4 ms·

I agree with you up to a point, namely that developers should be prevented from making their apps exclusive to any specific app store, but they shouldn't have t

I agree with you up to a point, namely that developers should be prevented from making their apps exclusive to any specific app store, but they shouldn't have to spend any resources making their app acceptable to any other app store. So if Epic Games want to create their own app store, they can, but Apple should be allowed to list their games on its own app store too (and pay Epic whatever the relevant price is for each download of a game, out of the amount that Apple bills the user for it).

michaelmrose 5y ago
Why should Epic be made to do business with Apple if you can't get a game via the app store of your choosing and it's that important play something else.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  The point or the justification for this sort of legislation is that monopolies and bundling are bad for consumers, so enabling companies to force users to use their app stores in order to download their games doesn't seem like a very consistent approach.
  - Drew_ 5y ago
    There is no monopoly if there is competition between the stores. Users are not forced to download anything if there is competition. If this practice is as bad as you think, it will be driven out by competition (spoiler alert: it's not bad at all and will remain in vogue).
    - dane-pgp 5y ago
      You could equally say that Apple don't have a monopoly on phones, which is true, but they do have monopoly-like control over the apps which iOS users can install, which this legislation is trying to remedy. Similarly, if the Epic Store is the only place you can download Fortnite, and you really like Fortnite, but hate the advertising and data harvesting and battery use of the Epic Store, then you are being denied the ability to participate freely in the market for app stores. Saying "just play a different game" is as unhelpful as saying "just buy a different phone", and doesn't address the underlying complaint that product tying is an anti-competitive practice that consumers should be protected against: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29
      - stale2002 5y ago
        > Saying "just play a different game" is as unhelpful as saying "just buy a different phone" No. This is a false comparision. The smartphone market is a duopoly that is worth trillions of dollars. Battle royale videos games are not that. If fortnite eventually is worth trillions of dollars, and literally almost every single person in the world has to use it, on the same level that they use freaking smart phones, `then` we can use anti-trust law, or pro-competition laws on this now vital service. But until then, it is a false comparison.
        michaelmrose 5y ago
        Any particular game is merely a singular and temporary amusement no matter how temporarily pervasive the smartphone is the single most pervasive platform for communication, culture, work, and computation in the world. There can be no comparison.
      - Drew_ 5y ago
        There is no precedent for choosing the distribution of your product in an open market as being "anti-competitive". Direct-to-consumer is in no way anti-competitive and is in fact the opposite. Simply put, if businesses opt to distribute their product via their own channels (or others) instead of yours that means your offering is not good enough, full stop. You will need to improve your product if you want to survive in the market. This is the definition of competition. Let's be frank here: people here are afraid because they know Apple's App Store and its policies are in no way actually compelling in the open market and, if they are subjected to real competition, they will fail just like most other 1st party stores that are subjected to competition. Instead of allowing Apple to be the governing body of what is acceptable software policy simply because they are a for-profit company that makes a lot of money, maybe you should focus this attention on actual legislation from your elected governing body that would give you such protections. Sidenote: Fortnite doesn't have a monopoly on gamers and most gamers do not play Fornite. People need to stop using Fornite as if it is the new Standard Oil of gaming. There is no such thing in gaming and it makes for silly arguments.
      - michaelmrose 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

michaelmrose 5y ago

Why should Epic be made to do business with Apple if you can't get a game via the app store of your choosing and it's that important play something else.

dane-pgp 5y ago
The point or the justification for this sort of legislation is that monopolies and bundling are bad for consumers, so enabling companies to force users to use their app stores in order to download their games doesn't seem like a very consistent approach.
- Drew_ 5y ago
  There is no monopoly if there is competition between the stores. Users are not forced to download anything if there is competition. If this practice is as bad as you think, it will be driven out by competition (spoiler alert: it's not bad at all and will remain in vogue).
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    You could equally say that Apple don't have a monopoly on phones, which is true, but they do have monopoly-like control over the apps which iOS users can install, which this legislation is trying to remedy. Similarly, if the Epic Store is the only place you can download Fortnite, and you really like Fortnite, but hate the advertising and data harvesting and battery use of the Epic Store, then you are being denied the ability to participate freely in the market for app stores. Saying "just play a different game" is as unhelpful as saying "just buy a different phone", and doesn't address the underlying complaint that product tying is an anti-competitive practice that consumers should be protected against: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29
    - stale2002 5y ago
      > Saying "just play a different game" is as unhelpful as saying "just buy a different phone" No. This is a false comparision. The smartphone market is a duopoly that is worth trillions of dollars. Battle royale videos games are not that. If fortnite eventually is worth trillions of dollars, and literally almost every single person in the world has to use it, on the same level that they use freaking smart phones, `then` we can use anti-trust law, or pro-competition laws on this now vital service. But until then, it is a false comparison.
      - michaelmrose 5y ago
        Any particular game is merely a singular and temporary amusement no matter how temporarily pervasive the smartphone is the single most pervasive platform for communication, culture, work, and computation in the world. There can be no comparison.
    - Drew_ 5y ago
      There is no precedent for choosing the distribution of your product in an open market as being "anti-competitive". Direct-to-consumer is in no way anti-competitive and is in fact the opposite. Simply put, if businesses opt to distribute their product via their own channels (or others) instead of yours that means your offering is not good enough, full stop. You will need to improve your product if you want to survive in the market. This is the definition of competition. Let's be frank here: people here are afraid because they know Apple's App Store and its policies are in no way actually compelling in the open market and, if they are subjected to real competition, they will fail just like most other 1st party stores that are subjected to competition. Instead of allowing Apple to be the governing body of what is acceptable software policy simply because they are a for-profit company that makes a lot of money, maybe you should focus this attention on actual legislation from your elected governing body that would give you such protections. Sidenote: Fortnite doesn't have a monopoly on gamers and most gamers do not play Fornite. People need to stop using Fornite as if it is the new Standard Oil of gaming. There is no such thing in gaming and it makes for silly arguments.
    - michaelmrose 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]