-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
All these "fuck Apple" posts are dumb as shit. It's like someone cheering a can of Coke being shoplifted because they hate the wide profit margins on soda. There was no deception, fraud, or antitrust behavior. The fees are incredibly clear. A video game is not insulin and Apple can charge whatever the fuck they want to host an app. If Epic believes the platform is too expensive, they can simply drop iOS support.
I think my ideal outcome here is: Case drags for a year and Apple loses the case and must allow competing stores on iOS. However, kids stuck with their iPhones and just find other games to play. Fortnight never recovers. Both companies eat shit.
I mean, I'm 99.9% sure this will not lead to anything except a suuper minor change in climate and exceptance of the closed nature of apple devices, BUT in theory this could lead to a court saying that platform holders are not allowed to charge whatever they want because they have a storefront monopoly, the charges need to be transparent and reasonable for the services they bring to the store's client (meaning they'd need to justify a 30% cut... is that anywhere in relation to the effort it takes them or are they just using their market muscle). And that would lead to industry wide changes that could be interesting and possibly pro-consumer.
It will and the people cheering epic on here will turn on them within seconds once it hits darling Sony or Nintendo
I'm under the belief they didn't just skirt the rules hoping it slid past Apple's watchful eye... they knew this was going to happen and now they're ready to hit back.
Epic are claiming that Apple's preventing competing app stores and competing payment methods on iOS is unlawful, being an unreasonable restraint of trade.
They argue that Apple's total control over what happens on IOS regarding app stores, payments and the 30% cut is anticompetitive and a detriment to app developers and consumers alike.
It comes to a point with most things that when you gain so much of the market share your responsibilities almost change. It is I guess their right to do so, technically. However doesn't mean they should. Especially since because their market share is so large app developers often have to just accept whatever they are told because if not they lose a shit ton of market share.
When companies get that large, practices like this are abusive to the industry. Full stop.
I don't want to hear Spotify's stance on this... considering how little they pay music artists compared to Apple.
Do you have a source that says they negotiated terms? IIRC they simply removed the option to pay in-app and that was within existing iOS TOS at the time.
Netflix stops paying the 'Apple tax' on its $853M in annual iOS revenue | TechCrunch
Earlier this year, Netflix was seen testing a bypass of iTunes billing across dozens of markets worldwide. As 2018 draws to a close, Netflix -- the App
techcrunch.com
Sounds like you might soon be proven wrong there, bud.
Truly a shitty day for libertarians.
In game right now lol.
...That's enough internet for me today.
I think people very much understand the appeal of the "walled garden" from this aspect. The question for the courts will be if the financial leverage and control Apple is able to exert over developers as a result of maintaining this control is justifiable.
Nintendo's total control over manufacturing and publishing on the original NES in the U.S. was likely heavily beneficial to helping revive the industry in this country, and companies went along with it for years. But time and pressure have a way of changing things.
Many consumers complained actually. Spotify is more expensive through iOS than directly from Spotify.
I quickly scanned through the complaint, and it's kind of incredible how much they talk about how the app store operates and the video game market, but completely ignore games consoles. They compare phone OSs to desktop computer OSs, and completely ignore the obvious point of comparison that is games console OSs. XBox in particular runs on a modified Hyper-V with the game running alongside a version of Windows. They must know that the comparison undermines their argument.
it's a prophetic book about our dystopian present and future, written in 1949 by George Orwell
Can't wait for the receipts when this happens and we hear how gamers rise up was a mistake.
Interesting. This is a really bizarre case.
On one hand, I agree that Apple has the right to do whatever they want...Its their ecosystem.
On another hand, is it not basically a monopoly on the mobile game market? Sure, Android exists...But 30% or 0% is basically a "bend over and take it or peace out", right? What does the Android vs iOS marketshare look like???
I understand the reference they are trying to parody, but yeah... this is tacky, tasteless, and probably not the best metaphor to use today of all fucking days.
This is why I think this entire situation is either going to disappear into nothing or unravel into a gigantic mess. The argument is essentially going to turn into allowing software to run on hardware regardless of the source since there is nothing wrong with Apple setting rules for their App Store just that there is no way to compete with the App Store in a locked down ecosystem. Then that argument will not only cover game consoles but straight up the operating system that any piece of hardware that is meant to act as a gateway to purchasing software.
If this ends up removing the requirement to go through apple for in app purchases this is much much larger than just vidya. It probably wont end up doing that but one can dream and this is at least highlighting the highway robbery apple have been engaged in.
I've had clients waste so much time and money + compromise their products and real life business models trying to get around the hefty cuts and app store requirements apple ask for.
Edit: And that's not even mentioning how much of a hassle and time developers have to waste getting through their app approval process, which is only complicated and difficult because of these policies. So this even has consequences for smaller app developers who aren't even trying to make money on the app store.
A good real world metaphor is to think of it as a toll booth on your way home from work where you need to pay 1 company (not the government so it doesnt even theoretically go to the greater good) 30% of what you earned that day. They more or less control and are making unreasonable amounts of money from a very large part of the internet by doing this (while also arbitrarily crippling the profits of potential competitors), it's 100% anti competitive because no one else has the resources to make a competitive product partly due to their app store policies. It has real world consequences as I outlined above, it's not just big guys like Epic that this fucks over.
The next step in your argument is to ask people to go make their own app store if they're so unhappy.
I've had clients waste so much time and money + compromise their products and real life business models trying to get around the hefty cuts and app store requirements apple ask for.
Edit: And that's not even mentioning how much of a hassle and time developers have to waste getting through their app approval process, which is only complicated and difficult because of these policies. So this even has consequences for smaller app developers who aren't even trying to make money on the app store.
A good real world metaphor is to think of it as a toll booth on your way home from work where you need to pay 1 company (not the government so it doesnt even theoretically go to the greater good) 30% of what you earned that day. They more or less control and are making unreasonable amounts of money from a very large part of the internet by doing this (while also arbitrarily crippling the profits of potential competitors), it's 100% anti competitive because no one else has the resources to make a competitive product partly due to their app store policies. It has real world consequences as I outlined above, it's not just big guys like Epic that this fucks over.
The next step in your argument is to ask people to go make their own app store if they're so unhappy.
Last edited:
Tbh if not for apple's stubbornness to control the platform epic would have almost no leverage. I can't imagine they can go against Google the same way, since they always point to android's side-loading feature.
I'm looking forward to see the settlement Epic will have to pay Apple in about half a decade's time.
A couple of things to note which might help people decide who to get mad at or root for
- Epic is protesting the 30% Apple revenue cut by bypassing Apples system and is offering only a 20% discount to consumers thereby making even more money per transaction
- Google Play has exactly the same rules as Apple regarding alternate stores and payment systems. They are just way more lax at enforcing them.
- Apple, Google, Sony PlayStation, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Steam all have a 30% revenue share and (mostly) similar rules with respect to their platform and ecosystem (Steam being somewhat of an outlier), so Apple isn't doing anything particularly different than the other platform manufacturers
You do realize how odd your take here is right?
There are 2 platforms for smart phones. iOS and Android. It's essentially a 2 headed monopoly with both roughly having a 50% split in both areas. If there were a ton for different options you would have a point. But there is only 2. App developers have 2 places to sell. Period. When half the market is on one platform and you are forced into a shitty situation with Apple or you literally lose HALF the market.
The whole "if you don't like it you can leave" is such a garbage mindset when you are talking about industries like this with literally only 2 options
Consumers choose to be in that barbed-wire garden, but Apple shouldn't have been allowed to have that in the first place.
Apple was clever to provide select streaming provides a "exclusive program" that they can subscribe to avoid the tax. I don't like either of these super rich parties, but I hate Apple more than Epic so it should be a fun fight.
Apple was clever to provide select streaming provides a "exclusive program" that they can subscribe to avoid the tax. I don't like either of these super rich parties, but I hate Apple more than Epic so it should be a fun fight.
Last edited:
30% is the industry standard. We've seen stores try to disrupt it (on PC) with mixed success (RIP, Discord store with its 10% cut). EGS is surviving, but it's still funneling enormous mount of money into freebies and exclusives to generate engagement (and their feature set is still shit)
A court isn't going to pick "what's reasonable", because when courts decide what's "reasonable" they tend to..... look at standard industry practices.
And this lawsuit isn't about the amount of the cut. It's about lack of ability to create a competing storefront to distribute iOS apps, or to create an alternative payment method in iOS apps without paying Apple their share.
I hate google, but android doesn't have the same issue. The only way you can install new software (without jailbreaking) is through the Apple App Store. Not so with google. I think the 30% cut is totally reasonable or at least defensible, IFF they allow other people to run app stores on ios, or allow software to be sideloaded somehow. They do on macs and still do just fine.
In most countries it's close to a 50/50 split with each having a bit more in some places than others.
Apple's cut is the same as Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo's cut, yeah? Doesn't it seem kind of odd that they aren't also defendants in this lawsuit? Maybe I'm not understanding something correctly.
This lawsuit has been coming for a long time. I have a lot of friends in development, and I have heard every single one of them at one point complain about Apple being unclear, restrictive, rejecting apps for certain features while other/bigger companies have had the same implementation of features they want, and just an overall frustration with the limitations they impose.
People who are framing this as something that we as consumer shouldn't get behind, are not fully understanding the power Apple currently holds over the companies who's apps you love using everyday. It is quite frankly strange that we accept that a device maker, especially of a device that we use for general purposes, to collect a fee on all purchases made with that device.
I think it's a great thing that this power gets challenged and in such as visible way. You may not support Epic as a company, Tim Sweeney as a person and I fully get that, I do. They might be in for the profit, want their own store on iOS etc., but if changes are the result it will benefit all of us. Just for consumers: if this lead to increasing the level of choice, whether it's in payment options, stores to download from or otherwise, it would be a great thing.
BTW: Typing this on my Macbook Pro, with myIpad Pro an Iphone 11 in the same room. I'm not in anyway an Apple hater, but will say they have made some disappointing decisions lately. If it was up to me, we would end up in a situation where multiple payment options are accepted, devs pay for the features provided by Apple they actually want to use. Use the store? Pay a fee for hosting and listing. Use the payment system? Pay a fee on the purchases. The result will be choice and competition, and I see that as a good thing.
People who are framing this as something that we as consumer shouldn't get behind, are not fully understanding the power Apple currently holds over the companies who's apps you love using everyday. It is quite frankly strange that we accept that a device maker, especially of a device that we use for general purposes, to collect a fee on all purchases made with that device.
I think it's a great thing that this power gets challenged and in such as visible way. You may not support Epic as a company, Tim Sweeney as a person and I fully get that, I do. They might be in for the profit, want their own store on iOS etc., but if changes are the result it will benefit all of us. Just for consumers: if this lead to increasing the level of choice, whether it's in payment options, stores to download from or otherwise, it would be a great thing.
BTW: Typing this on my Macbook Pro, with myIpad Pro an Iphone 11 in the same room. I'm not in anyway an Apple hater, but will say they have made some disappointing decisions lately. If it was up to me, we would end up in a situation where multiple payment options are accepted, devs pay for the features provided by Apple they actually want to use. Use the store? Pay a fee for hosting and listing. Use the payment system? Pay a fee on the purchases. The result will be choice and competition, and I see that as a good thing.
Last edited:
Do you have a source that says they negotiated terms? IIRC they simply removed the option to pay in-app and that was within existing iOS TOS at the time.
Netflix stops paying the 'Apple tax' on its $853M in annual iOS revenue | TechCrunch
Earlier this year, Netflix was seen testing a bypass of iTunes billing across dozens of markets worldwide. As 2018 draws to a close, Netflix -- the App
I know it came up during cook's senate testimony, but got the company wrong - it was Amazon who negotiated a better deal, not netflix
Apple's App Store commission structure called into question in antitrust hearing | TechCrunch
Apple CEO Tim Cook defended the company’s App Store commission structure in his sworn testimony before the House Antitrust Subcommittee on Wednesday. He
techcrunch.com
Calling out cook's BS that "every dev is treated equally" when they 100% are not treated equally
That's part of what Epic are arguing: that in practice app developers are forced to use the Apple app store (because of the market share for iOS devices) (and Android), because those two together constitute almost 100% of the market. And then they are forced to allow Apple to take a 30% cut, with no option of promoting their apps on a different app store on iOS or offering another payment method on iOS.
Oh wow.
This definitely seems like it will be an interesting outcome. At least I hope.
Ah yes, a big moneyhatting company getting 20% less money than it thinks it deserves is something totally comparable to Orwell's totalitarian dystopia.
Apple's store and policies need to change quite a bit, yes, but getting the Fortnite audience to annoy any adult they can find to put pressure on the system is not the way to do it.
Apple's store and policies need to change quite a bit, yes, but getting the Fortnite audience to annoy any adult they can find to put pressure on the system is not the way to do it.