4 ms·
This is about people advertising in their own apps. Apple wants to prevent that using their monopoly power over their devices.
by R0b0t1 5y ago
This is about people advertising in their own apps. Apple wants to prevent that using their monopoly power over their devices.
- noT1 5y agoApple would effectively be acting a distributor of apps that redirect people from their platform. I think you’re seeing this in terms of what some solo dev should be allowed to do when they have a choice; don’t sell iOS apps.
- vlovich123 5y agoWhat about if Amazon prevented a seller from advertising “direct to sale at a discount” and bypassing Amazon on their product page?
- void_mint 5y agouhhh....this happens all the time already. Lots of Amazon sellers maintain web stores and purchasing options outside of Amazon.
- enos_feedler 5y agoAnd do they link to those stores from their amazon product descriptions?
- void_mint 5y agoCan you point to an example of Epic doing that from an Apple-owned page (meaning, specifically, not from the app that Epic owns)? You're moving the goal posts further away from this example making sense.
- ntr-- 5y agoI think it's a bit disingenuous to imply that the example in question^1 is less extreme than Amazon allowing sellers to directly link to discounted options directly on their listings. The app in question was built, packaged, distributed, installed and runs on Apple funded SDKs after all. 1. https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-direct-pay-apple-app-store-2045x979-730033169.png https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-direct-pay-apple-app-stor...
- void_mint 5y agoThe source of the app is owned and maintained by Epic. The source of an Amazon seller page is made through Amazon's portal.
- enos_feedler 5y agoIts splitting hairs to break this down into who compiled the code. The “source” of both experiences is maintained by the developer/seller. In one case it’s some configuration and the other case it’s Apple platform bitcode
- void_mint 5y ago> Its splitting hairs to break this down into who compiled the code. It's not. The difference between building your store and getting a booth in someone else's.
- enos_feedler 5y agoThis makes no sense. Both the app store and amazon is someone elses store wrt Fortnite
- void_mint 5y agohttps://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-direct-pay-apple-app-store-2045x979-730033169.png https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/epic-direct-pay-apple-app-stor... Show me the app store in this image?
- gsich 5y agoThat's an ebay thing. I haven't seen different product descriptions on Amazon. There is only 1, no matter which seller you buy from.
- oh_sigh 5y agoThat seller almost certainly signed a contract with amazon saying that they would give amazon most-favored nation status with regards to product prices. So they could absolutely say such a thing, but in the end they couldn't contractually offer anything at a cheaper rate than what they list it for on amazon.
- vlovich123 5y agoThat's identical to contracts Epic signs to be on the Apple Store in the first place.
- PeterisP 5y agoNo, that's definitely not identical - no one, including Apple, is asserting that the fact that Fortnite users could by the same thing cheaper directly was a contract violation, the contentious issue was only that this cheaper price was being advertised on the iOS app.
- vlovich123 5y agoRight. Just as with Amazon. You don’t necessarily see Amazon with the lowest price for an item (the most favored nation thing may happen but I don’t know that that’s standard SOP for everything on the store, eg PlayStation may have discounts through other channels and for certain types of vendors they view as fungible without a brand they may not care at all). But you don’t see advertising for the cheaper option on the Amazon page.
- noT1 5y agoWhat monopoly when their mobile OS is only 18% of the mobile market? You all want these corporations to learn a lesson? Stop giving them attention. There are more useful political conversations to be had. This is more David v Goliath crap bros use to seek Valhalla