3 ms·

> You're right that unity wasn't a great example though. A better example would be the xbox, playstation, switch, etc. Not really. Gaming consoles are usually

> You're right that unity wasn't a great example though. A better example would be the xbox, playstation, switch, etc. Not really. Gaming consoles are usually sold at loss. "The reason game consoles end up being profitable is through a combination of software, service, and accessory sales, but it's still surprising to find Microsoft has never achieved hardware profitability" https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-says-xbox-consoles-have-always-been-sold-at-a-loss https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-says-xbox-consoles-have...

simondotau 5y ago
The business model shouldn’t decide what’s legal. If it’s legal for Sony, it should be legal for Apple. Or if you disagree, fine. What’s the threshold? How does the Government acquire the information to determine if enforcement is necessary? What happens if the PS5 console, later in its life, is ever sold for a profit?
- olliej 5y ago
  I think the argument being made is that hardware companies should be required to sell hardware at break even and provide free services and software to developers. :D
olliej 5y ago
Sure, let's do the math: The average cost of manufacture is a PS5 is $450, the cheap version of a PS5 is $399, so a $60 loss. The platform takes a 30% commission on games the are priced >=$69.99, so at three games per machine they're making a profit. The average cost of a game on iOS is 48c. Apple takes 14.4c, all that money then does things like supporting devices long after they were sold. Unlike google apple doesn't monetize its users: google continues to make money after devices are sold because the platform itself exists to help their ad business, that means android would still make money for google if they didn't even have their own store. Add to that apple providing actual major software updates for devices more than 5 years after they were sold - not just security fixes - and I would argue that apple has a greater justification for their commission than Sony or MS do.

simondotau 5y ago

The business model shouldn’t decide what’s legal. If it’s legal for Sony, it should be legal for Apple. Or if you disagree, fine. What’s the threshold? How does the Government acquire the information to determine if enforcement is necessary? What happens if the PS5 console, later in its life, is ever sold for a profit?

olliej 5y ago
I think the argument being made is that hardware companies should be required to sell hardware at break even and provide free services and software to developers. :D

olliej 5y ago

Sure, let's do the math: The average cost of manufacture is a PS5 is $450, the cheap version of a PS5 is $399, so a $60 loss. The platform takes a 30% commission on games the are priced >=$69.99, so at three games per machine they're making a profit. The average cost of a game on iOS is 48c. Apple takes 14.4c, all that money then does things like supporting devices long after they were sold. Unlike google apple doesn't monetize its users: google continues to make money after devices are sold because the platform itself exists to help their ad business, that means android would still make money for google if they didn't even have their own store. Add to that apple providing actual major software updates for devices more than 5 years after they were sold - not just security fixes - and I would argue that apple has a greater justification for their commission than Sony or MS do.