7 ms·
> I want a world where we're free to install whatever we want on our devices or distribute our hard work to others without having to implement it 5 different wa
by ilikehurdles 6y ago
> I want a world where we're free to install whatever we want on our devices or distribute our hard work to others without having to implement it 5 different ways.
I do too, but your appeal to emotion is off-topic. This has nothing to do with the lawsuit. None of these companies want that, nor are they working toward that. Epic and Spotify are pushing their own walled gardens, they just want to do it with a bigger profit margin.
- Apocryphon 6y agoBasecamp and Tile want walled gardens?
- ilikehurdles 6y agoEpic and Spotify.
- Apocryphon 6y agoSure, but what about the other names on the list? People are selectively focusing on only the major companies and neglecting that others have legitimate grievances.
- AlphaSite 6y agoThis article is about them, it makes sense that would be the focus.
- echelon 6y agoThe downvotes for your parent and your follow-up retort don't make sense. I'm also backing these companies' argument and I don't want a walled garden. I want an open and competitive marketplace. I want to be able to distribute my software to everyone (like I used to be able to do).
- electriclove 6y agoAre you not able to distribute your software to iOS devices?
- acituan 6y ago> Epic and Spotify are pushing their own walled gardens, they just want to do it with a bigger profit margin. There is absolutely no problem with that because it cures the one and only walled garden problem. If they implement a subpar walled garden, it will be up to the users to exercise choice on using them, which they currently can't. This is the core of the opponent processes of markets. It is irrelevant to demand ideological purity from opponents, what matters is the resulting dynamics their actions create, in this case creating a previously non-existing competition space on iOS app installs.
- boarnoah 6y agoJust for reference Epic has already shown us their playbook on how they plan to bootstrap a separate marketplace with the Epic Games Store on PC. Namely, paying for exclusivity onto their store (or more accurately paying for the developer to not release onto Steam - the current incumbent). I'm not sure how you can argue that they are helping users exercise choice when this is behavior they already engage in.
- 7786655 6y agoThe users are free to choose not to buy those games. If the developers offered you a deal you don't like, don't take it.
- 411111111111111 6y agoOnce Apple is legally required to allow third party app stores it will be possible to create open ones as well. Like f-droid , for iOS
- AlexandrB 6y ago> If they implement a subpar walled garden, it will be up to the users to exercise choice on using them, which they currently can't. Epic games store is a very subpar walled garden. It's the only way to access several games that are either in exclusivity agreements with Epic or were purchased by Epic outright (RIP Rocket League). Spotify is (IMHO) a subpar walled garden. They recently purchased exclusivity for Joe Rogan, if you want to listen to him in the future you have to use Spotify. I don't see where in this process I get a choice of anything. These companies are not fighting for consumer choice, they just want to move more power over the consumer from one middle man (Apple) to another (themselves).
- kbenson 6y ago> None of these companies want that, nor are they working toward that. Being able to choose to run whatever you want on your own device is a necessary first step to opening up app stores to competition. They support the ideal because it's the only way to get what they want. It's a mistake to assume that since they are doing it for their own benefit that we all can't benefit as well.