4 ms·

I will disagree, you can see the entitlement of users that demand the game,movie or payment system must be exactly his preferred one. Though for Valve you can

I will disagree, you can see the entitlement of users that demand the game,movie or payment system must be exactly his preferred one. Though for Valve you can compete with them (but people hate it but I think they don't hate the actual competition but the shitty implementation of the stores and the fact this game launcher most of the time must be run in background ) BUT with Apple you can't compete, they have up to 50% market share in some countries and if you are a business half of your existing customers(that you earned fairly and were not gifted by Apple to you) will ask for an iOS app and now you either give a bad experience to your customer or you pay the tax. About the argument that Apple,Valve gives you access to many users, sure that should be price correctly, developers could pay for getting promoted on the first page of the store, but Apple,Google should not get a cut for promoting my app if the user installed it starting from my own website.

dkonofalski 6y ago
>BUT with Apple you can't compete, they have up to 50% market share in some countries That statement isn't true no matter how you slice it. Apple's largest competitor is Google so the idea that you can't compete with Apple is nonsense. And what countries does Apple have a 50% market share in?
- simion314 6y ago
  US, mobile market , ask Apple fanbous about app sales and they will proudly tell you how Apple stores has more sales. Ask same guys about monopoly and they will then count the entire world, count all computers and dumb-phones and pretend Apple is the little guy. I fucking can't compete with Apple, say I am a bank/store/club and my customers(not Apple ones) want a mobile app, how can I give the 50% of my customer my app without having to pay Apple , if I try to sell something or put a link to a page of mine for buying subscriptions or stuff Apple will demand a cut(I know they were forced to be less greedy lately).
  - dkonofalski 6y ago
    1. Sales != market share but that's not relevant. Even a >50% share isn't a monopoly if there are multiple other competitors in the remaining 50%. And I don't think anyone is misrepresenting Apple's position. The word "Monopoly" has a meaning. Apple does not fit that meaning. 2. You can't give your customers an app without paying Apple if your customers are demanding it work for Apple products. That doesn't mean you can't compete. You can still only sell to Android users and other phone users but you have to do so with the understanding of what that means. You're still competing. That's like saying you can't compete with Windows when you only release your app for Linux. That's your choice. You're still competing against Windows.
    - stale2002 6y ago
      A literal monopoly is not required for something to be illegally anti competitive. All that has to happen is that a company has significant market power. And courts have held that 50% of a given geographic area can fall under anti trust laws.
      - dkonofalski 6y ago
        That's completely fine. The current situation already has precedent in courts considering that Sony, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon, and many others have exclusive control of their App Stores. Claiming Apple is anti-competitive because of its platform would upend all of these platforms.
    - simion314 6y ago
      I know Apple is very dear for many people but let's think different , say 49% of the radios in people homes and cars are made by Huawei and if I want my radio station to work on this radios I need to pay Huawei 30% of my profits and I can only have content approved by Huawei just in case is not respecting the correct values. It is ridiculous right to have a radio or TV device put artificial limits, Your second point is again invalid, say Apple is blocking my website because I said that they are greedy, this is fine in your opinion because I can still show my site to PC and Android users and you can't even see yet the abuse that is happening, Apple should not decide that they don't like the politics on an app or book and not allow the user the freedom to install it, they can block it from the store sure but the user should have the freedom to use his brain and install what he wants, The same for say a group of developers or musicians that want to compete with Apple products , like the Apple Store, or Apple Music or whatever games they have, it is actually ilegal for Apple to abuse their market share in smartphones to give it's own products an advantage. (yeah actually the law does not say you must have 50% +1 market share)
Notorious_BLT 6y ago
It isn't entitlement for consumers to look at a company saying "you can buy this game, but only on our own launcher/storefront" and say "okay, then I won't buy it". Users don't like juggling Steam, Origin, Uplay, Epic, and whatever other launchers/storefronts. If publishers feel the additional sales are important, they can make it available through Steam.
- simion314 6y ago
  I don't think there is any sane user that will say something as stupid like "I wish Cool Game 3 would be only on Origin(or only on Steam). So we should try to get most games on all stores not try to get them only on our facorite store. The issue with the launchers is indeed a problem, the solution is to have the games run without the shitty launcher. So if you want to buy and play a game you can open your browser, find the best deal, buy the game and if you want do a direct download and play, or use a launcher, install the game then kill the launcher and play the game. This is the GOG model, you don't need the launcher. So IMO the launcher issue should be addressed by fixing it, not by praying that there will be no competition in future so only my favorite launcher will exist.
  - dkonofalski 6y ago
    I'm not sure what you're arguing because it sounds like you agree with the parent. The games should be available on Origin and Steam and people should be able to choose the one they want. That's the whole issue, though. Case in point, I bought DooM Eternal's Collector's Edition. I could not use Steam and had to activate the game through the Bethesda launcher. I can add the game to my Steam library as an "external" game but I can't play with my list of Steam friends or use the matchmaking tools built into Steam. I had to use Bethesda's platform and we, essentially, had to re-do all the connections and friends lists to duplicate them in Bethesda. I would have preferred not to do that. You may even be able to do that now but it was not an option at launch.
    - simion314 6y ago
      Sorry If I was not clear, I see some people commenting that they like Steam so Epic, Origin and others are evil and should not exists. My point is that we should wish they exist and compete and that games would be available on all of them so you can chose and would also be great if the launchers would also be optional like GOG. Also today there are many examples of PC players playing together with console players so there is no technical reason why someone that uses Steam should not be able to play multiplayer game with someone that bought on GOG or PlayStation Store.

dkonofalski 6y ago

>BUT with Apple you can't compete, they have up to 50% market share in some countries That statement isn't true no matter how you slice it. Apple's largest competitor is Google so the idea that you can't compete with Apple is nonsense. And what countries does Apple have a 50% market share in?

simion314 6y ago
US, mobile market , ask Apple fanbous about app sales and they will proudly tell you how Apple stores has more sales. Ask same guys about monopoly and they will then count the entire world, count all computers and dumb-phones and pretend Apple is the little guy. I fucking can't compete with Apple, say I am a bank/store/club and my customers(not Apple ones) want a mobile app, how can I give the 50% of my customer my app without having to pay Apple , if I try to sell something or put a link to a page of mine for buying subscriptions or stuff Apple will demand a cut(I know they were forced to be less greedy lately).
- dkonofalski 6y ago
  1. Sales != market share but that's not relevant. Even a >50% share isn't a monopoly if there are multiple other competitors in the remaining 50%. And I don't think anyone is misrepresenting Apple's position. The word "Monopoly" has a meaning. Apple does not fit that meaning. 2. You can't give your customers an app without paying Apple if your customers are demanding it work for Apple products. That doesn't mean you can't compete. You can still only sell to Android users and other phone users but you have to do so with the understanding of what that means. You're still competing. That's like saying you can't compete with Windows when you only release your app for Linux. That's your choice. You're still competing against Windows.
  - stale2002 6y ago
    A literal monopoly is not required for something to be illegally anti competitive. All that has to happen is that a company has significant market power. And courts have held that 50% of a given geographic area can fall under anti trust laws.
    - dkonofalski 6y ago
      That's completely fine. The current situation already has precedent in courts considering that Sony, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon, and many others have exclusive control of their App Stores. Claiming Apple is anti-competitive because of its platform would upend all of these platforms.
  - simion314 6y ago
    I know Apple is very dear for many people but let's think different , say 49% of the radios in people homes and cars are made by Huawei and if I want my radio station to work on this radios I need to pay Huawei 30% of my profits and I can only have content approved by Huawei just in case is not respecting the correct values. It is ridiculous right to have a radio or TV device put artificial limits, Your second point is again invalid, say Apple is blocking my website because I said that they are greedy, this is fine in your opinion because I can still show my site to PC and Android users and you can't even see yet the abuse that is happening, Apple should not decide that they don't like the politics on an app or book and not allow the user the freedom to install it, they can block it from the store sure but the user should have the freedom to use his brain and install what he wants, The same for say a group of developers or musicians that want to compete with Apple products , like the Apple Store, or Apple Music or whatever games they have, it is actually ilegal for Apple to abuse their market share in smartphones to give it's own products an advantage. (yeah actually the law does not say you must have 50% +1 market share)

Notorious_BLT 6y ago

It isn't entitlement for consumers to look at a company saying "you can buy this game, but only on our own launcher/storefront" and say "okay, then I won't buy it". Users don't like juggling Steam, Origin, Uplay, Epic, and whatever other launchers/storefronts. If publishers feel the additional sales are important, they can make it available through Steam.

simion314 6y ago
I don't think there is any sane user that will say something as stupid like "I wish Cool Game 3 would be only on Origin(or only on Steam). So we should try to get most games on all stores not try to get them only on our facorite store. The issue with the launchers is indeed a problem, the solution is to have the games run without the shitty launcher. So if you want to buy and play a game you can open your browser, find the best deal, buy the game and if you want do a direct download and play, or use a launcher, install the game then kill the launcher and play the game. This is the GOG model, you don't need the launcher. So IMO the launcher issue should be addressed by fixing it, not by praying that there will be no competition in future so only my favorite launcher will exist.
- dkonofalski 6y ago
  I'm not sure what you're arguing because it sounds like you agree with the parent. The games should be available on Origin and Steam and people should be able to choose the one they want. That's the whole issue, though. Case in point, I bought DooM Eternal's Collector's Edition. I could not use Steam and had to activate the game through the Bethesda launcher. I can add the game to my Steam library as an "external" game but I can't play with my list of Steam friends or use the matchmaking tools built into Steam. I had to use Bethesda's platform and we, essentially, had to re-do all the connections and friends lists to duplicate them in Bethesda. I would have preferred not to do that. You may even be able to do that now but it was not an option at launch.
  - simion314 6y ago
    Sorry If I was not clear, I see some people commenting that they like Steam so Epic, Origin and others are evil and should not exists. My point is that we should wish they exist and compete and that games would be available on all of them so you can chose and would also be great if the launchers would also be optional like GOG. Also today there are many examples of PC players playing together with console players so there is no technical reason why someone that uses Steam should not be able to play multiplayer game with someone that bought on GOG or PlayStation Store.