21 ms·
Apple removes Fortnite from App Store after Epic attempts to bypass fees
- xwdv 6y agoSaying the App Store is a monopoly every chance you get doesn’t mean it actually is.
- an_ko 6y agoAnd vice versa: saying it isn't doesn't mean it actually isn't. Opinions are unproductive to discuss without reasoning attached.
- EE84M3i 6y agoThe Verge has a statement from apple: https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21366438/apple-fortnite-ios-app-store-violations-epic-payments https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21366438/apple-fortnite-i...
- bredren 6y agoConcluding points from the statement: >Epic agreed to the App Store terms and guidelines freely and we’re glad they’ve built such a successful business on the App Store. >The fact that their business interests now lead them to push for a special arrangement does not change the fact that these guidelines create a level playing field for all developers and make the store safe for all users.
- aaomidi 6y ago> Epic agreed to the App Store terms and guidelines freely lol.
- almost_usual 6y agoare you suggesting they were threatened?
- mamurphy 6y agoare you suggesting they had any alternative if they wanted to pursue iPhone customers?
- yazaddaruvala 6y agoEpic doesn't need to pursue Apple iPhone customers they same way Epic doesn't need to pursue Sony Bravia customers. This is the same as Bungee not needing to pursue Playstation customers to make Halo what it is.
- aaomidi 6y agoIPhone is a general computing platform so that argument doesn't hold water.
- yazaddaruvala 6y agoWhy is it more of a "general computing platform" than an Xbox or a Playstation or a Bravia? All of those platforms have stores, all of them allow digital downloads of software that executes, all of those have browsers. What makes the iPhone "general purpose" where the others are not?
- aaomidi 6y agoProbably the fact that no one made a fuss over consoles. I'd argue the same rules should start applying for them as well. But there was nothing stopping Microsoft from releasing halo onto the playstation. There is nothing stopping anyone from developing a game for these consoles.
- yazaddaruvala 6y agoAnd there is nothing stopping Epic from releasing Fortnite on the iPhone (in-fact it was there for years). The rules could be unfair[1] but this issue is just Epic not wanting to follow the rules to make some more money. [1] We can discuss what a fair price/percentage should be. Arguably the market and Apple customers have decided 30% is fair, but we can discuss. Meanwhile, side-loading or not charging would make my iPhone experience worse.
- laloyosoy 6y ago[insert michael jackson popcorn meme]
- FreakyT 6y agoReally hoping regulators crack down hard on Apple's clearly anticompetitive practices. If Apple allowed sideloading the entire point would be, of course, moot, but Apple's continued refusal to allow this is really the biggest problem, IMO.
- floydnoel 6y agowell they do allow that, users have to reinstall every week though.
- KMnO4 6y agoFree certificates last a week. You can also pay Apple $99 to get a certificate that lasts a year, or pay a "UDID registration" website around $10 for the same (with some limitations).
- girishso 6y agoWhat’s UDID registration website?
- gruez 6y agoRandom result: https://www.udidregistrations.com/ https://www.udidregistrations.com/ >Starting at $8.99, we also provide Certificate & Provisioning files that can be used to install any app, including apps you've created and those not found on the App Store. Looks like they're essentially "sharing" developer accounts.
- KMnO4 6y agoIn order to test developer beta releases, you need a paid Apple developer account. Obviously it wouldn't be great if you had to pay $99 for every device (or employee at your business) just to test on the latest beta release, so Apple allows you to register up to 100 devices on your paid developer account. Some people realized that they could sell each of those 100 slots at $5-10 to people who really wanted to use the beta (NB: previously iOS did not have public betas), hence "UDID registration". Later, some of those people realized they could also sell you the code signing certificate that's generated by the real Apple developer account; valid for up to 1 year. That means you have the option of purchasing a real code signing certificate that allows you to sideload apps on non-jailbroken iPhones.
- epaga 6y agoThis is not surprising to me, and I have to say, I completely agree with it. Epic publicly and blatantly bypassed multiple App Store restrictions with their move today. Surely they were expecting this to happen, so what comes next? Perhaps Epic has been planning a major lawsuit and this will provide them with the reason to launch it? Edit: https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1293984290326433792 https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1293984290326433792 They have an entire short prepared for this. This is nothing if not fascinating deep-level company poker.
- untog 6y agoI'm very sure Epic saw this coming. I assume they, and many others, are spoiling for a fight with Apple over this and are willing to take this risk in bringing public opinion with them.
- threeseed 6y agoOf course they did. It's to coincide with EU/US investigations into the Apple and Google App Stores.
- naravara 6y agoThis seems ill-advised for Epic, in particular. The fight they're picking will logically end in a regulatory hammer coming down and that hammer is going to hit Epic a lot harder than Apple just because Epic is even more reliant on extracting revenue from being a platform owner than Apple is.
- Benjamin_Dobell 6y agoEpic's platform is Unreal Engine. The key difference is Unreal Engine is not the only game engine. You can use another game engine and gain access to the exact same user base. You could certainly argue Epic Games have made anti-competitive plays. However, they're not stupid, they even fund their "competitors" https://gamefromscratch.com/godot-receives-epic-megagrant/ https://gamefromscratch.com/godot-receives-epic-megagrant/.
- wedn3sday 6y agoHow is the apple app store not the definition of a monopoly? Is there an competing app store on iphones that Epic could be using?
- ghshephard 6y agoI think the argument is, you can always go use an Android phone if you don't like the iPhone. Apple has a monopoly on its app-store the same way Amazon has a monopoly on what (and how) it sells on AWS for services.
- ardy42 6y ago> How is the apple app store not the definition of a monopoly? Is there an competing app store on iphones that Epic could be using? I think it's all about how you define the market. Is the market for "apps on the iPhone" or "computer software in general"? Apple has monopoly control of the former but not the latter.
- snapetom 6y agoThis. Antitrust lawsuits almost always focus on what exactly the market is that the players play in. "Monopoly" is a highly technical economic and legal term that is scrutinized on a case-by-case basis. It is not the broad stroke that the public likes to use.
- untog 6y agoBecause the iPhone is not a monopoly. Apparently Apple has 58% of the smartphone market in the US so it's not really all that comparable to Microsoft back in the day. So if you don't like the App Store, you can switch to Android. (I personally don't agree with this viewpoint but it's how it is viewed by many. For one, I've spent $X on iOS apps, if I switch platforms I lose all of those apps. Feels unfair!)
- jaegerpicker 6y agoThere are a ton of competing app stores, the fact that you can't access them on an iPhone means nothing. Apple made a platform, they have every right to set the rules. Don't like it go somewhere else there are plenty of other choices.
- xoxoy 6y agoFortnite of course expected this: seems like they’ve prepared a short video mocking Apple’s old super bowl ad 1984 to premiere in an hour https://twitter.com/fortnitegame/status/1293984290326433792?s=21 https://twitter.com/fortnitegame/status/1293984290326433792?...
- ecf 6y agoDoesn’t Epic take a cut out of every single purchase made of a game built with Unreal Engine? Seems kinda hypocritical that they’re taking this stance when their licensing model is arguably just as burdensome on developers. In my opinion, Epic should not put their app on the App Store if they don’t like the terms, just as they would tell a developer to not use their engine if they don’t like the terms.
- lfowles 6y ago> Doesn’t Epic take a cut out of every single purchase made of a game built with Unreal Engine? Only those that make >$1mil lifetime gross.
- moron4hire 6y agoNote that $1mil lifetime revenue is a very low boundary. A very small consulting operation of 2 or 3 people could easily hit that in a year or two. A single freelancer could probably hit it in 4 or 5 years. It's easy to read "a million dollars!" And think "we're rich!", but running any business has a lot of overhead.
- mirthflat83 6y agoLmao
- elliekelly 6y agoWhat is Apple’s end game here? It seems like they’re fighting a losing battle and digging their own antitrust grave. Pretty clever on Epic’s part to specifically highlight how Apple’s app store fee hits the user directly. Pretty short-sighted of Apple to immediately pull an app for providing consumers with additional disclosure about where their money is going.
- donor20 6y agoGood lord - on HN the monopoly comments are so crazy sometimes. What is the monopoly issue Apple has? Use android if you don't like Apple's product line. Apple is at 22% share.
- rbecker 6y ago'Monopoly' is just a poorly phrased way of saying abuse of market power. Edit as reply: I'm not accusing them of breaking a law, but of abusing their position. That there might not yet be a law against this specific kind of abuse doesn't make the practice any less abusive.
- ashtonkem 6y agoIf you are accusing Apple of doing something contrary to US law, you have to be specific about what that is. What do you mean by "abuse of market power"? What is the law or regulation that you are accusing Apple of being in breach of?
- itsovermyhead 6y agoIt's not about using a different OS. The monopoly is that if you want to distribute through Apple, you have to go through their app store. There's not another app store that you can go through. At least with Android you can go through f-droid if you don't like the Play Store.
- ecf 6y agoThat’s not a monopoly though. No one is being forced into using an iOS device. A monopoly would be if Apple was literally the only smartphone manufacturer in the entire world.
- adrianmonk 6y agoSo, what is Epic's plan? I have to assume they fully expected removal. So they must have some next step in mind. Some kind of legal action? A complaint to regulators or a lawsuit? Are either of those likely to work?
- kevingadd 6y agoMight be as simple as "let our players do the talking" since Fortnite has a huge audience and many of the players are really passionate.
- almost_usual 6y agoApple has more cash stockpiled than most companies on Earth, I think they’ll survive the fallout of Fortnite gamers.
- badwolf 6y agohttps://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1293994211621167105 https://twitter.com/FortniteGame/status/1293994211621167105 They absolutely expected this.
- nabla9 6y agoApple platform is closed like gaming consoles. Epic almost certainly knew this was going to happen. I think they are trying to build a case for regulatory intervention. US Antitrust is still in the 80's Chicago School era where antitrust is solely based on consumer benefit and and efficiency. EU has more broad approach where economic power in the public interest is important. It may be up to the EU to change how Apple does business.
- stefan_ 6y agoThis seems like a close and shut case of consumer harm right here.
- basch 6y agoApple can argue its 30% surcharge protects consumers from their payment information being tied to each individual product, making canceling easier and buying things safer.
- gruez 6y agoPaypal does the same thing and charges an order of magnitude less.
- voidpointercast 6y agowhich I very much agree with.
- nrb 6y ago... and competitors do the same for less than a tenth of that cost. The only thing that allows them to do so is complete control over the ecosystem to shut out all competition.
- basch 6y agoThat's literally the value add Apple is selling. A completely controlled ecosystem not infiltrated by 20 payment middle men. Youre paying a premium for noise filtering.
- bdz 6y agoIf any company then I think Tencent has the money and will to bring Apple to the court (they have 40% share in Epic). And won't be surprised if this will be a new chapter in the US v China trade fight.
- AkelaA 6y agoIn a way this is the equivalent of an old-school carriage dispute but for apps. I wouldn't be surprised if we see more of this in the future. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carriage_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carriage_dispute
- pgrote 6y agoI am ignorant of the rules applying to apps with payments in the apple app store. Is it true retailers do not have to pay a percentage to Apple when people pay to reload cards through the app? https://twitter.com/ballmatthew/status/1293893660493455360 https://twitter.com/ballmatthew/status/1293893660493455360 "Wow. Epic outright promoting direct in-app payment around iOS store but in iOS apps And users collect 100% of the savings. No monetary benefit to Epic. Note: McDonalds, Starbucks, et al are 'allowed' to do this today - but not gaming/media cos"
- kayodelycaon 6y agoPhysical and digital goods are treated differently.
- mrep 6y agoWow, what they did is brilliant. Direct way to show consumer harm due to the iOS fees.
- heavyset_go 6y agoApple and Google are able to gatekeep what you can install on entire generations of devices, from smartphones to tablets. Their power to gatekeep billion dollar markets needs to be looked at through the lens of antitrust legislation.
- Sargos 6y agoMore people in the world use mobile devices than PCs by a huge margin. These two corporations essentially decide what apps humanity is allowed to use and how all software and services are built. That is a lot of power and it shouldn't be used for the benefit of a single corporation. Pardon my hyperbole but this is nearing the level of a human rights issue. The freedom to run the apps and services you want to is so core to the way our society works that most people don't think about it. Having one corporation dictate how all apps for the entire world work is not compatible with a free society and actively harms innovation. This is becoming a big problem and regulations are being very slow to react to it.
- josephcsible 6y agoDon't lump Google in with Apple here. Android lets you sideload apps.
- MikusR 6y agoApple yes. Google no. You can install 3rd party stores and freely sideload apps.
- heavyset_go 6y agoI don't think "freely" is the adverb I'd use to describe the sideloading process, considering how "freely" and effortlessly I can install apps in Google's preferred way through the Play Store. Google made it so third party app stores like F-Droid can't even implement auto-upgrading, or background installations of apps. App stores outside of the Play Store and 3rd party apps are 2nd class citizens on Android. It is similar to how Gatekeeper works in macOS. Developers that didn't pay Apple $100 a year to develop and notarize software have their apps get treated like they're radioactive by Gatekeeper.
- ryneandal 6y agoGiven Epic's history, this is entirely them taking the lead and trying to fight for smaller game devs. Kudos to them.
- voidpointercast 6y agoThat seems blindly naive but okay.
- ryneandal 6y agoI mean, there's obviously business-related reasons as well, but cutting dev cuts to 12% on EGS, waiving royalties on first $1MM of revenue for UE5 games, and providing source for UE4 have all been incredibly massive boons to the indie game dev scene. Benevolence within the industry can foster good will with developers, which positively impacts their bottom line.
- calcifer 6y agoHow so? If, over the long term, Epic wins this fight (e.g via an antitrust case) Apple would either allow sideloading, or reduce their cut. How is that not a benefit for small developers?
- iamspoilt 6y agoQuestion: How is Apple's 30% cut different from the transaction fees that are charged by Visa / Mastercard and payment processors like Stripe? I can see the big percentage but is the argument in favour of removing the entirety of the cut or reducing it down?
- oh_sigh 6y agoI think you're right in that the argument is against the huge, rent-seeking percentage, and not necessarily the concept of taking a percentage. If Apple forced all payments to go through them and added only a few percent on top, I doubt this would be as big of an issue.
- paxys 6y ago1. The percentage cut is a lot more in Apple's case (30% vs 2-3%). 2. (Directly resulting into 1) There is no competition for distributing apps on Apple devices. You cannot sideload or implement your own app store. You cannot use any other payment processor.
- kps 6y agoVisa / Mastercard don't forbid you to use Amex or cash.
- jdmoreira 6y agoPeople will take sides in this and I think they will be missing the point. These are just 2 greedy corporations strong-arming each other and trying to win some hearts in the public space. Epic would do the same if they were in Apple's position and Apple would do the same if they were in Epic's position. This is just 21st century politics and it’s all about money.
- arduinomancer 6y agoI don't think that matters because its clear the end consumer would benefit here if epic were allowed their own payment system.
- jdmoreira 6y agoDo you really think they wouldn’t maximize their profit anyway? Being more expensive in the appstore is just politics.
- mrep 6y agopgrote posted this tweet elsewhere in the thread [0]. They literally gave users the option for apple app store pay for $9.99 and Epic direct payment as $7.99. [0]: https://twitter.com/ballmatthew/status/1293893660493455360 https://twitter.com/ballmatthew/status/1293893660493455360
- jdmoreira 6y agoWhich is just a genius PR move
- Sargos 6y agoThis is a naive take on the situation. Sure they are both companies and looking to make money but this issue transcends both of them and is a core freedom of choice issue. As a society are we allowed to run software that we want or are we okay with being told which software is deemed acceptable for us? This question would be thorny if it even were a political issue but at this point it's literally a private corporation with no accountability unilaterally deciding what software is deemed worthy of use for a large portion of the entire world. That's dangerous and not at all a good place to be in.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- cosmotic 6y agoApple famously makes its money on the hardware; if they claim the cut is for the app store tools, then they better start charging less for the hardware. If the tools are indeed paid for by the hardware sales, they should reduce or eliminate the cut they take. Based on the reports of how hard it is to develop for the app store and all the third party tools to help deal with signing apps, I have a hard time believing the self-proclaimed greatness of the tools Apple provides. Apple claims level playing field, but that's obviously nonsense.
- elicash 6y agoThis is really bad for Apple users like me and ultimately for Apple. People are talking anti-trust, but I don't think it'll take a legal case for them to eventually lose this broader fight. Apple has enough money they COULD do whatever they want for as long as they want, but if this grows to even more companies, Apple's negotiating position becomes weaker.
- simonhamp 6y agoIn all this dick-measuring, the people that lose out are the consumers. Apple maintaining a stupid and unjustifiable premium forced higher prices. Companies retaliating with this sort of posturing from Epic forces App Store removals and worse. Epic are hypocrites. Apple are greedy. I’ll back the horse that’s neither
- jnetterf 6y agoIs it time for Epic to invest in the PinePhone?
- jariel 6y agoThis is great news, it will take a handfull of 'killer apps' to possibly move the needle. App makers could start to 'play games' like trying different pricing models that 'go outside the bounds' and the 'come back' - making sure to blame Apple for the problems. App makers could group together and 'go black' for a few days in protes. App makers could group together and all circumvent the rules at the same time.
- smnrchrds 6y agoDiscussion of Apple topics here on HN almost always gets reduced to the argument that Apple is not a monopoly, so what they are doing is OK. I want to present an alternative viewpoint. It's not a monopoly issue, it is an anti-competitive issue. In Canada, we have three major cell carriers. None of them has a monopoly, or anything close to it. None of them has even 50% market share. You can have a 10 GB smartphone plan with Rogers for $75. If you don't like that, you can switch to Bell's 10 GB plan for $75. If you don't like Bell, of course you can switch to Telus's 10 GB plan for, wait for it, $75. The Big 3 operate smaller brands with fewer bells and whistles and lower costs. You can get a 4 GB cell plan from Koodo (Telus subsidiary) for $50, or from Fido (Rogers subsidiary) for $50, or from Virgin Mobile (Bell subsidiary) for $50. Sometimes one of them has promotional pricing, like $45 instead of $50 for 4GB. The other two offer the same pricing for the same duration. Sometimes one of them increases their prices by $5 a month citing reasons such as infrastructure investments, lower Canadian dollar value, or inflation. The other two increase their prices by the same amount a couple of days later. And none of this is collusion in the legal sense. They don't gather in smoke-filled rooms and decide how to screw over their customers. There is not back-channel communication whatsoever. And it is not because the competition is so perfect the prices have been commoditized. In fact, Canada has some of the highest cell plan prices in the world, even adjusting for factors such as population density and GDP. It's just that the big companies have decided to stop competing. If you live in, say Alberta or Ontario or BC, you have three options and they are all the same overpriced crap. Cell carriers in Canada are not a monopoly, but you don't have to be a monopoly to harm customers with anti-competitive behaviour. Apple and Google, Android and iOS do not have a monopoly or a collusion agreement. But they are harming the customers all the same.
- chodeboy 6y agoI think the word you are looking for is oligopoly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
- grandinj 6y agoYup. We have similar behaviour with cell phone companies here in South Africa. The big two have reached a stable state, are happy with their market share, and know that as long as they don't directly talk to each other when raising prices, they are legally in the clear.
- cocktailpeanuts 6y agoIt's interesting how the industry is shaking up in so many different ways lately. 1. TikTok and WeChat getting banned (This will also have a huge side effect for Apple) 2. Uber and Lyft regulated to classify drivers as employees 3. Influential companies trying to tear down the Apple payment walled garden (Last time it was Hey, but this time it's Fortnite, which is infinitely more formidable). Now the only thing left is for Google to come out and say "we're going to charge zero commission for our in-app payments", and the wall will be down pretty soon. I feel like there's some pattern here that may change the overall game of the tech industry. Grabbing some popcorn and waiting for new opportunities to open up!
- isoprophlex 6y agoAbout popcorn... On a smaller scale, I can't wait to read the scathing, cynical take n-gate.com will no doubt have on these HN threads
- foepys 6y agoYou could say that the disruption is being disrupted. Regulators are slowly getting sick of the tech industry's behavior of overthrowing markets by VC-ing out competitors to establish their own monopoly all while dodging taxes through global schemes.
- ghiculescu 6y agoThat was quick https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf
- Leherenn 6y agoHow does it technically work? Is the app forcibly removed from every phone that has it, or is it just not downloadable/upgradable anymore. If the latter, can people who have it already keep on playing or are there some other obstacles involved?
- areoform 6y agoThe transparent sophistication of this ploy is strangely delightful. And very reminiscent of Steve Jobs' e-book negotiation emails, https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-steve-jobs-emails-that-show-how-to-win-a-hard-nosed-negotiation/276136/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/05/the-ste... We have been given court-side seats to a sophisticated game of feints and dramatic negotiation. Pre-Game, Epic lined their shot with care. They've come prepared with media and assets, (no doubt) lawyers (and potential lawsuits?), PR strategy, regulatory strategy etc. They know the argument they would like to make. And they know how to make it. How will Apple respond? Will Epic's strong start lead to a strong finish? Their machinations have been laid scandalously bare. If you listen closely, you can hear your local business school clickety-clacking away to a ludicrously overpriced case study. And the local #hustle blogger RSI their way to a million views. O'Think of the great blog posts and MBA lessons this drama will make! edit: and they've filed for relief! https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf
- samcat116 6y agoHas Google done anything yet? This is in violation of their guidelines as well from what I can tell. On the Google Play store only games must use the Play Store In App purchase system. Other types of apps can link to their own.
- Sargos 6y agoThis is a highly technical forum so I really think all of the "Apple is within their rights to determine what software users can run" folks should think about how they would feel if Windows could only run software that Microsoft publishes. Are you okay with that? Does the fact that Linux exists make this okay? It sounds like the answer from a lot of people is "Yes, of course" which baffles me. It doesn't take much imagination to see how different the world would be if a single corporation decided what software was allowed to be used by society. Anything that is the least bit controversial wouldn't exist. Napster, Torrents, Emulators etc are obvious and people would no doubt argue they shouldn't exist anyway, but I imagine even web browsers themselves (Apple already doesn't allow them on iOS), networking tools like IPFS, game streaming services (also banned by Apple), etc just wouldn't exist in that world. I could go on with examples but that's the point, there's a LOT of creativity and complexity out there and it's impossible for a single gatekeeper to do a good job of deciding what has a right to exist.
- Sargos 6y agoMy post is being downvoted and I have no idea why. I didn't say anything against the rules and wasn't being annoying I don't think. I guess this topic is too political for discussion.
- makecheck 6y agoThis is one of the games Apple likes to “feature” regularly. They basically strongly encouraged people to buy this game one week, and yanked it from the store the week after. The game “owners” should be livid.
- jbarnett2 6y agoIt's like you're dating a hot girl and you like showing her off. Then you find out the next week she cheated on you then you dump her. Wouldn't you do the same thing in Apple's position?
- rvz 6y agoWell that was expected and was quick wasn't it? Unfortunately Apple's the sherrif in the app store and doesn't give a damn. Unreal.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- justicezyx 6y agoI feel that Apple made a mistake. App store fees are on the unjustified side in the current spectrum of value assessment. The more reasonable approach is to figure out ways for customers to get more values from the platform, instead of extracting more efficiently. I bet this decision is some form of lower-to-middle level decision, without consulting Tim and his close subordinates. I would expect Tim and his close subordinates to be sensitive enough to at least not doing something so abruptly (not that it's not complying with the rules). I would guess this decision didn't even surfaced to VP level. AFAIK, VPs should be owning such sensitive decisions at Apple.
- sjs382 6y agoEpic has filed a legal complaint, according to their Twitter account: https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf
- EastSmith 6y agoMonopoly definition is so much outdated. Everything that has 10% market share should have some kind of regulation for things like this. Defining things like this is hard though. What to regulate is hard too.
- Exuma 6y agoAWESOME. Fortnite not following rules = good riddance. I don't want 528925 apps with different payment platforms and rules.
- XCSme 6y agoThe problem are not the rules on the App Store (that Epic actually breached), but the App Store having a monopoly as you can't easily install external apps or stores like you can on Android.
- jedberg 6y agoHere's the short they just released making fun of Apple's 1984 commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqTNO8LTggI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqTNO8LTggI Edit: The youtube comments are hilarious because no one knows what it's a spoof of. For those who don't know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zfqw8nhUwA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zfqw8nhUwA
- vjba 6y agoReading the announcement post on HN: "This will surely piss of Google and Apple"... Then I read the title to this post... directly under it. What a day
- tomxor 6y agoThe quantity of twitter replies along these lines is sad: > Why would epic even do this.... they know the rules. Why would they expect to use another companies platform for free. With apple 100% on this. Use? they add value to the platform, Apple is just double dipping because crazy hardware markup wasn't enough for them. Are people really this blind?
- foepys 6y agoI wonder if people were still with Apple if Apple charged them 30% for using Apple Pay.
- totaldude87 6y agoreplied to another thread.... ok am going to put a highly objectionable comment. I buy stuff on apple store because its easy and SAFE. That safety point is more important than ever, if there was no app store or lets say having 10 other app stores , i wont have the same level of confidence and heck i wont even be spending any dollars out there. Over to Apple's 30 % cut, i dont know whats the call here, to make it 0%? ,10% , 20%? what if the same fortnite (or any other company) increases the bill to $9.99 next week :) Am saying this purely from a consumer perspective that i dont care how apple and devs split the money as long as it doesn't bite me ...
- dayjobpork 6y agoIf there was another app store, no one is forcing you to use it.
- joisig 6y agoI sometimes wonder why app makers don't "unionize", to collectively threaten to boycott the Apple ecosystem, to pressure Apple into reducing its cut. An iPhone without apps is much less valuable than an iPhone with apps.
- tazedsoul 6y agoRemarkable that TikTok is still available on the App Store, despite the risk it poses to national security. I guess Apple and China sleeping together is truly a case of friends with benefits. Maybe Epic Games should please Apple more often?
- sercand 6y agoEpic games kind of Tencent (a Chinese company) subsidiary, it has 40% share.
- tazedsoul 6y agoThere are about 5 times as many TikTok users as Fortnite players. I suppose that is a part of the calculation as well.
- tazedsoul 6y agoAlso, perhaps I’m mistaken, but the majority of Epic Games is owned by Tim Sweeney. Meanwhile, TikTok majority is owned by ByteDance, which I don’t think we can confidently believe is truly a separate, sovereign entity from the CPC. And all this is somewhat besides the point; Apple is clearly more dependent on TikTok (China) than Epic Games.
- vffhfhf 6y agoI dont think people here actually understand why monopolies are bad. Its not for consumers. Consumers will always feel safe with what they have. Its to not stifle the competition. Look what happened to vine. A competitor bought it, twitter. Gutted it and left it. It could have been next tiktok in a few years. We would never know. How many competitor have google and apple stiffed?
- Wolfenstein98k 6y agoI find it obscene that Apple feels it deserves a third of each and every microtransaction. I also find out obscene that Epic tried to used its size to circumvent that when its smaller competitors wouldn't dream of doing so. But I'm more annoyed by the first bit. It's such an obscene cut to take when it's clear you are only facilitating the transaction by choice instead of by necessity.
- ctdonath 6y agoThis is about nothing, folks. Literally. Epic sells usage ("v-bucks") which would cost them nothing to supply 'unlimited'. Apple, having a standard of "in-app sales, we get 30%", wants their cut of making a bundle via the Apple ecosystem.
- minusSeven 6y agoBoy am I glad I use Android instead. Never used an Apple product before and if things are like this I don't see why I should.