3 ms·

> PCs are availble from lots of different brands Macs aren't. > For PCs, there is no central developer shouldering all the R&D costs. I'm not sure how R&D co

by _qulr 6y ago

> PCs are availble from lots of different brands Macs aren't. > For PCs, there is no central developer shouldering all the R&D costs. I'm not sure how R&D costs are even relevant, legally. PCs, Macs, iPhones, iPads are all financed by hardware sales. That's how you repay R&D, not skimming money off of 3rd party developers. Somehow PCs and Macs have always paid for their own R&D without taking 3rd party developer revenue.

scarface74 6y ago
And the judge didn’t agree with the theory that Epic proffered that how it is financed should be the distinction. But if that’s the case, who “finances” the extra four or five years worth of support that iOS devices get over Android devices? Maybe it’s that Apple knows by having more people running the same OS it increases the market for apps. Android OEMs don’t have the same incentives.
- _qulr 6y ago
  > Android OEMs don’t have the same incentives. Of course they don't. They don't make the operating system, and also the average selling price is lower. Not sure what this has to do with the App Store though.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    The argument was that game sales fund consoles that are sold at a loss. No one would claim that Apple sells at a loss. But, continuing support for six year old phones is solely motivated by service revenue - just like consoles.
    - _qulr 6y ago
      > continuing support for six year old phones is solely motivated by service revenue - just like consoles. No, because Macs are supported for even longer. And Mac App Store revenue is not even worth mentioning. (Literally, Apple has never mentioned it!) The long period of support is because the devices are sold at a premium, and as premium. Price, quality, reputation, they all go hand in hand.
      - scarface74 6y ago
        And Microsoft gives Windows away to end users. Even on the cheapest PCs. My Dell Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz circa 2010 runs Windows 10. It has to, no one is willing to pay for operating system upgrades.

by _qulr 6y ago

scarface74 6y ago

And the judge didn’t agree with the theory that Epic proffered that how it is financed should be the distinction. But if that’s the case, who “finances” the extra four or five years worth of support that iOS devices get over Android devices? Maybe it’s that Apple knows by having more people running the same OS it increases the market for apps. Android OEMs don’t have the same incentives.

_qulr 6y ago
> Android OEMs don’t have the same incentives. Of course they don't. They don't make the operating system, and also the average selling price is lower. Not sure what this has to do with the App Store though.
- scarface74 6y ago
  The argument was that game sales fund consoles that are sold at a loss. No one would claim that Apple sells at a loss. But, continuing support for six year old phones is solely motivated by service revenue - just like consoles.
  - _qulr 6y ago
    > continuing support for six year old phones is solely motivated by service revenue - just like consoles. No, because Macs are supported for even longer. And Mac App Store revenue is not even worth mentioning. (Literally, Apple has never mentioned it!) The long period of support is because the devices are sold at a premium, and as premium. Price, quality, reputation, they all go hand in hand.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      And Microsoft gives Windows away to end users. Even on the cheapest PCs. My Dell Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz circa 2010 runs Windows 10. It has to, no one is willing to pay for operating system upgrades.