After a lengthy legal battle and billion-dollar loss, 'Fortnite' is back on iOS

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 36
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.

    Saying Apple deserves a 30% cut of all digital goods because they built the platform is like saying a mall owner deserves a percentage of everything sold in every store, forever, even after the store builds its own loyal customer base and no longer relies on foot traffic.

    Sure, Apple built the “mall” - the App Store - and they deserve fair rent for access and discovery. But when Apple blocks tenants from even telling customers that cheaper options exist outside the mall, or forces them to use Apple’s own checkout system, it stops being about fair business and becomes about control.

    The real issue isn’t whether Apple should earn money - they already do, handsomely. It’s that they’ve positioned themselves as landlord, tax authority, and competitor all at once. Epic’s win doesn’t mean developers escape costs - it just means they can finally choose how to run their businesses. That’s not freeloading. That’s competition.

    And let’s be honest: a free economy isn’t absolute. It needs guardrails. When two companies are the app economy, protecting free markets requires regulation - not just to stop abuse, but to keep the system open for the next generation of creators.

    Let's see how this Apple-as-mall-owner metaphor works.

    Suppose I own a mall. It's a beautiful facility in a great location with massive foot traffic. I write into the lease agreement that every tenant has to pay me a percentage of gross sales (interestingly, I charge nothing else; so if you don't do any business or give away your products and services for free, you don't pay me a dime. You sign a lease under those terms; you might have preferred a flat monthly rent, but after weighing the costs and benefits you decide it's worth it.

    Then you decide to get "clever" and tell customers that they can pay for purchases by going to your website instead of paying in-person. Maybe you even give them a discount for going that route. So far so good.

    Then you tell me, your landlord, that those payments thru your site don't count as part of gross revenue.

    Who's the bad actor in this scenario?

    I didn't propose this metaphor, but I fail to see how it makes Apple the bad guy.
    edited May 21
    rjharlanwilliamlondonAlex1Nroundaboutnowmike1watto_cobra
     6Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 36
    AppleZuluapplezulu Posts: 2,549member
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.
    He’d definitely take a cut if you wanted to sell your wares out of his dealership. 

    And of course, just like with Apple, if you want a different deal, there are other car makers you can work with. 
    williamlondonAlex1Nelijahgmike1watto_cobra
     5Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 36
    danoxdanox Posts: 3,896member
    saarek said:

    A really bad look for Apple and a sign that they have lost their moral compass.
    Based on your objections, it's not at all clear when Apple had a moral compass that you would approve of. Steve Jobs defended Apple's financial interests even more aggressively than the current leadership.
    In the end Apple will charge for their infrastructure morality has nothing to do with it, AT&T still gets paid for my iPhone connection to their system....
    neoncatwatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 36
    rjharlanrjharlan Posts: 9member
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.

    Saying Apple deserves a 30% cut of all digital goods because they built the platform is like saying a mall owner deserves a percentage of everything sold in every store, forever, even after the store builds its own loyal customer base and no longer relies on foot traffic.

    Sure, Apple built the “mall” - the App Store - and they deserve fair rent for access and discovery. But when Apple blocks tenants from even telling customers that cheaper options exist outside the mall, or forces them to use Apple’s own checkout system, it stops being about fair business and becomes about control.

    The real issue isn’t whether Apple should earn money - they already do, handsomely. It’s that they’ve positioned themselves as landlord, tax authority, and competitor all at once. Epic’s win doesn’t mean developers escape costs - it just means they can finally choose how to run their businesses. That’s not freeloading. That’s competition.

    And let’s be honest: a free economy isn’t absolute. It needs guardrails. When two companies are the app economy, protecting free markets requires regulation - not just to stop abuse, but to keep the system open for the next generation of creators.

    Let's see how this Apple-as-mall-owner metaphor works.

    Suppose I own a mall. It's a beautiful facility in a great location with massive foot traffic. I write into the lease agreement that every tenant has to pay me a percentage of gross sales (interestingly, I charge nothing else; so if you don't do any business or give away your products and services for free, you don't pay me a dime. You sign a lease under those terms; you might have preferred a flat monthly rent, but after weighing the costs and benefits you decide it's worth it.

    Then you decide to get "clever" and tell customers that they can pay for purchases by going to your website instead of paying in-person. Maybe you even give them a discount for going that route. So far so good.

    Then you tell me, your landlord, that those payments thru your site don't count as part of gross revenue.

    Who's the bad actor in this scenario?

    I didn't propose this metaphor, but I fail to see how it makes Apple the bad guy.
    I completely agree! How is Apple (or for that matter, any other creator) supposed to monetize their platform? You are asking them to provide a “free of charge” platform (which it would essentially become) if left to the devices of the likes of the Fortnite creators of the world. I also find it interesting that their platform also charges other creators a fee for providing a platform for their space. How magnanimous of them! Can we at least be honest here? It’s all about money. Just follow the money!
    SnorpleAlex1Nwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 36
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,844member
    Apple should stop selling smart phones (ie, phones which run other people's software) and just sell feature phones. Apple's software is good, and it's enough for me.
    neoncattiredskillswatto_cobra
     1Like 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 36
    Video game consoles: 30% commission on sales in 1st party digital store + no 3rd party digital stores + 30% commission on discs sold in 3rd party retail. That business model has never been ruled to have supracompetitive rates by a U.S. court and it predates the iPhone and App Store. Epic has tried to argue that model is "okay" because console makers don't make as much profit on hardware as Apple. But that argument is not legally based. There is no law that states specific levels of profit allowed for a company that sells a closed system. 
    edited May 21
    neoncatrandominternetpersonAlex1Nmike1watto_cobra
     3Likes 1Dislike 1Informative
  • Reply 27 of 36
    mikethemartianmikethemartian Posts: 1,737member
    Video game consoles: 30% commission on sales in 1st party digital store + no 3rd party digital stores + 30% commission on discs sold in 3rd party retail. That business model has never been ruled to have supracompetitive rates by a U.S. court and it predates the iPhone and App Store. Epic has tried to argue that model is "okay" because console makers don't make as much profit on hardware as Apple. But that argument is not legally based. There is no law that states specific levels of profit allowed for a company that sells a closed system. 
    Antitrust laws are specifically targeted at large markets. You would have to compare the size of the console market to the size of the Apple and Google phone app markets whether or not there is a an antitrust market argument against the console makers.
    tiredskillswilliamlondon
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 36
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,644member
    saarek said:

    A really bad look for Apple and a sign that they have lost their moral compass.
    Based on your objections, it's not at all clear when Apple had a moral compass that you would approve of. Steve Jobs defended Apple's financial interests even more aggressively than the current leadership.
    Steve certainly believed in making profit, he was a good capitalist and would not shy away from charging high margins.

    I'm not sure if you have read any of the witness statements, judges comments or evidence of this trial. Phil clearly struck a tone of understanding that developers are customers too, that they should be offered a good experience and they are needed.

    The other Apple execs obfuscated, some were clearly caught out lying about dates and knowledge of events, and were all pushing Tim Cook to be as greedy as possible.

    A friend of mine runs his own web design business and also, as a side business, is a co-owner of a small app development business. It's not just the onerous fees that he chafes under, rather most of the process of submitting and maintaining of an app is a lesson in frustration. Furthermore, his ability to interact with customers is terrible. He can't even do something simple, like issue a refund. Rather, he has to get the customer to submit a request to Apple, which takes 24-48 hours to be answered.

    He's been stuck in bureaucratic loops, with no way to speak directly with a manager, over seemingly random denials of apps due to unwritten rules, etc.

    I say again, developers are Apple's customers too. More importantly, apps are the lifeblood of iOS. Apple should look after them more and bend them over financially a lot less.

    Alex1Nelijahgwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
     2Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 36
    Video game consoles: 30% commission on sales in 1st party digital store + no 3rd party digital stores + 30% commission on discs sold in 3rd party retail. That business model has never been ruled to have supracompetitive rates by a U.S. court and it predates the iPhone and App Store. Epic has tried to argue that model is "okay" because console makers don't make as much profit on hardware as Apple. But that argument is not legally based. There is no law that states specific levels of profit allowed for a company that sells a closed system. 
    Antitrust laws are specifically targeted at large markets. You would have to compare the size of the console market to the size of the Apple and Google phone app markets whether or not there is a an antitrust market argument against the console makers.
    Not true.  Per Google "Yes, antitrust laws apply to small markets. While antitrust laws are often associated with large corporations and mergers, they also apply to businesses operating in smaller markets. These laws aim to promote fair competition and prevent anti-competitive practices, regardless of the size of the market."
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 36
    Xedxed Posts: 3,266member
    danox said:
    It’s a sad day for freedom. 

    What’s gonna be sad for the average developer going forward is that Xcode (and all those other tools) will not be cheap/free anymore all those developer tools that Apple has given away will over time will start to cost real money up front a la like the good old days you know those two grand software developer packs. 

    The big companies never cared about the small fry developer (as portrayed Sweeney Todd) its like saying, Elon cares he doesn’t refer to the way Adobe is behaving now with their new subscription plan, what is funny is all of the software companies who think they’re gonna have a subscription here and a subscription there similar to the way all those tv/video/movie production houses, cable internet/channels (including Apple) thought there was a pot of gold with endless subscriptions but there is a finite limitation for the average person/family. 

    The mark/customer doesn’t have a source of endless monetary resources to have 20 monthly subscriptions going at the same time, we may be headed back to the good old days where you bought something upfront once and that’s it, I have four subscriptions, Netflix, PBS, Apple and BritBox that’s it and there will be no more than that how many do you have? And that number is across all content mediums, video, music, software yep-that’s it just four….

    I seem to recall before the App Store days that I would pay $500 a year to get access to the new developer tools.
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 36
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 3,678member
    It’s a sad day for freedom. 
    Because I can now circumvent the App store as save money buying direct? This is actual freedom. 
    Not for those who worked so hard to build a company snd platform catering to users who value security, privacy, and quality. 

    And good luck building your dream company with shenanigans like this going on. 
    Xedmike1zeus423watto_cobra
     3Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 36
    Hedwarehedware Posts: 108member
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.

    Saying Apple deserves a 30% cut of all digital goods because they built the platform is like saying a mall owner deserves a percentage of everything sold in every store, forever, even after the store builds its own loyal customer base and no longer relies on foot traffic.

    Sure, Apple built the “mall” - the App Store - and they deserve fair rent for access and discovery. But when Apple blocks tenants from even telling customers that cheaper options exist outside the mall, or forces them to use Apple’s own checkout system, it stops being about fair business and becomes about control.

    The real issue isn’t whether Apple should earn money - they already do, handsomely. It’s that they’ve positioned themselves as landlord, tax authority, and competitor all at once. Epic’s win doesn’t mean developers escape costs - it just means they can finally choose how to run their businesses. That’s not freeloading. That’s competition.

    And let’s be honest: a free economy isn’t absolute. It needs guardrails. When two companies are the app economy, protecting free markets requires regulation - not just to stop abuse, but to keep the system open for the next generation of creators.

    Those complaining developers would not be developers if there was no Apple App Store. They should be bowing down doing homage to Apple whenever someone buys their app.
    elijahgCrossPlatformFroggersaarekmike1tiredskillswilliamlondonzeus423watto_cobra
     4Likes 4Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 36
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,644member
    Hedware said:
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.

    Saying Apple deserves a 30% cut of all digital goods because they built the platform is like saying a mall owner deserves a percentage of everything sold in every store, forever, even after the store builds its own loyal customer base and no longer relies on foot traffic.

    Sure, Apple built the “mall” - the App Store - and they deserve fair rent for access and discovery. But when Apple blocks tenants from even telling customers that cheaper options exist outside the mall, or forces them to use Apple’s own checkout system, it stops being about fair business and becomes about control.

    The real issue isn’t whether Apple should earn money - they already do, handsomely. It’s that they’ve positioned themselves as landlord, tax authority, and competitor all at once. Epic’s win doesn’t mean developers escape costs - it just means they can finally choose how to run their businesses. That’s not freeloading. That’s competition.

    And let’s be honest: a free economy isn’t absolute. It needs guardrails. When two companies are the app economy, protecting free markets requires regulation - not just to stop abuse, but to keep the system open for the next generation of creators.

    Those complaining developers would not be developers if there was no Apple App Store. They should be bowing down doing homage to Apple whenever someone buys their app.
    And the iPhone would not be the mega smash hit that it has been without developers. At the end of the day it is a partnership, and yes, sometimes partnerships involve money from one party to another.

    But Apple should respect the development community, who also happen to be customers of Apple as well, far more than they do.
    elijahgmuthuk_vanalingamtiredskillswilliamlondonwatto_cobra
     3Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 36
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,502member
    Hedware said:
    "we love developers" as long as we get a 30% cut.

    Just because Karl Benz invented the automobile doesn't mean he gets a cut of every toll road.

    Saying Apple deserves a 30% cut of all digital goods because they built the platform is like saying a mall owner deserves a percentage of everything sold in every store, forever, even after the store builds its own loyal customer base and no longer relies on foot traffic.

    Sure, Apple built the “mall” - the App Store - and they deserve fair rent for access and discovery. But when Apple blocks tenants from even telling customers that cheaper options exist outside the mall, or forces them to use Apple’s own checkout system, it stops being about fair business and becomes about control.

    The real issue isn’t whether Apple should earn money - they already do, handsomely. It’s that they’ve positioned themselves as landlord, tax authority, and competitor all at once. Epic’s win doesn’t mean developers escape costs - it just means they can finally choose how to run their businesses. That’s not freeloading. That’s competition.

    And let’s be honest: a free economy isn’t absolute. It needs guardrails. When two companies are the app economy, protecting free markets requires regulation - not just to stop abuse, but to keep the system open for the next generation of creators.

    Those complaining developers would not be developers if there was no Apple App Store. They should be bowing down doing homage to Apple whenever someone buys their app.

    I can't imagine even wanting an app from a developer who wouldn't want to be in the app store. Like buying stuff from a folding table on a street corner in the city.
    edited May 22
    tiredskillswilliamlondonwatto_cobra
     2Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 36
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,315member
    Does anyone care about this game anymore?

    i played it a couple times years ago and never again.  

    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 36
    simply258simply258 Posts: 137member
    It’s a sad day for freedom. 
    You have a very convoluted concept of freedom.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.