4 ms·

Supporting Epic in this fight is just setting a dangerous precedent that big players should be able to just intimidate platform owners into giving them whatever

by xwdv 6y ago

Supporting Epic in this fight is just setting a dangerous precedent that big players should be able to just intimidate platform owners into giving them whatever terms they want. Don’t do it.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
How do you reconcile this opinion with the glaringly obvious counter that Apple swings its weight around in exactly that fashion?
- xwdv 6y ago
  A company should have the right to enforce the terms for its own platform.
  - gambiting 6y ago
    No, I think what they mean is that for instance, Apple Music is on Android, but Apple takes payments through its own platform, not through Google Play, therefore denying Google their 30% cut on apple music payments. Many smaller companies are not able to negotiate the same thing.
    - xwdv 6y ago
      Oh I didn’t know. I guess supporting Epic means that kind of behavior will just continue if they win...
      - icebraining 6y ago
        That's very unlikely, because the court can't force Apple to provide a special deal to Epic. Whatever decision they arrive at, it must be generally applicable.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      Massive off-topic aside: Would you mind stop referring to me as he, and more generally don't assume someones gender identity. Sorry about it, just shitting me off a bit lately.
      - gambiting 6y ago
        Huge apologies, I normally just use "they" when I don't know the gender, honestly no idea why I didn't do that here. Sorry about that.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - yyyk 6y ago
    Not if they're anti-competitive, like selectively using private APIs or forcing developers to use unrelated services (i.e. Apple payment processors).
Jare 6y ago
Wait, Epic is the big player in this fight?
tgb 6y ago
I assume that the Epic supporters rather are hoping to get Apple to reduce the 30% on all transactions (or on all transactions of some type), not just to get Epic to be a special case. I'm not sure they have a case, but I think you're misrepresenting them.
- m3kw9 6y ago
  Is their way to cover them selves in court. Otherwise it makes no difference to them. To ask for themselves or everyone
  - icebraining 6y ago
    Well, of course; if someone is supporting a company's position because of that company's "character", that would be absurd indeed. Both sides are doing it for profit. That doesn't mean we can't support one or the other on other grounds.
gameswithgo 6y ago
big players already get special terms from apple
methodin 6y ago
With no skin in the game, I could just as easily counter with: Supporting Apple in this fight is just setting a dangerous precedent that big players should be able to just intimidate platform developers into giving them whatever terms they want. Don't do it. Again I don't really have a concrete view but a lot of these discussions tend to boil down to preference against one party or the other and not objectively looking at the arguments from both sides. Replace Epic with one of your critical apps. Replace Apple with Google and the arguments are the same.
- xwdv 6y ago
  It’s a flawed argument, developers don’t come saying “we’ll give you 30% of our revenue if you let us build on your platform”. If they don’t like the terms they can simply choose to not develop there.
  - tortasaur 6y ago
    Or they can do what they're currently doing.
  - icebraining 6y ago
    And if Apple doesn't like US antitrust law, they can simply not make the App Store available in the US.
  - gambiting 6y ago
    >>If they don’t like the terms they can simply choose to not develop there. Sure, but sometimes, as a society, we decide that this is simply not ok. I know this is not a completely correct comparison, but the main counter against forcing businesses to accept non-white customers was "well, they can simply go somewhere else, what's the big deal". We as a society decided that no, actually, it is a big deal, and regardless of whether you can "simply" go somewhere else or not, you shouldn't have to. I'm hoping that this will be the first victory in a string of rulings forcing platform holders to open them up, because we value that more than we value the platform holders ability to keep them closed. Apple just happened to be first.
  - 6y ago
dkarp 6y ago
Epic is still the under dog here. They’re nothing compared to Apple. Even if this is all in Epic’s selfish best interest, that doesn’t matter if their interest is more aligned with smaller app developers’ interests. The balance of power is still shifted well towards Apple.
- gambiting 6y ago
  Weeeeell.....yes, except that Epic has Tencent behind their back, and while Apple is still bigger, Tencent isn't that far behind.
  - icebraining 6y ago
    True, but how much is Tencent really willing to dump behind this fight? There's only so much upside for them even if Epic wins.
    - gambiting 6y ago
      I guess that's what remains to be seen. But Epic seems to be throwing their most valuable property at it right now, so they must have some degree of confidence that a larger player will back them on this.
    - stock_toaster 6y ago
      How much would the CCP be willing to dump behind a fight to make one of the most valuable US company/brands in the world look bad? I'm betting.. a lot.
      - HatchedLake721 6y ago
        To gain what?
8note 6y ago
Apple seems to be the big player here, no? And it seems like Apple has already given the big players whatever terms they want, and epic is too small to get the same treatment
gambiting 6y ago
Absolutely disagree, this article made me really see both sides and how apple is in the wrong here: https://stratechery.com/2020/rethinking-the-app-store/ https://stratechery.com/2020/rethinking-the-app-store/
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

by xwdv 6y ago

Supporting Epic in this fight is just setting a dangerous precedent that big players should be able to just intimidate platform owners into giving them whatever terms they want. Don’t do it.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago

How do you reconcile this opinion with the glaringly obvious counter that Apple swings its weight around in exactly that fashion?

xwdv 6y ago
A company should have the right to enforce the terms for its own platform.
- gambiting 6y ago
  No, I think what they mean is that for instance, Apple Music is on Android, but Apple takes payments through its own platform, not through Google Play, therefore denying Google their 30% cut on apple music payments. Many smaller companies are not able to negotiate the same thing.
  - xwdv 6y ago
    Oh I didn’t know. I guess supporting Epic means that kind of behavior will just continue if they win...
    - icebraining 6y ago
      That's very unlikely, because the court can't force Apple to provide a special deal to Epic. Whatever decision they arrive at, it must be generally applicable.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    Massive off-topic aside: Would you mind stop referring to me as he, and more generally don't assume someones gender identity. Sorry about it, just shitting me off a bit lately.
    - gambiting 6y ago
      Huge apologies, I normally just use "they" when I don't know the gender, honestly no idea why I didn't do that here. Sorry about that.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- yyyk 6y ago
  Not if they're anti-competitive, like selectively using private APIs or forcing developers to use unrelated services (i.e. Apple payment processors).

Jare 6y ago

Wait, Epic is the big player in this fight?

tgb 6y ago

I assume that the Epic supporters rather are hoping to get Apple to reduce the 30% on all transactions (or on all transactions of some type), not just to get Epic to be a special case. I'm not sure they have a case, but I think you're misrepresenting them.

m3kw9 6y ago
Is their way to cover them selves in court. Otherwise it makes no difference to them. To ask for themselves or everyone
- icebraining 6y ago
  Well, of course; if someone is supporting a company's position because of that company's "character", that would be absurd indeed. Both sides are doing it for profit. That doesn't mean we can't support one or the other on other grounds.

gameswithgo 6y ago

big players already get special terms from apple

methodin 6y ago

With no skin in the game, I could just as easily counter with: Supporting Apple in this fight is just setting a dangerous precedent that big players should be able to just intimidate platform developers into giving them whatever terms they want. Don't do it. Again I don't really have a concrete view but a lot of these discussions tend to boil down to preference against one party or the other and not objectively looking at the arguments from both sides. Replace Epic with one of your critical apps. Replace Apple with Google and the arguments are the same.

xwdv 6y ago
It’s a flawed argument, developers don’t come saying “we’ll give you 30% of our revenue if you let us build on your platform”. If they don’t like the terms they can simply choose to not develop there.
- tortasaur 6y ago
  Or they can do what they're currently doing.
- icebraining 6y ago
  And if Apple doesn't like US antitrust law, they can simply not make the App Store available in the US.
- gambiting 6y ago
  >>If they don’t like the terms they can simply choose to not develop there. Sure, but sometimes, as a society, we decide that this is simply not ok. I know this is not a completely correct comparison, but the main counter against forcing businesses to accept non-white customers was "well, they can simply go somewhere else, what's the big deal". We as a society decided that no, actually, it is a big deal, and regardless of whether you can "simply" go somewhere else or not, you shouldn't have to. I'm hoping that this will be the first victory in a string of rulings forcing platform holders to open them up, because we value that more than we value the platform holders ability to keep them closed. Apple just happened to be first.
- 6y ago

dkarp 6y ago

Epic is still the under dog here. They’re nothing compared to Apple. Even if this is all in Epic’s selfish best interest, that doesn’t matter if their interest is more aligned with smaller app developers’ interests. The balance of power is still shifted well towards Apple.

gambiting 6y ago
Weeeeell.....yes, except that Epic has Tencent behind their back, and while Apple is still bigger, Tencent isn't that far behind.
- icebraining 6y ago
  True, but how much is Tencent really willing to dump behind this fight? There's only so much upside for them even if Epic wins.
  - gambiting 6y ago
    I guess that's what remains to be seen. But Epic seems to be throwing their most valuable property at it right now, so they must have some degree of confidence that a larger player will back them on this.
  - stock_toaster 6y ago
    How much would the CCP be willing to dump behind a fight to make one of the most valuable US company/brands in the world look bad? I'm betting.. a lot.
    - HatchedLake721 6y ago
      To gain what?

8note 6y ago

Apple seems to be the big player here, no? And it seems like Apple has already given the big players whatever terms they want, and epic is too small to get the same treatment

gambiting 6y ago

Absolutely disagree, this article made me really see both sides and how apple is in the wrong here: https://stratechery.com/2020/rethinking-the-app-store/ https://stratechery.com/2020/rethinking-the-app-store/

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]