this. Epic can't seem to follow rules like others.
You're not obligated to follow a rule if the rule itself is illegal. That's what Epic is arguing and only a court can decide if they're right. (But if you'd like a preview of how a court might view things.. the Supreme Court ruled against on Apple on a similar issue in 2019. Google 'Apple vs. Pepper'.)
Re:Apple is stuck (Score:5, Insightful)
> I am usually pretty pro apple
...which is a problem, I see no reason to be "pro" any commercial entity. What I do see is reasons to be pro policies and actions by commercial (and other) entities. Apple happens to have many policies which I consider to be bad, mostly related to their drive to control and monetise. Arch-competitor Google also has a number of policies which I oppose but they at least make it possible to opt out - Google-free Android is a thing, Apple-free iOS is not. Were Apple to open up iOS, release the source, allow side loading and alternative repositories things might change but I will not voluntarily subject myself to their control mania.
Re: (Score:3)
Also on Apple's side for a lot of things, but the walled garden concept has gone too far in many cases and this is just them exorbitantly lining their pockets, robbing the developers that helped them establish the hardware. But Apple is just proving Epic's point and digging their own grave. It was just a matter of time. Remember, Apple: if you realize you're digging yourself into a deeper hole, just put the damn shovel down.
Which is a frontal assult on (Score:3)
My understanding is, if any of my Apple Developer/Enterprise Developer signing creds and such expire or are revoked they can not just be turned back on. So all apps would fail to run.
And the only way to recover would be re signing and re distribution.
Someone broke the Big Guns out
If you attack the king, you had better win
Go Epic (Score:2)
In the gaming space on Apple I can only think of Epic. Microsoft/Google/Facebook all could and have complaints, but all don't want to draw attention to their own houses. Mozilla should, but they are only interested in rent on a dying browser. Netflix and the all the new subscription TV should go against Apple, but they won't because they need relevance. Apple has already lost in Russia, and India antitrust for a local app...China would but after WeChat becoming unavailable there, who is gonna want an iphone
Re: (Score:3)
"If you come at the king, you best not miss" - Omar
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I could be wrong and/or missing something.
My only hands on experience has been with in-house apps for clients not distribution from the app store.
Interesting, but seems Apple is wrong here (Score:2)
I don't think Epic will win the original lawsuit they filed.
However, I don't see a good basis for Apple terminating Epic's whole account, just because one app did not meet guidelines... Epic should be able to continue develop other things that do meet guidelines, and as noted they should realistically have access to develop things like an SDK...
Even if Apple was legally in the right here, it seems like a bad strategic move when they had a good footing to start with in Epic's initial charges.
Re: (Score:3)
If Epic was some small indie developer with a few hundred users, their Apple development accounts would have already been terminated for trying to bypass the App Store for in-game purchases. The only reason they're getting a warning is because Apple doesn't want to deal with the PR blow back from kicking a few thousand kids off of their favorite game in the middle of a pandemic.
Epic fail (Score:3, Interesting)
Epic's strategic blunder was they got themselves kicked out of Google Play Store .. if they hadn't done that .. Apple would have an higher fear that people may buy Android devices to play Fortnite. Now that fear is reduced a bit (although most people can still get it from Galaxy store and elsewhere). Google too might have made a strategy misstep here in that now more people will find/try out about alternate stores, although compared to having to reduce fees they may have made the right choice.
Re: (Score:2)
They wanted to get kicked out of both stores so they could file lawsuits against both
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that their Apple suit specifically said that allowing side loading would be an agreeable outcome for Epic and then they turned around and sued Google saying that even though Android allows side loading, it isn't economically feasible.
Because reality is that most people aren't going to do side loading and most people aren't going to use 3rd party App Stores.
Their real goal is to hope to back Apple and Google into a corner and get full access to user data in exchange for dropping the suit.
Re:Epic fail (Score:4, Informative)
Unlike on iOS, it's pretty easy to sideload applications on Android. Especially for Fortnite's young demographic, following a small series of steps from some tutorial video isn't a big hurdle.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody wants to make that effort. Epic's justification for suing Google is that 30% is too much to give up for a store that doesn't provide them anything, but when they tried pulling out of the play store and made the game available as a side-load, nobody bothered. Sounds to me like the Play Store (and by extension, the App Store) is definitely worth SOMETHING.
What Epic wants is for Apple and Google to do all the footwork of making things easy, but get nothing in return. Is 30% too much? Yeah, almost certai
Re:Epic fail (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how they can get Apple to allow that unless they can convince some EU amd Chinese legislators to force Apple to allow third party app stores on their devices (something Apple will resist strongly for "user security" reasons). China will probably jump at the opportunity considering what Huawei is facing outside of China.
Apple has become such a customer-hostile company (Score:2)
Apple has become such a customer-hostile company (Score:2)
Shares, and the fact being into technology used to be technical, and now having a phone makes you a cool nerd. People like me and Kendell are immigrants from Digg when it went full Apple. That and the rise of the ethical corporation (sic) and... politics. Short of complaining about init on Linux and that "Linux on the Desktop" you wouldn't recognize is from any other genetic website...still better than the Verge that makes me want to tear my eats out.
#FreeFortnite
How is this being customer hostile? (Score:2)
I definitely agree that Apple doesn't have the right focus on the customer since Jobs died but I don't see how this affects the customer in a negative way.
If somebody wants to buy an add on for their Fortnite game, how do they care or are negatively impacted if Apple gets a cut?
Re: How is this being customer hostile? (Score:2)
Because apple decides what you can do and put on your iToys, not you or developers. You purchase a product from Apple. What right do they have to tell you where and what you can install on it? They claim iOS is a replacement for desktop operating systems. Would you defend Microsoft doing the same thing?
There are so many lies and ignorant statements in your post that I hardly know where to start.
1. Every Developer presumably what the rules are. 99.99999% of them are more than happy to list their Apps on Appleâ(TM)s App Store. Epic could have easily followed the rules by simply having an external ecommerce page to handle in-App purchases. But they wanted to use Apple as a FREE Payment Processor, Distribution and Advertisement Service, and Audience-Consolidator. Sorry; Google didn't put up with it, eith
How is this being customer hostile? (Score:2)
I will play...
100% of developers would love to play less. They have no other store to sell in to access iPhone users. It's 100% monopoly.
Apple literally advertises their iPad as a computer. Phone's literally are used as more portable computer. I am literally entering this post on my phone.
You literally cannot buy an run an application from another store without buying a whole new device, but because duopoly...it's the same price.
#FreeFortnite
Re: (Score:2)
1: Wrong and Wrong. Nobody knowns exactly what the rules are, and when apple do/don't enforce them. It's a jungle where your app just might be rejected for no known reason. And also wrong because the entire point of the update was that epic explicit avoided using "Apple as a Payment Processor". That is the the entire point of the case. That Epic don't want to use apple as a payment processor.
Re: (Score:3)
Stockholm syndrome, sunk-cost fallacy... pick your reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Epic great (Score:2)
The only negative thing I have heard about Epic...is game exclusives on PC. Such is competition.
Was a great company zzy, jazz jackrabbit, and epic pinball...they did unreal but fuck that I had a compac at the time and it ran like a screensaver.
Apple literally have Rioting workers, Child labour in factories with suicide nets, and their business practices are appalling...and then there is the 30% cut from the top of Developers.
Re:Apple has become such a customer-hostile compan (Score:5, Insightful)
I think Apple is in the wrong to an extent—30% is probably too much, and single-mindedly pursuing that cut is bad for customers.
But I don't think Epic is right either. The App Store and Google's Play Store BOTH provide a trustworthy service with payment systems that people are used to. When I buy something from either of them, I know that my money isn't being stolen by some shady kid in a cellar somewhere. The money goes where I intend it. My CC info isn't stolen. I get what I want immediately. Those are all meaningful conveniences and Epic is wrong to discount them as worthless.
If Epic gets what it wants, we will see an explosion in the number of scams. By their own words they want to change things for every developer, not just themselves. It will be a complete nightmare. Part of the value of my phone is that it's sufficiently limited that the damage that can be incurred is ALSO limited.
There's plenty of unfettered capitalism to go around. I'm not super happy with any of the parties involved here.
EU and monopoly (Score:3)
This is about the worst possible time for Apple to deal with this.
The EU is already all over them for their app store lockdowns. Epic demonstrating Apple's tactics here for the world ie the EU to see will certainly intensify Apple's problems in Europe.
That trickles down. Do you think the US will sit and watch the EU have drastically lower app store fees? I doubt it. If Apple is forced to spin off or otherwise radically change the pricing structure of it's app store in the EU, the US will follow.
IMO, Epic stands to lose very little. They have a much larger install base on Android and you can still install on android even without the play store. Apply MUST fear the potential loss of a generation of kids that wont touch an Apple product because they grow up to be adults that wont touch an Apple product.
Epic can either lose 30% to Apple and Google on every single purchase or they can drop a perfectly timed revolt with just enough time for it to be felt before the holiday season and for the EU to see this play out in lock-step with their own efforts.
What about Russia (Score:2)
Everyone seems to gloss over Russia. Apple have already lost their anti trust case there.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia’s ruling is just part of a long fight with Apple to get Apple made apps replaced by Russian made ones that Russia can control. It practically toothless because Apple has such a light footprint in Russia (just the online store), it could just leave Russia entirely without really effecting it at all.
It’s just not something to get spun up about.
Re: (Score:2)
But of course you make a valid addition. Thank you for that.
Looking around a bit more Apple also seems to face problems in China: https://www.forbes.com/sites/s... [forbes.com] and with the beef between tech from China and the US as well a all of the of Apple's assets in China, this could get very ugly.
and say trump wants an vote trump app will that be (Score:3)
and say trump wants an vote trump app will that be added with say no content review ??
EU and monopoly (Score:2)
Really 11 times the money. Show me that figure. The figures I see make that unlikely with Android making similar profits from the 33 billion pie. It seems improbable.
O THE DRAMA (Score:2)
Oh my, it looks like the two mean girls are having a spat. Now Jenna is going to tell Marcy that Becky said that Donna told her that she made out with Frank while they were at Kelly's party.
O The Drama, baby. Let's get to the part where they tear each other's clothes off and then engage in a hot, slutty corporate merger.
Re: (Score:2)
And as in any cat fight, I don't give a hoot 'til the hair's flying. As long as they only bitch, I keep watching football, call me when the mudwrestling starts.
Dick move by Apple (Score:3)
Guess Apple forget that the Infinity Blade [epicgames.com] trilogy helped sell iPhones back in the day.
This email [house.gov] to Tim Cook back in 2015, iOS evangelist giving up apps based on appreview team, sheds further light on Apple continuing to shaft developers.
With Unreal Engine being free, source provided, and zero royalties [unrealengine.com] until 1 million in gross revenue, afterwards it is 5% after, it is hard to side with Apple's 30% greed.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't (Score:2)
If they relent, it's going to give every other developer a reason to try the same. If they don't, well, it basically makes Epic's case for them.
Plus there's always the looming sword of Damocles that users might notice that their favorite game/drug can only be gotten if they have an android phone.
Preliminary Injunction (Score:2)
Preliminary Injunction (Score:2)
You don't start a fight, unless you have an army of lawyers, who have assessed the risk an reward.
No UTF-8 and it's 2020 (Score:5, Informative)
I gave up hoping for UTF-8 years and years ago. I hoped for a while that pipedot.org would succeed, since it has a better interface and full UTF-8 support, but sadly no posts in over 2 years.
Still, it's very shameful to post UTF-8 in submissions that show up funky, especially in mid-2020.
Re: No UTF-8 and it's 2020 (Score:3)
Thereâ(TM)s no shame in posting UTF-8, just shame in shitty code and failure to fix a glaring bug. Thatâ(TM)s how much the owners of /. care about their âoecommunity.â
No UTF-8 and it's 2020 (Score:2)
Seriously...poop emojis 2020 FTW.
Re: (Score:3)
Stop posting UTF-8 garbage.
Go Ahead Apple, make our f**king day (Score:2)
Epic's Unreal engine does not good (let say like Unity3d) at mobile.
However, for the last 2 years, Epic has been extremely developer friendly. There are a lot of developer friendly moves such as free assets in each month, free quixel megascan access, increasing the revenue share limit for Unreal Engine to one million dollars, cutting only 5% from the game sold in the Epic Store.
Yes, game developers are not Linux zealots, however Apple seems to have a headache.
Monolopy (Score:4, Interesting)
Smart phone software is a duopoly: IOS and Android. That is a point of fact, so existing monopoly law applies. Duopoly is no defense against monopoly claims, since there has to be multiple options for a "free marketplace."
This is Epic's fundamental edge. They will maintain that Apple's behavior is classic monopolistic control, and that they deserve injunctive relief as a result. Apple threatening to cut off Epic's development license is adding fuel to the fire.
Apple and Google are both potential loosers here. They reap vast rewards by being unregulated monopolies in the smart phone ecosystem. If one of them looses a case on the issue of monopolistic practices, they will both be effected.
In the US, monopoly regulation has been dead for decades. That is the only reason Apple has been able to get away with their current practices. Still, even without regulators, it's possible to break a monopoly through civil litigation with existing law. In the EU there is more enforcement of anti-monopoly law. Therefore, it is likely that Apple will have to change their business model sooner rather then later.
Re: (Score:3)
That's how I always pronounce it anyways.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This just keeps getting better (Score:5, Funny)
I wonder if some lawyer at Apple got a kick out of giving Fortnite a fortnight to respond to the ultimatum.