4 ms·

New headline: “Billionaire doesn’t like to pay for infrastructure that helped make him a billionaire.” To his credit that’s a substantially large club, he’s no

New headline: “Billionaire doesn’t like to pay for infrastructure that helped make him a billionaire.” To his credit that’s a substantially large club, he’s not alone. (Edit) To elaborate, he’s balking at a company having control over a platform that they built and charge for to help maintain the platform. Every company wants to own and drive the platform, and that’s been the desire since at least the 80’s. Tim would like to build a metaverse and own that platform, and doesn’t like that today he’d have to build it on top of other platforms and pay a price to do so.

musicale 4y ago
This just in: CEOs named Tim like making money and want more of it.
smolyeet 4y ago
Can’t push an app with a 3rd party store as an option. Can’t install outside the AppStore. I think the argument for some regulation is fair. The mobile space is restrictive at the end of the day and users lose because of it.
- subharmonicon 4y ago
  I think ultimately this argues for far more than regulating the mobile space. Users can end up losing anytime there are dominant players, but I don’t think Tim is arguing for anything to help users, he’s arguing to help himself and that’s my point. This isn’t some kind of altruistic mission he’s on.
  - jlawson 4y ago
    If you need people to be on an 'altruistic mission' to support them doing something, you're really narrowing your options. If someone does something that helps a situation we should support it.
    - Spivak 4y ago
      Epic CEO wants government regulation to make it so he doesn’t have to pay for something he values just doesn’t have the same ring.
      - jlawson 4y ago
        Replace "Epic CEO" with "someone" in that sentence and you're talking about like half of all activism.
mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
Epic’s Fortnite was massively profitable before mobile ports came around. Most companies are balking at a 30% surcharge on everything purchased for essentially app reviewing and listing in a store. Why doesn’t Apple charge all financial apps 30% on those transactions? Why aren’t the taking a slice from every streaming service?
- subharmonicon 4y ago
  It’s not clear, at least to me, how many apps end up paying 30% versus 15%. To your point about financial apps, most can and do offer their services on websites as well. Those websites aren’t relying on infrastructure and SDKs paid for by Apple. If the current percentage isn’t fair, what is? Honest question.
  - perryizgr8 4y ago
    > most can and do offer their services on websites as well. Those websites aren’t relying on infrastructure and SDKs paid for by Apple. Isn't that true for fortnite too? I bet 90% of the code and infra involved in an in-game Fortnite purchase belongs to Epic and is common to all the different platforms they support.
    - mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
      Apple is merely hosting downloads and not much else for Fortnite or any other online only game, they aren't running game servers. Yes they make the hardware and provide SDK's, so does Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nintendo, Sony, etc. and Epic owns Unreal engine and likely has games on all of those platforms. 30% or 15% on all in-game purchases is kinda ridiculous because Apple (or other platforms) aren't doing anything other than collecting revenue in those cases so the surcharge should reflect that, like 4-5% seems fair to cover credit card surcharges and payment infrastructure and volume discounts would make sense there for a behemoth like Epic.
  - lbwtaylor 4y ago
    > If the current percentage isn’t fair, what is? Whatever Apple can negotiate with Epic after Apple is forced to allow Fortnite to bypass the app store and the 30% cut. I don't know what number that is, but it's not 30% for Epic. I'm sure plenty would pay it, but plenty would not.
lbwtaylor 4y ago
> infrastructure that helped make him a billionaire This is simply not true. First because Fortnite was a desktop first game. But philosophically, I really struggle with the idea that just because something sits on the app store then Apple deserves the credit for any success. It's like saying that Fortnite owes MS windows and Intel for their success. Sure at some level, but not in any real or practical way. Can you imagine if Windows took 30% of all desktop software sales since the dawn of Win 3.1, and what a worse place computing would be in?
- Spivak 4y ago
  I think we moralize this too much. Apple doesn’t get credit for the app or the infrastructure or whatever. Their role in the transaction is their ownership of valuable digital real-estate that companies salivate over and their business is keeping that real-estate valuable. And boy do they charge a premium for it. Nobody has to hawk their goods on iOS and if there wasn’t money in it nobody would. If Epic didn’t stand to make assloads of money they wouldn’t saber-rattle every few months or fight these legal battles. If anything the fact that everyone complains about their pricing but still publishes on iOS means they have the pricing exactly right.
  - lbwtaylor 4y ago
    > Nobody has to hawk their goods on iOS But this ignores their market position on mobile phones and the barriers to creating an open competing mobile phone. It's like if there were two car companies and you could buy tires from them, but if you wanted to buy tires from a third party you had to pay Ford or Chevy 30% tax because you were putting them on their cars. And you want to tell the tire companies too bad, you don't have to sell tires.
- Hippocrates 4y ago
  It’s really straightforward. Platform owners make investments in supporting development on their platform. Xcode? Metal? Would there even be any apps, developers, or users on iOS if they didn’t make this investment? Tolls and taxes bother me but I don’t pretend to not understand them.

musicale 4y ago

This just in: CEOs named Tim like making money and want more of it.

smolyeet 4y ago

Can’t push an app with a 3rd party store as an option. Can’t install outside the AppStore. I think the argument for some regulation is fair. The mobile space is restrictive at the end of the day and users lose because of it.

subharmonicon 4y ago
I think ultimately this argues for far more than regulating the mobile space. Users can end up losing anytime there are dominant players, but I don’t think Tim is arguing for anything to help users, he’s arguing to help himself and that’s my point. This isn’t some kind of altruistic mission he’s on.
- jlawson 4y ago
  If you need people to be on an 'altruistic mission' to support them doing something, you're really narrowing your options. If someone does something that helps a situation we should support it.
  - Spivak 4y ago
    Epic CEO wants government regulation to make it so he doesn’t have to pay for something he values just doesn’t have the same ring.
    - jlawson 4y ago
      Replace "Epic CEO" with "someone" in that sentence and you're talking about like half of all activism.

mattbrewsbytes 4y ago

Epic’s Fortnite was massively profitable before mobile ports came around. Most companies are balking at a 30% surcharge on everything purchased for essentially app reviewing and listing in a store. Why doesn’t Apple charge all financial apps 30% on those transactions? Why aren’t the taking a slice from every streaming service?

subharmonicon 4y ago
It’s not clear, at least to me, how many apps end up paying 30% versus 15%. To your point about financial apps, most can and do offer their services on websites as well. Those websites aren’t relying on infrastructure and SDKs paid for by Apple. If the current percentage isn’t fair, what is? Honest question.
- perryizgr8 4y ago
  > most can and do offer their services on websites as well. Those websites aren’t relying on infrastructure and SDKs paid for by Apple. Isn't that true for fortnite too? I bet 90% of the code and infra involved in an in-game Fortnite purchase belongs to Epic and is common to all the different platforms they support.
  - mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
    Apple is merely hosting downloads and not much else for Fortnite or any other online only game, they aren't running game servers. Yes they make the hardware and provide SDK's, so does Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Nintendo, Sony, etc. and Epic owns Unreal engine and likely has games on all of those platforms. 30% or 15% on all in-game purchases is kinda ridiculous because Apple (or other platforms) aren't doing anything other than collecting revenue in those cases so the surcharge should reflect that, like 4-5% seems fair to cover credit card surcharges and payment infrastructure and volume discounts would make sense there for a behemoth like Epic.
- lbwtaylor 4y ago
  > If the current percentage isn’t fair, what is? Whatever Apple can negotiate with Epic after Apple is forced to allow Fortnite to bypass the app store and the 30% cut. I don't know what number that is, but it's not 30% for Epic. I'm sure plenty would pay it, but plenty would not.

lbwtaylor 4y ago

> infrastructure that helped make him a billionaire This is simply not true. First because Fortnite was a desktop first game. But philosophically, I really struggle with the idea that just because something sits on the app store then Apple deserves the credit for any success. It's like saying that Fortnite owes MS windows and Intel for their success. Sure at some level, but not in any real or practical way. Can you imagine if Windows took 30% of all desktop software sales since the dawn of Win 3.1, and what a worse place computing would be in?

Spivak 4y ago
I think we moralize this too much. Apple doesn’t get credit for the app or the infrastructure or whatever. Their role in the transaction is their ownership of valuable digital real-estate that companies salivate over and their business is keeping that real-estate valuable. And boy do they charge a premium for it. Nobody has to hawk their goods on iOS and if there wasn’t money in it nobody would. If Epic didn’t stand to make assloads of money they wouldn’t saber-rattle every few months or fight these legal battles. If anything the fact that everyone complains about their pricing but still publishes on iOS means they have the pricing exactly right.
- lbwtaylor 4y ago
  > Nobody has to hawk their goods on iOS But this ignores their market position on mobile phones and the barriers to creating an open competing mobile phone. It's like if there were two car companies and you could buy tires from them, but if you wanted to buy tires from a third party you had to pay Ford or Chevy 30% tax because you were putting them on their cars. And you want to tell the tire companies too bad, you don't have to sell tires.
Hippocrates 4y ago
It’s really straightforward. Platform owners make investments in supporting development on their platform. Xcode? Metal? Would there even be any apps, developers, or users on iOS if they didn’t make this investment? Tolls and taxes bother me but I don’t pretend to not understand them.