15 ms·

This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it's not like Epic is fully innocent here. But what they are doing is brilliant, beca

This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it's not like Epic is fully innocent here. But what they are doing is brilliant, because they have just demonstrated that their perceived infringement of the iOS rules has caused them to also lose Mac developer access, presumably due to it being the same account. But legally, the iOS and the Mac developer agreements are separate contracts. So from a legal standpoint, Apple has reacted to a perceived infringement in one contract by retaliating in a legally unrelated contract. That might be illegal. And in addition, Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway. I'm curious to see how this will mix with Apple silicon, which will effectively make running a stock Windows impossible. So in the future, you'll need to choose when buying your hardware if you want phone-quality games on Mac or triple A on PC. I predict that the market segment of casual players using Apple hardware but Windows Bootcamp will now be driven away from Apple. In my opinion, the only way to avoid that would have been for Apple to demonstrate excellent UE5 performance on Apple silicon, but that now surely won't happen.

Terretta 6y ago
On Windows, Microsoft is trying to extend the Xbox-exclusive store to cover Windows 10 gaming. On Mac you can distribute outside Apple’s App store[1,2,3], as you can on Windows. But Microsoft is laying groundwork for shift towards Apple’s model. 1. https://setapp.com/ https://setapp.com/ 2. https://www.gog.com/games?system=osx_106,osx_107&sort=popularity&page=1 https://www.gog.com/games?system=osx_106,osx_107&sort=popula... 3. https://store.steampowered.com/macos https://store.steampowered.com/macos
- flohofwoe 6y ago
  Microsoft has been trying to "boil the frog" for a long time now, but that has always failed, and it will fail as long as Windows remains relevant as a gaming platform. MS might be the captain of the ship, but they never owned the ship, despite their best attempts. For gamers, the current power equilibrium on the Windows platform with multiple competing stores is pretty much perfect. Even Microsoft caved in and started to offer their games on Steam too instead of insisting on making them Windows Store exclusives.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Their only mistake was not making the store Win32 from the get go, but as their Windows 10X roadmap and Project Reunion reboot shows, that will eventually arrive. Classical PCs are now a niche in a consumer world full with laptops and tablets. Little frogs will keep complaining without noticing that it has actually already taken place.
    - flohofwoe 6y ago
      Microsoft can do what they want with their own store because nobody cares about it anyway. And the moment they try to "ban" Steam, Epic Store, Gog etc, they essentially kill Windows as gaming platform and turn it into a business-only offering. I don't think that's in their own interest (as their renewed interest in PC gaming demonstrates).
      - pjmlp 6y ago
        Apparently you missed what Windows 10X is all about. "How Windows 10X runs UWP and Win32 apps" https://youtu.be/ztrmrIlgbIc https://youtu.be/ztrmrIlgbIc Due to the situation we are all in, Windows 10X plans have been put aside for the time being, but rest assured they will be back when the world returns to business as usual. Windows as gaming platform has managed quite well without Steam, Epic Store, Gog, no need to pollute my OS with third party garbage.
        Macha 6y ago
        What games are you playing? Digital PC games pretty much universally have launchers needed, whether it's a store like Steam or Epic, or publisher specific like Uplay, Paradox or Blizzard's. Physical PC sales have barely been a thing for the last decade. Even when you could get it, by the end they were usually a key for a given retailer and a disc that had a much outdated version of the game to initially install on only to download as much in patches.
        pjmlp 6y ago
abduhl 6y ago
Regardless of how you feel about Apple versus Epic, we should all be clear about one thing here: there is no "perceived" infringement of the iOS rules. Epic broke the rules. They do not even try to deny that they breached their contract with Apple in their lawsuit, but rather attack the contract directly as being illegal. Their approach is analogous to you being caught going 120 miles per hour in a 45 mile per hour zone and you challenging whether the speed limit is legal.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  Epic's stance is that the rule was never enforceable to begin with, which would make breaking that rule not an infringement of the contract. But in any case, no court has ruled in Apple's favor yet, and Epic denies their claim, so at the moment the infringement is perceived to exist by Apple, but not proven as fact yet.
  - abduhl 6y ago
    That is a very weird way to interpret the phrase "broke the rule." Just because the rule is invalid does not mean that you didn't break it, it just means that you can't be punished for breaking it.
    - stevehawk 6y ago
      It's kind of how it works. Like, if I sign a contract with Company A that is, by legal definitions, invalid, then they can't sue me for breach of contract because it was never a valid contract to begin with. I assume that's one of the arguments that Epic is making here.
      - abduhl 6y ago
        This is a giant misunderstanding of how contract law works. Company A can certainly sue you for breach of contract and the burden of proof would be on you to show that the contract is invalid. The law looks kindly upon the aggrieved party and frowns upon parties that breach a contract. I'm sure you can come up with plenty of examples of contracts that are on their face invalid and which would be ludicrous to sue over ("what if it was a contract to kill someone!?"); however, the contract at issue here is certainly not so clear cut and, even in those cases, they could still sue you for breach of contract and you would need to still prove that the contract is invalid (no matter how easily it could be done). A subsidiary question: if the contract is so obviously illegal, why did you (or Epic) agree to it?
nodamage 6y ago
> But legally, the iOS and the Mac developer agreements are separate contracts. This might have been true in the past but I don't believe it's true anymore. The two have been combined into a single program governed by the Apple Developer Program License Agreement which can be found here: https://developer.apple.com/terms/ https://developer.apple.com/terms/
- pornel 6y ago
  What's really troubling is that a legitimate anti-malware feature has been tied to "we can do whatever we want" TOS. The Developer Id system was a decent compromise: gave developers way out from App Store walled garden, and still protected users from random "Update your Flash!" malware downloads. But now Apple has demonstrated that it will use it as a weapon in App Store disputes, even on a different platform, even when the Developer Id app clearly isn't malware, and the Mac app didn't violate any rules.
  - ArchOversight 6y ago
    Code signing has been a thing for a while, Windows has had it for ages. With Windows though you have to get a cert from an authorized partner, with Apple you go directly to the source. That includes agreeing with the terms of the developer agreement, which clearly states that if you violate the rules, you lose access to your developer account, and thus access to the signing keys to sign new applications.
    - donmcronald 6y ago
      There's a difference between those two systems. You can get normal code signing certs from multiple vendors and if one of them unfairly revokes your certificate [1] it doesn't prevent you from getting one from another vendor. If your business is big enough you might even have more than one code signing certificate on hand. Compare that to a developer account (Apple, Google, or Microsoft) where there's ONE vendor for the signing certificate and it comes along with a significantly more complex (developer) agreement that includes curation and (often arbitrary) requirements and ToS. 1. https://it.slashdot.org/story/19/06/02/0042209/ask-slashdot-what-to-do-when-your-certificate-authority-suddenly-revokes-your-cert https://it.slashdot.org/story/19/06/02/0042209/ask-slashdot-...
hrktb 6y ago
> This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it's not like Epic is fully innocent here. It looks more and more like Apple made a mistake in blocking the developper account. Arguably the reaction should have stopped at pulling Fortnite out of the store. If extra steps were really needed, forcing suppression of Fortnite from existing iOS devices could have been accepted as a related measure. But blocking the whole developper account is so overreaching it still generates news weeks after the initial issue. It feels like Epic waived a red cloth and Apple just ran full speed into it. I see the current mess completely of Apple's own doing.
- cma 6y ago
  It was even crazier when they tried to deactivate their Apple signin users. Apple has just a few months ago started mandating you allow Apple sign in if you allow any other third party sign in. This gives Apple a huge hammer over your business, as it causes Apple sign in to leak into your web properties or properties on other platforms and Apple now has a hammer over some portion of your users who didn't even find your stuff through their store or even their devices or have moved on from using those devices.
  - paxys 6y ago
    Yeah that was the worst one for me. They don't even have user email addresses in all cases, so those users are just permanently lost. People were hailing it as a great privacy move (which it still may be), but it gives Apple a massive lock-in advantage.
    - katbyte 6y ago
      tbh i use it when i don't really care and whatever rando app required a login for some reason. For that purpose it's fantastic and no different then google/fb/ect except more private. for anything i care about i use a real email/password
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Exactly. I get to choose who I want to have my email address. If it is a company I trust, I give them my real email address.
nojito 6y ago
It's brilliant in terms of marketing. It's not so brilliant in terms of actual legal reasons.
Razengan 6y ago
> Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway. Everyone serious about gaming is going to have a console too. Most AAAAs are exclusive to consoles for a year or more (GTA V, RDR 2, FF7RM, Bloodborne, and many others). Even if you had the most tweaked out PC you'd still be waiting for some of the latest and hottest to get ported. I used to be Windows-only until about a decade ago, and between Mac-compatible games, CrossOver/VMs, consoles and handhelds, I don't really miss the PC.
- verall 6y ago
  Not neccesarily - I know tons of people happy they waited for GTA V on PC since they really took care to beef up graphics and work out bugs. PC gaming is at a huge high point in the last decade or so, thanks in large part to twitch.
dpkonofa 6y ago
There are a few inaccuracies in your comment. For one, every agreement, regardless of the device it applies to very clearly states that violating the terms of the developer account on one device can be grounds for terminating the entire developer account and that either party has the ability to sever the agreement if any part of it is violated. That's what Apple chose to do so that's not illegal. If there's one thing in contract law that's iron-clad, it's the ability to terminate an agreement for violations of said agreement. Two, you say that "Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway." If that was the case, then why is Epic pushing so hard for this? Obviously, iOS is a huge market for them so your statement can't possibly be true and it's also gatekeeping the "seriousness" of gamers. Lastly, why do you think Apple silicon won't be able to run stock Windows? Windows 10 has been available for ARM processors for years and Apple silicon is all ARM processors. I think you're confusing techy gamers with gamers in general. PC gamers aren't even the majority of the gaming market now.
- mcherm 6y ago
  > That's what Apple chose to do so that's not illegal. Not necessarily. Perhaps it was illegal for Apple to include that clause in their terms in the first place because it was leveraging their monopoly power in one area to gain dominance in another and this violated antitrust law. This is Epic's claim.
  - dpkonofa 6y ago
    >leveraging their monopoly power Apple does not have a monopoly so that can't possibly be true and the judge has already stated that. If this was true, then Sony, Microsoft, Steam, and even Epic themselves would not be able to sell goods on their own stores. That's ridiculous.
jtdev 6y ago
Maybe Apple doesn’t actually want a bunch if whiny gamers as customers...
chaostheory 6y ago
> And in addition, Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway. This is the message Apple has given from the start, and it hasn't changed much even though it was key to the app store's success. This is also the same reason why VR is mainly PC and consoles.
tmpz22 6y ago
As a developer my next laptop will absolutely be a Windows 10 machine running WSL2 for development workloads, likely with an AMD 4xxx series chip. Up until about 6 months ago I was on the fence, actions like this have been a validation I'm sharing with all my friends and family making similar purchasing decisions.
- xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
  I encourage you to try Linux straight up -- Proton works wonders. It's not a perfect solution but I can play every game I care about, and don't have to worry about WSL's impotence.
  - tmpz22 6y ago
    I run ubuntu on my desktop computer, it's alright but I still get wireless connection issues on fresh installs. On top of that I prefer the various settings interfaces on windows 10 especially when interacting with third party hardware such as high-end monitors and graphics cards. Finally, native windows software is frequently better than native linux GUI software. In my opinion there is just less craftsmanship (i.e. loading animations around network latency, general responsiveness (multi-threading support?)), that effects the user experience. I will always keep an installation of linux on one of my devices, but I don't want it to be my main driver.
Mandatum 6y ago
I think there's being more and more work being done to make cross platform easier, and I think the move to Silicon is going to be great for the community at large. I don't expect to play Triple A titles on my Mac, no. But I do expect "develop once, deploy everywhere" including iOS and MacOS as target OS's to get significantly more funding and investment. And I think indie titles are going to take advantage of that ability.

Terretta 6y ago

On Windows, Microsoft is trying to extend the Xbox-exclusive store to cover Windows 10 gaming. On Mac you can distribute outside Apple’s App store[1,2,3], as you can on Windows. But Microsoft is laying groundwork for shift towards Apple’s model. 1. https://setapp.com/ https://setapp.com/ 2. https://www.gog.com/games?system=osx_106,osx_107&sort=popularity&page=1 https://www.gog.com/games?system=osx_106,osx_107&sort=popula... 3. https://store.steampowered.com/macos https://store.steampowered.com/macos

flohofwoe 6y ago
Microsoft has been trying to "boil the frog" for a long time now, but that has always failed, and it will fail as long as Windows remains relevant as a gaming platform. MS might be the captain of the ship, but they never owned the ship, despite their best attempts. For gamers, the current power equilibrium on the Windows platform with multiple competing stores is pretty much perfect. Even Microsoft caved in and started to offer their games on Steam too instead of insisting on making them Windows Store exclusives.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Their only mistake was not making the store Win32 from the get go, but as their Windows 10X roadmap and Project Reunion reboot shows, that will eventually arrive. Classical PCs are now a niche in a consumer world full with laptops and tablets. Little frogs will keep complaining without noticing that it has actually already taken place.
  - flohofwoe 6y ago
    Microsoft can do what they want with their own store because nobody cares about it anyway. And the moment they try to "ban" Steam, Epic Store, Gog etc, they essentially kill Windows as gaming platform and turn it into a business-only offering. I don't think that's in their own interest (as their renewed interest in PC gaming demonstrates).
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Apparently you missed what Windows 10X is all about. "How Windows 10X runs UWP and Win32 apps" https://youtu.be/ztrmrIlgbIc https://youtu.be/ztrmrIlgbIc Due to the situation we are all in, Windows 10X plans have been put aside for the time being, but rest assured they will be back when the world returns to business as usual. Windows as gaming platform has managed quite well without Steam, Epic Store, Gog, no need to pollute my OS with third party garbage.
      - Macha 6y ago
        What games are you playing? Digital PC games pretty much universally have launchers needed, whether it's a store like Steam or Epic, or publisher specific like Uplay, Paradox or Blizzard's. Physical PC sales have barely been a thing for the last decade. Even when you could get it, by the end they were usually a key for a given retailer and a disc that had a much outdated version of the game to initially install on only to download as much in patches.
        pjmlp 6y ago

abduhl 6y ago

Regardless of how you feel about Apple versus Epic, we should all be clear about one thing here: there is no "perceived" infringement of the iOS rules. Epic broke the rules. They do not even try to deny that they breached their contract with Apple in their lawsuit, but rather attack the contract directly as being illegal. Their approach is analogous to you being caught going 120 miles per hour in a 45 mile per hour zone and you challenging whether the speed limit is legal.

fxtentacle 6y ago
Epic's stance is that the rule was never enforceable to begin with, which would make breaking that rule not an infringement of the contract. But in any case, no court has ruled in Apple's favor yet, and Epic denies their claim, so at the moment the infringement is perceived to exist by Apple, but not proven as fact yet.
- abduhl 6y ago
  That is a very weird way to interpret the phrase "broke the rule." Just because the rule is invalid does not mean that you didn't break it, it just means that you can't be punished for breaking it.
  - stevehawk 6y ago
    It's kind of how it works. Like, if I sign a contract with Company A that is, by legal definitions, invalid, then they can't sue me for breach of contract because it was never a valid contract to begin with. I assume that's one of the arguments that Epic is making here.
    - abduhl 6y ago
      This is a giant misunderstanding of how contract law works. Company A can certainly sue you for breach of contract and the burden of proof would be on you to show that the contract is invalid. The law looks kindly upon the aggrieved party and frowns upon parties that breach a contract. I'm sure you can come up with plenty of examples of contracts that are on their face invalid and which would be ludicrous to sue over ("what if it was a contract to kill someone!?"); however, the contract at issue here is certainly not so clear cut and, even in those cases, they could still sue you for breach of contract and you would need to still prove that the contract is invalid (no matter how easily it could be done). A subsidiary question: if the contract is so obviously illegal, why did you (or Epic) agree to it?

nodamage 6y ago

> But legally, the iOS and the Mac developer agreements are separate contracts. This might have been true in the past but I don't believe it's true anymore. The two have been combined into a single program governed by the Apple Developer Program License Agreement which can be found here: https://developer.apple.com/terms/ https://developer.apple.com/terms/

pornel 6y ago
What's really troubling is that a legitimate anti-malware feature has been tied to "we can do whatever we want" TOS. The Developer Id system was a decent compromise: gave developers way out from App Store walled garden, and still protected users from random "Update your Flash!" malware downloads. But now Apple has demonstrated that it will use it as a weapon in App Store disputes, even on a different platform, even when the Developer Id app clearly isn't malware, and the Mac app didn't violate any rules.
- ArchOversight 6y ago
  Code signing has been a thing for a while, Windows has had it for ages. With Windows though you have to get a cert from an authorized partner, with Apple you go directly to the source. That includes agreeing with the terms of the developer agreement, which clearly states that if you violate the rules, you lose access to your developer account, and thus access to the signing keys to sign new applications.
  - donmcronald 6y ago
    There's a difference between those two systems. You can get normal code signing certs from multiple vendors and if one of them unfairly revokes your certificate [1] it doesn't prevent you from getting one from another vendor. If your business is big enough you might even have more than one code signing certificate on hand. Compare that to a developer account (Apple, Google, or Microsoft) where there's ONE vendor for the signing certificate and it comes along with a significantly more complex (developer) agreement that includes curation and (often arbitrary) requirements and ToS. 1. https://it.slashdot.org/story/19/06/02/0042209/ask-slashdot-what-to-do-when-your-certificate-authority-suddenly-revokes-your-cert https://it.slashdot.org/story/19/06/02/0042209/ask-slashdot-...

hrktb 6y ago

> This is almost certainly due to their developer account being blocked, so it's not like Epic is fully innocent here. It looks more and more like Apple made a mistake in blocking the developper account. Arguably the reaction should have stopped at pulling Fortnite out of the store. If extra steps were really needed, forcing suppression of Fortnite from existing iOS devices could have been accepted as a related measure. But blocking the whole developper account is so overreaching it still generates news weeks after the initial issue. It feels like Epic waived a red cloth and Apple just ran full speed into it. I see the current mess completely of Apple's own doing.

cma 6y ago
It was even crazier when they tried to deactivate their Apple signin users. Apple has just a few months ago started mandating you allow Apple sign in if you allow any other third party sign in. This gives Apple a huge hammer over your business, as it causes Apple sign in to leak into your web properties or properties on other platforms and Apple now has a hammer over some portion of your users who didn't even find your stuff through their store or even their devices or have moved on from using those devices.
- paxys 6y ago
  Yeah that was the worst one for me. They don't even have user email addresses in all cases, so those users are just permanently lost. People were hailing it as a great privacy move (which it still may be), but it gives Apple a massive lock-in advantage.
  - katbyte 6y ago
    tbh i use it when i don't really care and whatever rando app required a login for some reason. For that purpose it's fantastic and no different then google/fb/ect except more private. for anything i care about i use a real email/password
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Exactly. I get to choose who I want to have my email address. If it is a company I trust, I give them my real email address.

nojito 6y ago

It's brilliant in terms of marketing. It's not so brilliant in terms of actual legal reasons.

Razengan 6y ago

> Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway. Everyone serious about gaming is going to have a console too. Most AAAAs are exclusive to consoles for a year or more (GTA V, RDR 2, FF7RM, Bloodborne, and many others). Even if you had the most tweaked out PC you'd still be waiting for some of the latest and hottest to get ported. I used to be Windows-only until about a decade ago, and between Mac-compatible games, CrossOver/VMs, consoles and handhelds, I don't really miss the PC.

verall 6y ago
Not neccesarily - I know tons of people happy they waited for GTA V on PC since they really took care to beef up graphics and work out bugs. PC gaming is at a huge high point in the last decade or so, thanks in large part to twitch.

dpkonofa 6y ago

There are a few inaccuracies in your comment. For one, every agreement, regardless of the device it applies to very clearly states that violating the terms of the developer account on one device can be grounds for terminating the entire developer account and that either party has the ability to sever the agreement if any part of it is violated. That's what Apple chose to do so that's not illegal. If there's one thing in contract law that's iron-clad, it's the ability to terminate an agreement for violations of said agreement. Two, you say that "Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway." If that was the case, then why is Epic pushing so hard for this? Obviously, iOS is a huge market for them so your statement can't possibly be true and it's also gatekeeping the "seriousness" of gamers. Lastly, why do you think Apple silicon won't be able to run stock Windows? Windows 10 has been available for ARM processors for years and Apple silicon is all ARM processors. I think you're confusing techy gamers with gamers in general. PC gamers aren't even the majority of the gaming market now.

mcherm 6y ago
> That's what Apple chose to do so that's not illegal. Not necessarily. Perhaps it was illegal for Apple to include that clause in their terms in the first place because it was leveraging their monopoly power in one area to gain dominance in another and this violated antitrust law. This is Epic's claim.
- dpkonofa 6y ago
  >leveraging their monopoly power Apple does not have a monopoly so that can't possibly be true and the judge has already stated that. If this was true, then Sony, Microsoft, Steam, and even Epic themselves would not be able to sell goods on their own stores. That's ridiculous.

jtdev 6y ago

Maybe Apple doesn’t actually want a bunch if whiny gamers as customers...

chaostheory 6y ago

> And in addition, Epic is basically using Apple to send a very strong signal to game developers: Everyone serious about gaming is on Windows anyway. This is the message Apple has given from the start, and it hasn't changed much even though it was key to the app store's success. This is also the same reason why VR is mainly PC and consoles.

tmpz22 6y ago

As a developer my next laptop will absolutely be a Windows 10 machine running WSL2 for development workloads, likely with an AMD 4xxx series chip. Up until about 6 months ago I was on the fence, actions like this have been a validation I'm sharing with all my friends and family making similar purchasing decisions.

xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
I encourage you to try Linux straight up -- Proton works wonders. It's not a perfect solution but I can play every game I care about, and don't have to worry about WSL's impotence.
- tmpz22 6y ago
  I run ubuntu on my desktop computer, it's alright but I still get wireless connection issues on fresh installs. On top of that I prefer the various settings interfaces on windows 10 especially when interacting with third party hardware such as high-end monitors and graphics cards. Finally, native windows software is frequently better than native linux GUI software. In my opinion there is just less craftsmanship (i.e. loading animations around network latency, general responsiveness (multi-threading support?)), that effects the user experience. I will always keep an installation of linux on one of my devices, but I don't want it to be my main driver.

Mandatum 6y ago

I think there's being more and more work being done to make cross platform easier, and I think the move to Silicon is going to be great for the community at large. I don't expect to play Triple A titles on my Mac, no. But I do expect "develop once, deploy everywhere" including iOS and MacOS as target OS's to get significantly more funding and investment. And I think indie titles are going to take advantage of that ability.