5 ms·

> contributes nothing Other than cultivating a base of iOS users spending 7x more than Android users on apps[1]. That sounds like significant value to me and n

> contributes nothing Other than cultivating a base of iOS users spending 7x more than Android users on apps[1]. That sounds like significant value to me and not dissimilar to what the console manufacturers pitch to developers. [1] https://9to5mac.com/2023/09/06/iphone-users-spend-apps/ https://9to5mac.com/2023/09/06/iphone-users-spend-apps/

smoldesu 3y ago
> Other than cultivating a base of iOS users spending 7x more than Android users on apps[1]. Those iOS users certainly aren't spending 7x more on AppleTV and iTunes albums. It's because of third-parties that Apple can convince users to spend money in the first place. > That sounds like significant value to me and not dissimilar to what the console manufacturers pitch to developers. If console manufacturers had the hardware margins Apple did, they wouldn't be console manufacturers anymore.
- matwood 3y ago
  Cool, so all the 3rd parties can move to Android and the affluent users will follow. Oh wait. The problem is assuming that either party is the one providing all the value. Of course the app developers are providing value, but so is Apple. > If console manufacturers had the hardware margins Apple did, they wouldn't be console manufacturers anymore. Margins are irrelevant in this discussion.
  - madeofpalk 3y ago
    I mean, if all the third party app developers did stop developing for iOS, I would imagine a significant amount would move to Android.
    - akaralar 3y ago
      Right, but looked from the other angle, if Apple didn’t provide an easy enough experience for developing apps, less 3rd party developers would develop and they wouldn’t have access to a luxurious market. It’s a two way relationship, these things don’t exist in a vacuum.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        If Apple didn't provide an easy experience for developing software, nobody would want to buy an iPhone. That's why the web browser portion was essential from the start - Apple needs third-parties in order to sell their hardware.
        akaralar 3y ago
        that’s not entirely true. there was no 3rd party software in the first year and people still bought it. On another note they managed to create a luxurious market although the other platform also allows 3rd party apps. What I’m trying to say is, yeah it’s undeniable that 3rd party devs bring something on the table, but so does Apple
        smoldesu 3y ago
        There absolutely was third-party content and software on iPhone, at launch. The web browser was one of the biggest selling-points when it was announced, alongside the phone and music-player functionality. > On another note they managed to create a luxurious market although the other platform also allows 3rd party apps. Many proven monopolies seemingly "improve" their user experience to get users to defend it. Famously, Bell Telephones had imposed a severely-limiting monopoly on phone hardware, but made long-distance calling free as a consolation to users. Bell's new "luxurious market" didn't excuse their prior market abuses, though. > it’s undeniable that 3rd party devs bring something on the table, but so does Apple I'm trying to say the opposite. If Apple was providing first-class support to any of their hardware-products, then they wouldn't need to impose anticompetitive limitations on third-parties. What Apple brings to the table is deliberately gimped to manipulate software margins and reduce user choice as a consequence. Third party devs are the only ones bringing things to the table; Apple is charging them for the privilege. Again - if you want to test this, ask around and see how many people would buy an iPhone with just first-party content. Nobody would, and the clear and eminent reason is that Apple does not provide a superior experience by removing user choice.
        akaralar 3y ago
zmmmmm 3y ago
Epic doesn't want those users. It is not asking for any placement in the app store. It just wants it's own users who have iPhones to be able to access its software which it will funnel to them through their own channel. Apple contributes nothing to cultivate the gaming market overall. No marketing, no investment, no PR, no subsidation of the hardware etc. Apple simply gets in the way, making it harder, adding restrictions, invading Epic's customers privacy and then to add insult to injury takes a huge slice of the profits.
- dwaite 3y ago
  and all Epic has to do is commit to honoring a contract (this time) to do that.
- password4321 3y ago
  > Apple contributes nothing to cultivate the gaming market overall. https://www.apple.com/apple-arcade/ https://www.apple.com/apple-arcade/
  - fennecbutt 3y ago
    Lmao, that's an Ad for Apple. It has nothing to do with supporting the gaming industry itself.
    - password4321 3y ago
      Thank goodness then that the parent comment mentioned the gaming market rather than the gaming industry! > No marketing, no investment, no PR How is Apple Arcade not at least marketing and PR for gaming?

smoldesu 3y ago

> Other than cultivating a base of iOS users spending 7x more than Android users on apps[1]. Those iOS users certainly aren't spending 7x more on AppleTV and iTunes albums. It's because of third-parties that Apple can convince users to spend money in the first place. > That sounds like significant value to me and not dissimilar to what the console manufacturers pitch to developers. If console manufacturers had the hardware margins Apple did, they wouldn't be console manufacturers anymore.

matwood 3y ago
Cool, so all the 3rd parties can move to Android and the affluent users will follow. Oh wait. The problem is assuming that either party is the one providing all the value. Of course the app developers are providing value, but so is Apple. > If console manufacturers had the hardware margins Apple did, they wouldn't be console manufacturers anymore. Margins are irrelevant in this discussion.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  I mean, if all the third party app developers did stop developing for iOS, I would imagine a significant amount would move to Android.
  - akaralar 3y ago
    Right, but looked from the other angle, if Apple didn’t provide an easy enough experience for developing apps, less 3rd party developers would develop and they wouldn’t have access to a luxurious market. It’s a two way relationship, these things don’t exist in a vacuum.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      If Apple didn't provide an easy experience for developing software, nobody would want to buy an iPhone. That's why the web browser portion was essential from the start - Apple needs third-parties in order to sell their hardware.
      - akaralar 3y ago
        that’s not entirely true. there was no 3rd party software in the first year and people still bought it. On another note they managed to create a luxurious market although the other platform also allows 3rd party apps. What I’m trying to say is, yeah it’s undeniable that 3rd party devs bring something on the table, but so does Apple
        smoldesu 3y ago
        There absolutely was third-party content and software on iPhone, at launch. The web browser was one of the biggest selling-points when it was announced, alongside the phone and music-player functionality. > On another note they managed to create a luxurious market although the other platform also allows 3rd party apps. Many proven monopolies seemingly "improve" their user experience to get users to defend it. Famously, Bell Telephones had imposed a severely-limiting monopoly on phone hardware, but made long-distance calling free as a consolation to users. Bell's new "luxurious market" didn't excuse their prior market abuses, though. > it’s undeniable that 3rd party devs bring something on the table, but so does Apple I'm trying to say the opposite. If Apple was providing first-class support to any of their hardware-products, then they wouldn't need to impose anticompetitive limitations on third-parties. What Apple brings to the table is deliberately gimped to manipulate software margins and reduce user choice as a consequence. Third party devs are the only ones bringing things to the table; Apple is charging them for the privilege. Again - if you want to test this, ask around and see how many people would buy an iPhone with just first-party content. Nobody would, and the clear and eminent reason is that Apple does not provide a superior experience by removing user choice.
        akaralar 3y ago

zmmmmm 3y ago

Epic doesn't want those users. It is not asking for any placement in the app store. It just wants it's own users who have iPhones to be able to access its software which it will funnel to them through their own channel. Apple contributes nothing to cultivate the gaming market overall. No marketing, no investment, no PR, no subsidation of the hardware etc. Apple simply gets in the way, making it harder, adding restrictions, invading Epic's customers privacy and then to add insult to injury takes a huge slice of the profits.

dwaite 3y ago
and all Epic has to do is commit to honoring a contract (this time) to do that.
password4321 3y ago
> Apple contributes nothing to cultivate the gaming market overall. https://www.apple.com/apple-arcade/ https://www.apple.com/apple-arcade/
- fennecbutt 3y ago
  Lmao, that's an Ad for Apple. It has nothing to do with supporting the gaming industry itself.
  - password4321 3y ago
    Thank goodness then that the parent comment mentioned the gaming market rather than the gaming industry! > No marketing, no investment, no PR How is Apple Arcade not at least marketing and PR for gaming?