5 ms·

I remember when Riccitiello announced per-install pricing for Unity last year and it, quite literally, cost him his job

by ljm 3y ago

gigatexal 3y ago
Unity didn’t have an App Store with 3B devices.
- thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
  Unity didn't have a monopoly on PC gaming or installing software on PCs.
  - gigatexal 3y ago
    that too
threesevenths 3y ago
Unity also announced that it would retrospectively apply to all developers who already publish games. Apple is apparently going to let developers remain in the current model or opt into the new one, and if that is correct, makes a difference here.
- atlasgcx 3y ago
  just want to point out that 1 "update" is also considered 1 "first annual install". So essentially you need to pay for previous acquired members/installs. Like for facebook, assuming they have a force update this year, then they need to pay for every iOS install even if it occurred before.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - oakesm9 3y ago
    Yes, but only if they proactively switch to the new fee terms. They can still with the current terms (which doesn’t allow non AppStore distribution) and not pay the CTF. Makes switching to the new fee structure pretty unattractive for a lot of big companies.
gretch 3y ago
The AppStore is a distribution channel. It’s a plausible business model to charge per unit of distribution, just like a freight company might do. Unity is a game framework/toolkit/engine. It does not do distribution (I sign into unity to download games?). It is literally impossible for unity to even know about the amount of distribution that is happening. That’s why the guy lost his job. Same way the CEO of McDonald’s would be ousted for instituting subscription based pay for cheeseburgers, even though Spotify can do it just fine.
- leereeves 3y ago
  This fee is charged even if the app isn't distributed on the App Store.
- choppaface 3y ago
  Except Apple’s App Store has a monopoly on half of all phones, and there are plenty of other potential distributors that would be happy to enter and compete but are locked out. Apple wants you to accept that “just a distribution model” position because it helps them further cement their illegal monopoly.
  - zer00eyz 3y ago
    >> Apple ... on half of all phones https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/iphone-market-share-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/iphone-ma... 40% in some places, not even that high globally (android wins by a large margin). But android isn't "one company". In the states, AT&T was a monopoly. They owned phones, the cables, the service, the device in your house... All of it. The rise and fall of ATT is a fascinating story, unix is free today because ATT was a monopoly (it's an interesting side effect not an argument for them). If you dont like apple, you have the choice of android. If you dont like nividia, you can pick AMD, if you dont like AMD, pick intel. Dont want to get on that Boeing flight, take Airbus... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly they exist all over and sometimes behave like monopoly's! Vendor lock in is real... I dont want to give up my iMessage bubbles is not that much different than not wanting to re-train pilots for something other than a 737 (and we get the max). Apple is much easier to pick on in this space because they have always aspired to be a vertically integrated company. YKK is a great example of one of these. They (ykk) make the zippers that DONT suck, they are just expensive vs everything else (sound like apple vs android). SO while the situation with apple might be lamentable, it isnt illegal or uncommon...

I remember when Riccitiello announced per-install pricing for Unity last year and it, quite literally, cost him his job

by ljm 3y ago

I remember when Riccitiello announced per-install pricing for Unity last year and it, quite literally, cost him his job

gigatexal 3y ago

Unity didn’t have an App Store with 3B devices.

thesuperbigfrog 3y ago
Unity didn't have a monopoly on PC gaming or installing software on PCs.
- gigatexal 3y ago
  that too

threesevenths 3y ago

Unity also announced that it would retrospectively apply to all developers who already publish games. Apple is apparently going to let developers remain in the current model or opt into the new one, and if that is correct, makes a difference here.

atlasgcx 3y ago
just want to point out that 1 "update" is also considered 1 "first annual install". So essentially you need to pay for previous acquired members/installs. Like for facebook, assuming they have a force update this year, then they need to pay for every iOS install even if it occurred before.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- oakesm9 3y ago
  Yes, but only if they proactively switch to the new fee terms. They can still with the current terms (which doesn’t allow non AppStore distribution) and not pay the CTF. Makes switching to the new fee structure pretty unattractive for a lot of big companies.

gretch 3y ago

The AppStore is a distribution channel. It’s a plausible business model to charge per unit of distribution, just like a freight company might do. Unity is a game framework/toolkit/engine. It does not do distribution (I sign into unity to download games?). It is literally impossible for unity to even know about the amount of distribution that is happening. That’s why the guy lost his job. Same way the CEO of McDonald’s would be ousted for instituting subscription based pay for cheeseburgers, even though Spotify can do it just fine.

leereeves 3y ago
This fee is charged even if the app isn't distributed on the App Store.
choppaface 3y ago
Except Apple’s App Store has a monopoly on half of all phones, and there are plenty of other potential distributors that would be happy to enter and compete but are locked out. Apple wants you to accept that “just a distribution model” position because it helps them further cement their illegal monopoly.
- zer00eyz 3y ago
  >> Apple ... on half of all phones https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/iphone-market-share-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/iphone-ma... 40% in some places, not even that high globally (android wins by a large margin). But android isn't "one company". In the states, AT&T was a monopoly. They owned phones, the cables, the service, the device in your house... All of it. The rise and fall of ATT is a fascinating story, unix is free today because ATT was a monopoly (it's an interesting side effect not an argument for them). If you dont like apple, you have the choice of android. If you dont like nividia, you can pick AMD, if you dont like AMD, pick intel. Dont want to get on that Boeing flight, take Airbus... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly they exist all over and sometimes behave like monopoly's! Vendor lock in is real... I dont want to give up my iMessage bubbles is not that much different than not wanting to re-train pilots for something other than a 737 (and we get the max). Apple is much easier to pick on in this space because they have always aspired to be a vertically integrated company. YKK is a great example of one of these. They (ykk) make the zippers that DONT suck, they are just expensive vs everything else (sound like apple vs android). SO while the situation with apple might be lamentable, it isnt illegal or uncommon...