3 ms·
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 t
by 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.