3 ms·

They forced developers to develop for iOS?

by noT1 5y ago

salamandersauce 5y ago
No, but considering iOS is roughly 50% or more of the mobile market in the U.S, U.K, Japan, etc. any developer choosing to forgo iOS is essentially shitting away half the market in some very lucrative places.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  More than that in terms of percentage of actual app revenue, since Google Play is such a $+#$show.
  - no_wizard 5y ago
    This is the crux of the matter, for most developers. Its why Apple is the target and not Google, despite having remarkably similar structure for this. The one exception is around having alternative App Stores (if I recall correctly this is totally blessed by Google, see Amazon Appstore App For Android[0], though I don't think any alternative store that has been created this way has thrived, cautionary tale of whether consumers will care about alternative app stores). Its otherwise the same, as far as I can tell[1] structurally. [0]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp [1]: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9858738?hl=en&ref_topic=9857752 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      The only way alternative app stores would stand a chance is if an app store lottery were foisted on Google. (A) They can't bundle GApps with Play Store & (B) they have to present an app store picker instead of defaulting to Google Play.
      - no_wizard 5y ago
        Wouldn't this be true regardless of circumstance? I think the happy medium everyone should be striving for is just third party payment APIs that are blessed by the platform. This isn't about distribution (I don't think Epic cares if it's hosted on the App Store, Google Play, or not). It's all about payment processing. If Apple and Google had a blessed Payment API that let developers use alternative payment processors, this would go away I imagine. I know some users want more freedom, but this lawsuit really isn't about user freedom, it's about payments (and if users do get more freedom, e.g. able to install apps in alternative ways, it's a side effect of this, not the goal of the lawsuit) I wonder if Apple is forced to cut their fees in payments if they'll raise the developer fees to compensate, tiered based on size of the org.
wernercd 5y ago
They forced people to use subpar options within their environment - just like Microsoft forced IE to be used on theirs. If you want to reach millions of customers, you are restricted to the Apple Payment options... even when better options exist. Same for Ad and other subpar options. Why? Because they are better options? No... because Apple FORCES you to use those options. "but you don't have to develop for Apple" is a copout that ignores the anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior Apple is using to force people into subpar options for a 30% gateway tax. Similarly, others can't put good browsers onto Apple because of restrictions... why? because webkit is the REQUIRED base... despite the fact that its restrictions mean you can't use webapps as real alternatives because of limitations with controllers, bluetooth, etc. Google can make better alternatives to Safari? Firefox can? Microsoft can? doesn't matter... Apple FORCES you to use their subpar options because if there was real competition, they wouldn't get a 30% tax. Spread that decision to email clients and all other corners of the Apple "ecosystem" and you have a company using monopolistic practices to limit competition to increase prices. "but don't do business on their platform" doesn't change the fact that they are using monopolistic practices to fleece their customers. I don't like EA and think they are an equally horrible company - and should be judged equally poorly for many bad practices... but EA (and netflix, steam, etc) should have the ability to not use Apples gated options and not pay for a service that isn't worth 30% - especially when they can host their own payment and ad services. Stop with the bad arguments to defend a company using monopolistic practices to fleece their customers. I say this as an iPhone owner and a programmer.

They forced developers to develop for iOS?

by noT1 5y ago

They forced developers to develop for iOS?

No, but considering iOS is roughly 50% or more of the mobile market in the U.S, U.K, Japan, etc. any developer choosing to forgo iOS is essentially shitting away half the market in some very lucrative places.

ethbr0 5y ago
More than that in terms of percentage of actual app revenue, since Google Play is such a $+#$show.
- no_wizard 5y ago
  This is the crux of the matter, for most developers. Its why Apple is the target and not Google, despite having remarkably similar structure for this. The one exception is around having alternative App Stores (if I recall correctly this is totally blessed by Google, see Amazon Appstore App For Android[0], though I don't think any alternative store that has been created this way has thrived, cautionary tale of whether consumers will care about alternative app stores). Its otherwise the same, as far as I can tell[1] structurally. [0]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp https://www.amazon.com/gp/mas/get/amazonapp [1]: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/9858738?hl=en&ref_topic=9857752 https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    The only way alternative app stores would stand a chance is if an app store lottery were foisted on Google. (A) They can't bundle GApps with Play Store & (B) they have to present an app store picker instead of defaulting to Google Play.
    - no_wizard 5y ago
      Wouldn't this be true regardless of circumstance? I think the happy medium everyone should be striving for is just third party payment APIs that are blessed by the platform. This isn't about distribution (I don't think Epic cares if it's hosted on the App Store, Google Play, or not). It's all about payment processing. If Apple and Google had a blessed Payment API that let developers use alternative payment processors, this would go away I imagine. I know some users want more freedom, but this lawsuit really isn't about user freedom, it's about payments (and if users do get more freedom, e.g. able to install apps in alternative ways, it's a side effect of this, not the goal of the lawsuit) I wonder if Apple is forced to cut their fees in payments if they'll raise the developer fees to compensate, tiered based on size of the org.

wernercd 5y ago

They forced people to use subpar options within their environment - just like Microsoft forced IE to be used on theirs. If you want to reach millions of customers, you are restricted to the Apple Payment options... even when better options exist. Same for Ad and other subpar options. Why? Because they are better options? No... because Apple FORCES you to use those options. "but you don't have to develop for Apple" is a copout that ignores the anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior Apple is using to force people into subpar options for a 30% gateway tax. Similarly, others can't put good browsers onto Apple because of restrictions... why? because webkit is the REQUIRED base... despite the fact that its restrictions mean you can't use webapps as real alternatives because of limitations with controllers, bluetooth, etc. Google can make better alternatives to Safari? Firefox can? Microsoft can? doesn't matter... Apple FORCES you to use their subpar options because if there was real competition, they wouldn't get a 30% tax. Spread that decision to email clients and all other corners of the Apple "ecosystem" and you have a company using monopolistic practices to limit competition to increase prices. "but don't do business on their platform" doesn't change the fact that they are using monopolistic practices to fleece their customers. I don't like EA and think they are an equally horrible company - and should be judged equally poorly for many bad practices... but EA (and netflix, steam, etc) should have the ability to not use Apples gated options and not pay for a service that isn't worth 30% - especially when they can host their own payment and ad services. Stop with the bad arguments to defend a company using monopolistic practices to fleece their customers. I say this as an iPhone owner and a programmer.