46 ms·

Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

167 points by gostsamo 2y ago

deutschepost 2y ago
Although this is good news, Epic will still have to pay Apples Core Technology Fee. For most developers this will be a deal breaker, because it also applies to free software which most of the time is only supported by donations.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  Unity got raked over the coals for this. Real shame Apple more or less got away with it with its ransom bekng to stay inside the walled garden.
  - martijnarts 2y ago
    The fee is being investigated by the EU now, so they may not get away with it entirely.
  - moooo99 2y ago
    > Real shame Apple more or less got away with it with its ransom bekng to stay inside the walled garden. Given with how much Apple got away for years, I am not surprised. Either many people don’t have particularly much insight or a severe case of Stockholm syndrome. What bothers me the most is apples double dipping. You as the consumer basically pay a fee for apples technology. And then they expect the developers to pay the same fee, which will ultimately be paid by the consumer as well. Also ignoring the fact that Apples platform would be completely worthless if it weren’t for the developers building the apps the users want
    - troupo 2y ago
      That's what infuriates me about this discourse. "Do you want Apple to continue to develop stuff and just provide it to developers for free?". iPhone sales alone are 3x Apple's entire R&D spend. And developers pay more than fair share of that because they need at least two devices (an iPhone and a Mac) if they want to develop anything, and a yearly fee. Apple doesn't just double dip. It triple dips, and wants to quadruple and quantuple dip.
      - cafed00d 2y ago
        Why can’t a business be built solely without giving Apple a dime? The web is free — as in freedom and as in gratis. It has a developer tools system funded by hundreds of companies, developers and community members. There’s hardly any order of dipping, if any. Why doesn’t the web compete away Apple’s “dips”?
        troupo 2y ago
        > Why doesn’t the web compete away Apple’s “dips”? Because the web sucks at building apps? Because the web can barely render a few lines of text and several images without lag and jank? Because the web lacks useful and powerful primitives and controls to build anything but the most primitive UIs? Because...
        immibis 2y ago
        Because Apple limits the viability of non-native apps on its mobile devices? Same reason it refused to allow Flash. It wants you to stay in the walled garden with the expensive fees.
        troupo 2y ago
        Android has been the dominant mobile OS for over a decade. Additionally, desktop browsers have been a thing since forever. Where is the multitude of amazing native-like web apps that we keep hearing about?
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        > Android has been the dominant mobile OS for over a decade. worldwide, and not by a large margin. I believe it's 60/40 last I checked. Among US and a few other first world countries, it's nearly 50/50, with a very small advantadge to Apple. Slashing your consumer base in the biggest markets isn't an attractive proposition. >Where is the multitude of amazing native-like web apps that we keep hearing about? well Apple made PWA's harder to do in the EU, so ask them... They're doing what they did to Flash long ago, with much less justification this time around.
  - dagmx 2y ago
    Unity got raked over the coals for *retroactively* changing the licensing fees for developers in a way that negatively impacted a common existing business model amongst their customers. It’s fair to not like the Apple fees but the scenario isn’t equivalent. One was a rug pull. If they did that all along it wouldn’t have been as big an issue.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      I'd say it's still equivalent. I just think apple was smart knowing most people are comfy in the walled garden and won't throw up a fuss. Similar to Unity, these pricing ding the smaller people the most. But unlike Unity, the bigger players aren't joining the protest. I guess I was just foolish thinking businesses would at least think in the middle-term of "what if we want our own storefront one day ". I guess the EU might pick up that ball, but the Apathy from other devs is a bit disenheartening. The same Apathy that let these companies enshittify the net and turn into trillionaires as punishment
      - dagmx 2y ago
        How are they equivalent other than a fee existing at all, and how is that different than a revenue share that Epic do? Apple hasn’t added a new fee to existing devs. The reason you see apathy is that this doesn’t negatively change the status quo. It provides new options. Granted they might not like the terms of the new options , as you clearly don’t. But nothing has been taken away from them in the process. It is completely unsurprising that there is apathy. Unity tried to change the terms from under people which changed their livelihood prospective negatively. If the only equivalence is that there’s a fee, then that applies to a lot more to the point it’s meaningless. Epic do a revenue share. Unity should have done a revenue share but did something more trackable without requiring regular audits. Ultimately it wasn’t Unity’s actual fee that was the problem, had it been a new tier. But it retroactively changed things for people.
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If you had any plans at all to maybe think of an alternative app store, it's equivalent. You have an expectation from a competitor who allows this and IOS instead will charge you despite not using their own store. Pricing that is worse than staying in the walled garden. If you were apathetic/supportive of Apple and would stay on the App Store anyway, nothing changes. And I suppose a lot of businesses are in this group. >But nothing has been taken away from them in the process. It is completely unsurprising that there is apathy. Yes, that's my core problem. But the last two years should have taught me thst companies aren't looking in the long term these days. Epic is, sort of. if only because they have no option given their whole kerfuffle.
  - KronisLV 2y ago
    > Unity got raked over the coals for this. It's kind of crazy, because all of the super high numbers and companies that said they'd go bankrupt were looking at the Personal tier, which basically acted as a sales funnel towards the Pro tier, where the prices would not be as outrageous, even in the original version of the Runtime Fee: https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/unity-runtime-fee-a-look-at-some-numbers https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/unity-runtime-fee-a-look-at... (under "How bad is it, really?") Of course, they since revised it so my article isn't relevant anymore, but if you look at the platform fee cost per install, then it becomes quite obvious and the initial pushback didn't seem to take this into account: https://blog.kronis.dev/images/1/6/-/f/e/16-fee-per-install-graph-dc7488d8.jpeg https://blog.kronis.dev/images/1/6/-/f/e/16-fee-per-install-... Aside from that, though, I guess companies will always try to take a part of the profits that anything offered through their platforms generates (Apple's App Store, Google's Play Store, Valve's Steam etc.). It's good to see things improving at least somewhat, though, since we can't express a lot of progress overnight.
    - ffgjgf1 2y ago
      > It's kind of crazy It’s crazy that Unity’s PR people (and the CEO himself) were so objectively dumb and incompetent while being paid that much. The retroactive part was probably indefensible but they did such a horrible job at explaining the actual fees initially that it utterly jaw dropping…
  - ffgjgf1 2y ago
    And Unity’s terms were/are much more generous than Apple’s
- arghwhat 2y ago
  For now, Apple has been found non-compliant with DMA and will probably have to remove it.
  - Longhanks 2y ago
    No, for now, there are investigations whether Apple is compliant or not. Vestager's opinion does not automatically become the truth.
- AnonC 2y ago
  > For most developers this will be a deal breaker, because it also applies to free software which most of the time is only supported by donations If the app is taking donations or any sort of payment, then the Core Technology Fee applies after 1 million first installs in a year. If it’s a completely free app, this fee does not apply. This fee also does not apply for educational institutions, nonprofits, and government agencies (with a fee waiver). Quoting from “ Understanding the Core Technology Fee for iOS apps in the European Union” [1]: > Developers whose apps do not surpass one million first annual installs per year and nonprofits, educational institutions, and government entities with an Apple Developer Program fee waiver do not pay the CTF. The CTF is also not required for developers with a no revenue business that offer free apps without monetization. [1]: https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/
  - lozenge 2y ago
    What about free as in beer software which includes some ads?
    - hk__2 2y ago
      This doesn't count as "completely free": > Apple provides many conditions where developers do not pay the CTF: […] Developers that earn no revenue whatsoever. This includes offering a free app without monetization of any kind (physical, digital, advertising, or otherwise). (from the link above)
- awelxtr 2y ago
  I love Anki, but it is a tough sell to Apple users because it costs 20 frigging bucks where on other OSs is free
supermatt 2y ago
That third party app stores are subject to review by apple is a problem in itself.
- whazor 2y ago
  And all the apps in the third party store too.
- Barrin92 2y ago
  one step at a time. Bureaucracies and regulators move slow but it seems pretty evident that the wind is at least blowing into the correct direction this time. Might take another five years or so but in a lot of regions it seems like the control over devices and software is slowly breaking down. India, Japan, SK all have similar regulation passed or on the way.
  - lostlogin 2y ago
    > similar regulation passed or on the way. With exclusions that suit them. As you say, the wind is blowing the right way, it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment.
    - Rinzler89 2y ago
      >With exclusions that suit them. Excuse them because they want their own rules and regulations on their territory and not the default US rules that ship with Google and Apple devices. That would be like Budweiser selling their beer in Europe with the condition you have to be 21 to drink it because that's how it is where they're from.
      - olelele 2y ago
        Except we have real beer in Europe:)
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      >it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment. what's the appeal? consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. These stores probably take 2-4 years to prepare properly. A dev won't use half their generation to get around a 30% fee. I think one understated part of the consoles is that that 30% does go into proper support, compared to apple/google that act more as gatekeepers. Larger studios knowing they can get on-site console developers to help debug, optimize, and maybe even fix API issues is well worth such a cut.
modeless 2y ago
> Apple is now telling reporters that this approval is temporary and are demanding we change the buttons in the next version https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1809336745613287445 https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/180933674561328744...
- TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
  Hmm, what? They are supposed to notarize application for security reasons, not make a review about design. Not their store, not their rules.
  - mike_d 2y ago
    Unless that design violates Apple trademarks or patents. Apple notarizing an infringement would be used by Epic to defend their infringement. Epic isn't the victim here, they are acting like spoiled children.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Apple needs to be heavily taxed and regulated into operating their devices like general computers free of their authoritarianism
- tgv 2y ago
  Why? You can buy an Android, or one of its derivatives, or a Huawei.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    Funny how people here are “anti communism” but suggest communism core principles all the time.
    - abhinavk 2y ago
      Socialism for me. Capitalism for thee.
    - talldayo 2y ago
      "people here" are inflamed pundits from social media that wouldn't know the difference between authoritarianism and common-sense regulation if they were being hunted by Chiquita's 'Death Squad'. I wouldn't take HN's cognitive dissonance personally. Half this website has to fellate their favorite CEO on a daily basis or they dematerialize into insecurity.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    That argument didn't work for Microsoft in the 90's (just install BSD or buy a mac if you don't like IE), I don't know why it should work for Apple who's gotten much bigger than 90's MS.
    - macintux 2y ago
      Microsoft had something like 90% of the PC market. That’s why the argument should work for Apple today.
    - 2y ago
holoduke 2y ago
Whats the difference between mobsters owning a city , demanding money from all shops and Apple? There is none. Leadership at Apple is no different. Criminals who need be charged with jail penalties. Only then things will change. Will that ever happen? No. Governments are more or less controlled by lobbyists representing the same evil companies.
- hk__2 2y ago
  > Whats the difference between mobsters owning a city , demanding money from all shops and Apple? Apple produces and sells the device. Without Apple, you wouldn’t be able to build these apps; whereas the shops would exist without the mobsters. (not trying to defend Apple, just answering the question)
  - halayli 2y ago
    Consumers buy these devices. Apple doesn't give them away for free. A consumer should be able to run whatever they want on the devices they have purchased. We are a long way from achieving this basic goal.
    - rozal 2y ago
      But the market has voted with their wallet. iPhones are extremely popular and desired, and people voted for it, in its current state. If people didn’t like what Apple was doing, they can just buy Android. Awfully simple
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      > A consumer should be able to run whatever they want on the devices they have purchased. That has probably never been the case for any product in any category. Your car can't fly, even though you think that the customer is always right.
      - Dylan16807 2y ago
        That has zero connection to running the code of your choice on your car. Which you can do.
rambambram 2y ago
The title alone makes me shiver. Apple "okays" what a government orders them to do. What!?? You and I look right through this power language, but this kind of wording makes people believe Apple is mightier than it is. It's disgusting from Reuters.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > title alone makes me shiver. Apple "okays" what a government orders them to do. What!?? If I’m fined by my city for a code violation, and then I sign off on a contractor to apply the remedies, I’m okaying work I’ve been ordered to do. Nothing in that framing challenges the city’s authority.
- 127 2y ago
  The alternative is to leave EU market. They do have a choice in the matter.
  - Hamuko 2y ago
    Could they even do that without giving up their Irish tax shelter?
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Probably not. Which is why they are begrudgingly applying, slowly. Last thing they want to do is pay their domestic country taxes that goes back (kinda) to the people.
  - jajko 2y ago
    Both are good choices TBH. Maybe Apple is utterly incompatible with the way we Europeans (at least western part for sure) treat freedom and moral behavior and expect companies adhere to those principles. Not empty phrases or half-assed gestures all over the place, but real, concrete, measurable, long term at least good enough behavior. I'd say fine every transgression progressively so much it hurts their finances so badly they actually make that choice, once and for good (for Apple this would be tens of billions each time depending on the case). But cca 450 million potential customers and rich market ain't something to ignore, shares would take 50% or more cut easily.
musicale 2y ago
If there's one thing we can all agree on it is that there should be laws to enable Epic to pay lower commissions on Apple's game store than it pays on other game stores.
solarkraft 2y ago
> Before Apple's announcement, Epic said the iPhone maker had twice rejected documents the video-game publisher submitted to launch the Epic Games Store because the design of certain buttons and labels was similar to those used by its App Store. This is illegal and I hope it leads to Apple being disallowed to still insert itself into the distribution process at all, which should’ve been the case from the start.
- nucleardog 2y ago
  It’s kinda strange to see so many people taking Epic’s account here at face value given they’ve been fined multiple times in multiple countries over their existing store (Fortnite). For example: > The FTC says Fortnite's "counterintuitive, inconsistent, and confusing button configuration led players to incur unwanted charges based on the press of a single button." > Because of those design tricks, the regulator says it found instances where players were charged while attempting to wake the game from sleep mode, while the game was in a loading screen, or by pressing an adjacent button while attempting simply to preview an item. > "These tactics led to hundreds of millions of dollars in unauthorized charges for consumers," the FTC said. > Some parents complained that their children had racked up hundreds of dollars in charges before they realized Epic had charged their credit card without their consent. Accounts who disputed unauthorized transactions on their credit cards often had their entire accounts locked, giving customers no access to content that they had willingly paid for. (https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fornite-ftc-fines-1.6690777 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fornite-ftc-fines-1.6690777) They’ve been fined by multiple governments over button design. Maybe they’re not the most reliable narrator here?
  - solarkraft 2y ago
    Epic‘s no saint, but I don’t expect them to outright lie about something they’ll likely present to officials. Especially considering that the alleged behavior is exactly in line with what Apple has been doing for a long time.
    - nucleardog 2y ago
ksec 2y ago
It is sad state of things. I dislike Apple's inconsistency and hypocrisy. And it was themselves which ultimately lead to the whole regulation. But I still think regulation or government intervention is bad for everybody. As we now have precedence to decouple a lot of things in the name of Anti-Trust or Monopoly.
- talldayo 2y ago
  > As we now have precedence to decouple a lot of things in the name of Anti-Trust or Monopoly. The precedence has always existed. It might seem a bit uncharacteristic from the European perspective, but historically the United States hasn't shied away from butchering it's largest cash cows.
rldjbpin 2y ago
not sure why Sweeney is still so motivated about this, but i am glad someone is leading the charge on countering apple's mobile ecosystem bs. if apple behaves like a judiciary court about these things, then epic is helping setting precendence in favour of the rest of us.

167 points by gostsamo 2y ago

Although this is good news, Epic will still have to pay Apples Core Technology Fee. For most developers this will be a deal breaker, because it also applies to free software which most of the time is only supported by donations.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
Unity got raked over the coals for this. Real shame Apple more or less got away with it with its ransom bekng to stay inside the walled garden.
- martijnarts 2y ago
  The fee is being investigated by the EU now, so they may not get away with it entirely.
- moooo99 2y ago
  > Real shame Apple more or less got away with it with its ransom bekng to stay inside the walled garden. Given with how much Apple got away for years, I am not surprised. Either many people don’t have particularly much insight or a severe case of Stockholm syndrome. What bothers me the most is apples double dipping. You as the consumer basically pay a fee for apples technology. And then they expect the developers to pay the same fee, which will ultimately be paid by the consumer as well. Also ignoring the fact that Apples platform would be completely worthless if it weren’t for the developers building the apps the users want
  - troupo 2y ago
    That's what infuriates me about this discourse. "Do you want Apple to continue to develop stuff and just provide it to developers for free?". iPhone sales alone are 3x Apple's entire R&D spend. And developers pay more than fair share of that because they need at least two devices (an iPhone and a Mac) if they want to develop anything, and a yearly fee. Apple doesn't just double dip. It triple dips, and wants to quadruple and quantuple dip.
    - cafed00d 2y ago
      Why can’t a business be built solely without giving Apple a dime? The web is free — as in freedom and as in gratis. It has a developer tools system funded by hundreds of companies, developers and community members. There’s hardly any order of dipping, if any. Why doesn’t the web compete away Apple’s “dips”?
      - troupo 2y ago
        > Why doesn’t the web compete away Apple’s “dips”? Because the web sucks at building apps? Because the web can barely render a few lines of text and several images without lag and jank? Because the web lacks useful and powerful primitives and controls to build anything but the most primitive UIs? Because...
      - immibis 2y ago
        Because Apple limits the viability of non-native apps on its mobile devices? Same reason it refused to allow Flash. It wants you to stay in the walled garden with the expensive fees.
        troupo 2y ago
        Android has been the dominant mobile OS for over a decade. Additionally, desktop browsers have been a thing since forever. Where is the multitude of amazing native-like web apps that we keep hearing about?
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        > Android has been the dominant mobile OS for over a decade. worldwide, and not by a large margin. I believe it's 60/40 last I checked. Among US and a few other first world countries, it's nearly 50/50, with a very small advantadge to Apple. Slashing your consumer base in the biggest markets isn't an attractive proposition. >Where is the multitude of amazing native-like web apps that we keep hearing about? well Apple made PWA's harder to do in the EU, so ask them... They're doing what they did to Flash long ago, with much less justification this time around.
- dagmx 2y ago
  Unity got raked over the coals for *retroactively* changing the licensing fees for developers in a way that negatively impacted a common existing business model amongst their customers. It’s fair to not like the Apple fees but the scenario isn’t equivalent. One was a rug pull. If they did that all along it wouldn’t have been as big an issue.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    I'd say it's still equivalent. I just think apple was smart knowing most people are comfy in the walled garden and won't throw up a fuss. Similar to Unity, these pricing ding the smaller people the most. But unlike Unity, the bigger players aren't joining the protest. I guess I was just foolish thinking businesses would at least think in the middle-term of "what if we want our own storefront one day ". I guess the EU might pick up that ball, but the Apathy from other devs is a bit disenheartening. The same Apathy that let these companies enshittify the net and turn into trillionaires as punishment
    - dagmx 2y ago
      How are they equivalent other than a fee existing at all, and how is that different than a revenue share that Epic do? Apple hasn’t added a new fee to existing devs. The reason you see apathy is that this doesn’t negatively change the status quo. It provides new options. Granted they might not like the terms of the new options , as you clearly don’t. But nothing has been taken away from them in the process. It is completely unsurprising that there is apathy. Unity tried to change the terms from under people which changed their livelihood prospective negatively. If the only equivalence is that there’s a fee, then that applies to a lot more to the point it’s meaningless. Epic do a revenue share. Unity should have done a revenue share but did something more trackable without requiring regular audits. Ultimately it wasn’t Unity’s actual fee that was the problem, had it been a new tier. But it retroactively changed things for people.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        If you had any plans at all to maybe think of an alternative app store, it's equivalent. You have an expectation from a competitor who allows this and IOS instead will charge you despite not using their own store. Pricing that is worse than staying in the walled garden. If you were apathetic/supportive of Apple and would stay on the App Store anyway, nothing changes. And I suppose a lot of businesses are in this group. >But nothing has been taken away from them in the process. It is completely unsurprising that there is apathy. Yes, that's my core problem. But the last two years should have taught me thst companies aren't looking in the long term these days. Epic is, sort of. if only because they have no option given their whole kerfuffle.
- KronisLV 2y ago
  > Unity got raked over the coals for this. It's kind of crazy, because all of the super high numbers and companies that said they'd go bankrupt were looking at the Personal tier, which basically acted as a sales funnel towards the Pro tier, where the prices would not be as outrageous, even in the original version of the Runtime Fee: https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/unity-runtime-fee-a-look-at-some-numbers https://blog.kronis.dev/articles/unity-runtime-fee-a-look-at... (under "How bad is it, really?") Of course, they since revised it so my article isn't relevant anymore, but if you look at the platform fee cost per install, then it becomes quite obvious and the initial pushback didn't seem to take this into account: https://blog.kronis.dev/images/1/6/-/f/e/16-fee-per-install-graph-dc7488d8.jpeg https://blog.kronis.dev/images/1/6/-/f/e/16-fee-per-install-... Aside from that, though, I guess companies will always try to take a part of the profits that anything offered through their platforms generates (Apple's App Store, Google's Play Store, Valve's Steam etc.). It's good to see things improving at least somewhat, though, since we can't express a lot of progress overnight.
  - ffgjgf1 2y ago
    > It's kind of crazy It’s crazy that Unity’s PR people (and the CEO himself) were so objectively dumb and incompetent while being paid that much. The retroactive part was probably indefensible but they did such a horrible job at explaining the actual fees initially that it utterly jaw dropping…
- ffgjgf1 2y ago
  And Unity’s terms were/are much more generous than Apple’s
arghwhat 2y ago
For now, Apple has been found non-compliant with DMA and will probably have to remove it.
- Longhanks 2y ago
  No, for now, there are investigations whether Apple is compliant or not. Vestager's opinion does not automatically become the truth.
AnonC 2y ago
> For most developers this will be a deal breaker, because it also applies to free software which most of the time is only supported by donations If the app is taking donations or any sort of payment, then the Core Technology Fee applies after 1 million first installs in a year. If it’s a completely free app, this fee does not apply. This fee also does not apply for educational institutions, nonprofits, and government agencies (with a fee waiver). Quoting from “ Understanding the Core Technology Fee for iOS apps in the European Union” [1]: > Developers whose apps do not surpass one million first annual installs per year and nonprofits, educational institutions, and government entities with an Apple Developer Program fee waiver do not pay the CTF. The CTF is also not required for developers with a no revenue business that offer free apps without monetization. [1]: https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/ https://developer.apple.com/support/core-technology-fee/
- lozenge 2y ago
  What about free as in beer software which includes some ads?
  - hk__2 2y ago
    This doesn't count as "completely free": > Apple provides many conditions where developers do not pay the CTF: […] Developers that earn no revenue whatsoever. This includes offering a free app without monetization of any kind (physical, digital, advertising, or otherwise). (from the link above)
awelxtr 2y ago
I love Anki, but it is a tough sell to Apple users because it costs 20 frigging bucks where on other OSs is free

supermatt 2y ago

That third party app stores are subject to review by apple is a problem in itself.

whazor 2y ago
And all the apps in the third party store too.
Barrin92 2y ago
one step at a time. Bureaucracies and regulators move slow but it seems pretty evident that the wind is at least blowing into the correct direction this time. Might take another five years or so but in a lot of regions it seems like the control over devices and software is slowly breaking down. India, Japan, SK all have similar regulation passed or on the way.
- lostlogin 2y ago
  > similar regulation passed or on the way. With exclusions that suit them. As you say, the wind is blowing the right way, it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment.
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >With exclusions that suit them. Excuse them because they want their own rules and regulations on their territory and not the default US rules that ship with Google and Apple devices. That would be like Budweiser selling their beer in Europe with the condition you have to be 21 to drink it because that's how it is where they're from.
    - olelele 2y ago
      Except we have real beer in Europe:)
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    >it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment. what's the appeal? consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. These stores probably take 2-4 years to prepare properly. A dev won't use half their generation to get around a 30% fee. I think one understated part of the consoles is that that 30% does go into proper support, compared to apple/google that act more as gatekeepers. Larger studios knowing they can get on-site console developers to help debug, optimize, and maybe even fix API issues is well worth such a cut.

modeless 2y ago

> Apple is now telling reporters that this approval is temporary and are demanding we change the buttons in the next version https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/1809336745613287445 https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/180933674561328744...

TheLoafOfBread 2y ago
Hmm, what? They are supposed to notarize application for security reasons, not make a review about design. Not their store, not their rules.
- mike_d 2y ago
  Unless that design violates Apple trademarks or patents. Apple notarizing an infringement would be used by Epic to defend their infringement. Epic isn't the victim here, they are acting like spoiled children.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Apple needs to be heavily taxed and regulated into operating their devices like general computers free of their authoritarianism

tgv 2y ago
Why? You can buy an Android, or one of its derivatives, or a Huawei.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Funny how people here are “anti communism” but suggest communism core principles all the time.
  - abhinavk 2y ago
    Socialism for me. Capitalism for thee.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    "people here" are inflamed pundits from social media that wouldn't know the difference between authoritarianism and common-sense regulation if they were being hunted by Chiquita's 'Death Squad'. I wouldn't take HN's cognitive dissonance personally. Half this website has to fellate their favorite CEO on a daily basis or they dematerialize into insecurity.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  That argument didn't work for Microsoft in the 90's (just install BSD or buy a mac if you don't like IE), I don't know why it should work for Apple who's gotten much bigger than 90's MS.
  - macintux 2y ago
    Microsoft had something like 90% of the PC market. That’s why the argument should work for Apple today.
  - 2y ago

holoduke 2y ago

Whats the difference between mobsters owning a city , demanding money from all shops and Apple? There is none. Leadership at Apple is no different. Criminals who need be charged with jail penalties. Only then things will change. Will that ever happen? No. Governments are more or less controlled by lobbyists representing the same evil companies.

hk__2 2y ago
> Whats the difference between mobsters owning a city , demanding money from all shops and Apple? Apple produces and sells the device. Without Apple, you wouldn’t be able to build these apps; whereas the shops would exist without the mobsters. (not trying to defend Apple, just answering the question)
- halayli 2y ago
  Consumers buy these devices. Apple doesn't give them away for free. A consumer should be able to run whatever they want on the devices they have purchased. We are a long way from achieving this basic goal.
  - rozal 2y ago
    But the market has voted with their wallet. iPhones are extremely popular and desired, and people voted for it, in its current state. If people didn’t like what Apple was doing, they can just buy Android. Awfully simple
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    > A consumer should be able to run whatever they want on the devices they have purchased. That has probably never been the case for any product in any category. Your car can't fly, even though you think that the customer is always right.
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      That has zero connection to running the code of your choice on your car. Which you can do.

rambambram 2y ago

The title alone makes me shiver. Apple "okays" what a government orders them to do. What!?? You and I look right through this power language, but this kind of wording makes people believe Apple is mightier than it is. It's disgusting from Reuters.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> title alone makes me shiver. Apple "okays" what a government orders them to do. What!?? If I’m fined by my city for a code violation, and then I sign off on a contractor to apply the remedies, I’m okaying work I’ve been ordered to do. Nothing in that framing challenges the city’s authority.
127 2y ago
The alternative is to leave EU market. They do have a choice in the matter.
- Hamuko 2y ago
  Could they even do that without giving up their Irish tax shelter?
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    Probably not. Which is why they are begrudgingly applying, slowly. Last thing they want to do is pay their domestic country taxes that goes back (kinda) to the people.
- jajko 2y ago
  Both are good choices TBH. Maybe Apple is utterly incompatible with the way we Europeans (at least western part for sure) treat freedom and moral behavior and expect companies adhere to those principles. Not empty phrases or half-assed gestures all over the place, but real, concrete, measurable, long term at least good enough behavior. I'd say fine every transgression progressively so much it hurts their finances so badly they actually make that choice, once and for good (for Apple this would be tens of billions each time depending on the case). But cca 450 million potential customers and rich market ain't something to ignore, shares would take 50% or more cut easily.

musicale 2y ago

If there's one thing we can all agree on it is that there should be laws to enable Epic to pay lower commissions on Apple's game store than it pays on other game stores.

solarkraft 2y ago

> Before Apple's announcement, Epic said the iPhone maker had twice rejected documents the video-game publisher submitted to launch the Epic Games Store because the design of certain buttons and labels was similar to those used by its App Store. This is illegal and I hope it leads to Apple being disallowed to still insert itself into the distribution process at all, which should’ve been the case from the start.

nucleardog 2y ago
It’s kinda strange to see so many people taking Epic’s account here at face value given they’ve been fined multiple times in multiple countries over their existing store (Fortnite). For example: > The FTC says Fortnite's "counterintuitive, inconsistent, and confusing button configuration led players to incur unwanted charges based on the press of a single button." > Because of those design tricks, the regulator says it found instances where players were charged while attempting to wake the game from sleep mode, while the game was in a loading screen, or by pressing an adjacent button while attempting simply to preview an item. > "These tactics led to hundreds of millions of dollars in unauthorized charges for consumers," the FTC said. > Some parents complained that their children had racked up hundreds of dollars in charges before they realized Epic had charged their credit card without their consent. Accounts who disputed unauthorized transactions on their credit cards often had their entire accounts locked, giving customers no access to content that they had willingly paid for. (https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fornite-ftc-fines-1.6690777 https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fornite-ftc-fines-1.6690777) They’ve been fined by multiple governments over button design. Maybe they’re not the most reliable narrator here?
- solarkraft 2y ago
  Epic‘s no saint, but I don’t expect them to outright lie about something they’ll likely present to officials. Especially considering that the alleged behavior is exactly in line with what Apple has been doing for a long time.
  - nucleardog 2y ago

ksec 2y ago

It is sad state of things. I dislike Apple's inconsistency and hypocrisy. And it was themselves which ultimately lead to the whole regulation. But I still think regulation or government intervention is bad for everybody. As we now have precedence to decouple a lot of things in the name of Anti-Trust or Monopoly.

talldayo 2y ago
> As we now have precedence to decouple a lot of things in the name of Anti-Trust or Monopoly. The precedence has always existed. It might seem a bit uncharacteristic from the European perspective, but historically the United States hasn't shied away from butchering it's largest cash cows.

rldjbpin 2y ago

not sure why Sweeney is still so motivated about this, but i am glad someone is leading the charge on countering apple's mobile ecosystem bs. if apple behaves like a judiciary court about these things, then epic is helping setting precendence in favour of the rest of us.