3 ms·

And how are those two not related? Epic is a developer, therefore their bottom line is literally in the interest of developers. Furthermore, if a company has le

And how are those two not related? Epic is a developer, therefore their bottom line is literally in the interest of developers. Furthermore, if a company has less fees to deal with then they can charge lower prices for the same product.

sva_ 5y ago
I doubt they'd charge much less. The price is mostly determined with what they believe people will pay.
- kevingadd 5y ago
  They literally offered a sizable discount when they pulled this stunt.
  - zepto 5y ago
    That was a stunt.
  - doctor_eval 5y ago
    The whole stunt was planned by Epic well in advance. Offering an outside payment option without lowering the price would have undermined their entire argument. Make no mistake, when the dust settles, consumers will pay the same amount, but Epic will get to keep more of it. There is nothing wrong with Epic wanting to increase its margins, but doing so under the rubric of helping the customer does get under my skin a bit.
danaris 5y ago
Yes, Epic is a developer. So too is Tim Cook a user; does that mean that what's in Tim Cook's interest is in the interest of users, in general? This doesn't logically follow; Epic's interests do not necessarily align with the interests of all developers, and they certainly don't necessarily align with the interests of users. In particular, the whole point of this is that Epic wants to be more than just a developer: they want to be a platform owner, and run their own App Store. Most developers can't even dream of that—and probably wouldn't want to.