About time. They are our devices, we should be able to run whatever we want on them including a competing app store. If Apple thinks 30% is fair then it can try competing with app stores where the cut is 10% and see how well it does. What if a $10 app cost only $8 on another app store? How many customers would stick with Apple then?
Who gets blamed if some crappy app crashes your phone? Not the app.
What does amazon get if you want to sell on its site?
Well, as soon as Epic Company sign or click two times on agree button, on Apple’s website to pay $99 per year to use Apple’s service (just like on macOS and iDevices to make sure you understand the agreement). Their lawsuit and case is already worthless and probably throw in the trash bag.
Epic already agree with Apple. Y’all know that not 100% of people read the term of agreements the whole from first to last page. Also read the guidelines.
If they read it and found out about the commission fee such as 30% (then 15% after a year for subscription) they should decline the agreement before being an idiot and sue Apple for no reason.
***Hey you “Grammar Nazi” don’t you dare criticize my grammar. I’m deaf reader and English isn’t my primary language, American Sign Language is.***
Pathetic. No company has a right to use another company's multi-billion dollar infrastructure for free. Who comes up with this stuff? Apple is not stopping Fortnite from creating it's own OS, phone, and App Store. They need to stop whining and get after it or sit down, way down.
They can also create their own custom browser to use their own platform.
I have no problem buying an app from the App Store... but Apple should not collect on in-app purchases or subscriptions as they have provided no value to it. These developers have designed their own commerce systems at their expense... why should Apple get any piece of it when their system doesn't touch it? If the concern is that companies will make everything on the a App Store just a gateway - then Apple can charge the developers for hosting and marketing their products on the store - as the only way to download apps is through the store.
Who do you think supports the store financially. IThey are not making the 30-36% they average on even hardware, because their are other cost like support, hosting, bandwidth and processing. If the app is making money, they deserve their share. If it is truly free, there is no charge.
I don't play Fortnight but I agree with Epic I've never agreed with Apple claiming a portion of all sales from an app even if those sales don't go through the AppStore. Some have compared it to having rules for stocking things in your own store. That's not it Some have said that Epic and others are trying to profit while not paying for the store. Not right either Look at it this way. I have a store. You want to sell something, a computer let's say, in my store. I can and should get a cut of the price for my trouble of hosting your product That's fair. But should I then demand a cut of everything else that is bought with that computer? I sell a Dell computer so anything purchased from Dell on that computer has to pay a toll back to me even if you're a thousand miles away from my store? Of course not, that would be absurd. Yet Apple is demanding a slice of everything bought on Amazon Prime, and Kindle, and all in game purchases, and more, even if those transactions have nothing to do and go nowhere near Apple's store. That has never felt right to me. Apple should get a cute of sales in their store. But that should be the end of it. Oh and don't go around saying if they don't like it they can go elsewhere, to Android for example. Apple has the only store where developers make significant money. The profits from the android store is a fraction. It's like saying if you don't want to pay my forever cut on sales you can go to the other store in the poor section of town where nobody can afford your stuff. Not really a choice for most developers. It's this kind of behavior that's getting Apple in trouble with antitrust hawks.
Your argument falls down. It’s not about poor android customers. It’s about people who can afford an Apple phone. Those people, who presumably have the money to buy Apple products and services and software, can take their Apple iPhone money and instead buy an Android phone. Nothing stopping them. They aren’t poor, by your own argument. There’s a clear choice for Epic, sell on Android’s app stores and market to everyone, including those who would buy iPhones, that people should buy an Android phone to play Epic games.
Google also booted them from Google Play. You can still download directly from Epic, turn off security features and side-load, which of course isn't an iOS option. but Google handled it the same as Apple.
Google also booted them from Google Play. You can still download directly from Epic, turn off security features and side-load, which of course isn't an iOS option. but Google handled it the same as Apple.
I wonder how long until the prewritten lawsuit against Google shows up.
I don't play Fortnight but I agree with Epic I've never agreed with Apple claiming a portion of all sales from an app even if those sales don't go through the AppStore. Some have compared it to having rules for stocking things in your own store. That's not it Some have said that Epic and others are trying to profit while not paying for the store. Not right either Look at it this way. I have a
You do know that these games are download for free, right? So Apple makes no money when customers download it.
These games makes money from follow up purchase, like weapons, outfit, extra power. So can you enlighten me how Apple or other companies makes money if they are not allowed to have a cut for each purchase?
Do you think Amazon and eBay should provide free service to third party seller too? After all, they are in the same boat as Apple. How about superstore should provide free space for other companies to sell their products? Supermarket already have The store setup anyway! How much it will cost them for the electricity and labour salaries anyway?
or you just think Apple should do things for free for the good of human race?
I don't play Fortnight but I agree with Epic I've never agreed with Apple claiming a portion of all sales from an app even if those sales don't go through the AppStore. Some have compared it to having rules for stocking things in your own store. That's not it Some have said that Epic and others are trying to profit while not paying for the store. Not right either Look at it this way. I have a store. You want to sell something, a computer let's say, in my store. I can and should get a cut of the price for my trouble of hosting your product That's fair. But should I then demand a cut of everything else that is bought with that computer? I sell a Dell computer so anything purchased from Dell on that computer has to pay a toll back to me even if you're a thousand miles away from my store? Of course not, that would be absurd. Yet Apple is demanding a slice of everything bought on Amazon Prime, and Kindle, and all in game purchases, and more, even if those transactions have nothing to do and go nowhere near Apple's store. That has never felt right to me. Apple should get a cute of sales in their store. But that should be the end of it. Oh and don't go around saying if they don't like it they can go elsewhere, to Android for example. Apple has the only store where developers make significant money. The profits from the android store is a fraction. It's like saying if you don't want to pay my forever cut on sales you can go to the other store in the poor section of town where nobody can afford your stuff. Not really a choice for most developers. It's this kind of behavior that's getting Apple in trouble with antitrust hawks.
They have the option of pulling the App. It's not hard.
The complaint alleges that Apple has become a "behemoth seeking to control markets, block competition and stifle innovation," and claims that the company's size and reach "far exceeds that of any technology monopolist in history."
A behemoth with how much of the mobile phone market exactly? Of the desktop market? Of the laptop market? Epic just wants free access to customers. This is a dead suit. Every reseller/store pays a wholesale price. And in grocery stores you also pay a shelving fee. If I won't pay that Safeway won't carry my product. So good luck here...
Yes. It is amazing how these companies make the claim that Apple is monopolizing the market for Apple products. Even more amazing that some politicians are swallowing this line. Maybe they should turn their attention to Sony for monopolizing the market for Sony game consoles. Or Merceds Benz for their lock on the market for Mercedes Benz cars. Ridiculously stupid thinking.
The Apple App Store is a subordinate market. It exists solely because of the iPhone and iPad. If Apple has a monopoly in the smartphone and tablet market, then sure, Epic has a case because that is the only way consumers can buy and play their games. But with Android out there, Epic cannot claim that Apple is shutting them out of the market. If they must sue someone, maybe they should sue Google and the Android phone manufacturers for putting out such lousy product that nobody wants to play Fortnite through their platform. But that's not true either because a lot of Android phone owners play Fortnite.
Even if Apple had a monopoly Epic still has no case. Of course anti-Apple Americans will try to screw Apple anyway.
iKnockoffs are having a hard time running Fortnite and Epic knows this. They're stupid for biting the hand that feeds them. I think Apple needs to go on a full on assault on anyone who tries screwing them over.
Of course you do. That's not exactly a surprise. Gruber is, so far, the only one that has nailed the heart of the issue;
"It’s unclear, of course, what Epic actually hopes to get from Apple, either voluntarily or forced by the courts, but they’re asking for the whole shebang: they’re claiming it is illegal for iOS not to be as open to native third-party software as the Mac."
https://daringfireball.net/2020/08/epic_app_store_war Right now, on the Mac, one can download software a) via the Mac App Store or b) side-loading apps so long as apps are signed & notarized (a feature of GateKeeper). As far as I know, the Mac, in no way, has been negatively affected from a privacy or security standpoint when apps are installed via option (b). So why can't GateKeeper be implemented on iOS or iPadOS. For a $2 Trillion company, I highly doubt it's a technical issue. I agree with Epic taking up this issue but at the end of the it'll be up to the courts to decide if it gets that far.
This idea that there's choice because users can just buy Android is a false notion. Should Americans just move to Canada because Canadians have access to universal health care and far cheaper pharmaceutical prices? Legally speaking, a company does not always retain full control over products and market they create once those products/markets grown large and important enough to society and the economy. It happened in the 1970s/80s with Bell Telephone, and it will likely happen again with many software/tech companies as we move further into a tech-based economy.
Perhaps it’s time for two tiers. Supported iPhones with apps etc. credentialed through the Apple process and no longer under warranty open iPhones where you’re free to get as identity thefted and bricked as you like.
Choice is good.
Apple is nowhere remotely close to the old Bell System monopoly. Android phones are available everywhere, no need to move to another country when they’re in the same Verizon etc. store and will connect to every service in America.
If I had my own grocery store, wouldn't I be allowed to pick and choose which goods I wanted to sell? I should be able to decide that much because it's MY store. I set the rules. Isn't the App Store the same way or does something change because of the scale of the store?
I'm not going to argue as to whether Apple charges too much in terms of fees because I don't know what's exactly fair. Apple has a lot of housekeeping to do so I don't know if they're making huge profits or not. I just think that if a developer already knows the rules and they want to put their app on the App Store, I don't understand why they're complaining after the fact. Fortnite is very popular and didn't Epic make quite a bit of money from the game already. I'm not taking any sides as it doesn't affect me in any way as I don't play Fortnite and I'm not a developer. I am an Apple shareholder and Tim Cook has said many developers make a lot of money from their apps on iOS. Those numbers I heard seem pretty huge, but there are lots of games on the App Store so who knows how many developers make a lot of money. Maybe only a small percentage. I'm interested in how the courts treat this anti-trust suit, but Apple usually loses court cases because it's a wealthy company that's an easy target for large payouts.
What if you had your own phone and someone else decided that ONLY their store can be on YOUR phone? Do you have an iPhone? Do you own it or does Apple own it?
Surely you get software from different sources for your computer. Is a phone something so special that you should not have this option on it even after dropping $1200 on the latest and greatest iPhone?
Hi Apple, thanks for helping us become really popular and rich with your trusted app store and rock-solid worldwide hosting, transaction and distribution platform. Also thanks for building a market for us to sell our wares too, as well as making the hardware, software and APIs for us to utilise as a means to sell stuff to people.
But LOL, we don't want to pay for any of that. It should be free because you sell phones or something.
Yeah I don't think Apple had anything to do with fortnite becoming popular nor making Epic rich.
The complaint alleges that Apple has become a "behemoth seeking to control markets, block competition and stifle innovation," and claims that the company's size and reach "far exceeds that of any technology monopolist in history."
A behemoth with how much of the mobile phone market exactly? Of the desktop market? Of the laptop market? Epic just wants free access to customers. This is a dead suit. Every reseller/store pays a wholesale price. And in grocery stores you also pay a shelving fee. If I won't pay that Safeway won't carry my product. So good luck here...
Yes. It is amazing how these companies make the claim that Apple is monopolizing the market for Apple products. Even more amazing that some politicians are swallowing this line. Maybe they should turn their attention to Sony for monopolizing the market for Sony game consoles. Or Merceds Benz for their lock on the market for Mercedes Benz cars. Ridiculously stupid thinking.
The Apple App Store is a subordinate market. It exists solely because of the iPhone and iPad. If Apple has a monopoly in the smartphone and tablet market, then sure, Epic has a case because that is the only way consumers can buy and play their games. But with Android out there, Epic cannot claim that Apple is shutting them out of the market. If they must sue someone, maybe they should sue Google and the Android phone manufacturers for putting out such lousy product that nobody wants to play Fortnite through their platform. But that's not true either because a lot of Android phone owners play Fortnite.
Exactly. One could just as well argue that Epic should allow other game developers to sell games on the Epic store, and do so for free. But of course Epic will not allow that because it's their store. And they would be right in doing so because their store is not an industry within the meaning of antitrust law.
Epic should be required to sell loot crates for other software titles. Not sure what players would do with Photoshop Filters and Dropbox storage boasts but they should still have the ability to promote their product via Fortnight.
Oh, wait no what would really happen is they'd just make the whole system more harmful and gambling like.
Epic's unleashed "innovation" is hardly likely to be good for society.
I don't play Fortnight but I agree with Epic I've never agreed with Apple claiming a portion of all sales from an app even if those sales don't go through the AppStore. Some have compared it to having rules for stocking things in your own store. That's not it Some have said that Epic and others are trying to profit while not paying for the store. Not right either Look at it this way. I have a
You do know that these games are download for free, right? So Apple makes no money when customers download it.
These games makes money from follow up purchase, like weapons, outfit, extra power. So can you enlighten me how Apple or other companies makes money if they are not allowed to have a cut for each purchase?
Do you think Amazon and eBay should provide free service to third party seller too? After all, they are in the same boat as Apple. How about superstore should provide free space for other companies to sell their products? Supermarket already have The store setup anyway! How much it will cost them for the electricity and labour salaries anyway?
or you just think Apple should do things for free for the good of human race?
Speaking of Amazon, how does prime video work? Does Apple get 30% of the yearly/monthly subscription? Does it get 30% if you rent/buy a movie or TV show?
Hi Apple, thanks for helping us become really popular and rich with your trusted app store and rock-solid worldwide hosting, transaction and distribution platform. Also thanks for building a market for us to sell our wares too, as well as making the hardware, software and APIs for us to utilise as a means to sell stuff to people.
But LOL, we don't want to pay for any of that. It should be free because you sell phones or something.
Yeah I don't think Apple had anything to do with fortnite becoming popular nor making Epic rich.
About time. They are our devices, we should be able to run whatever we want on them including a competing app store. If Apple thinks 30% is fair then it can try competing with app stores where the cut is 10% and see how well it does. What if a $10 app cost only $8 on another app store? How many customers would stick with Apple then?
Why are you not suggesting to compare 30% with an alternative App Store with no fee at all? Of course lower price will win. But there are costs to run the store; and other related costs like developing Swift, xCode etc.
I don't play Fortnight but I agree with Epic I've never agreed with Apple claiming a portion of all sales from an app even if those sales don't go through the AppStore. Some have compared it to having rules for stocking things in your own store. That's not it Some have said that Epic and others are trying to profit while not paying for the store. Not right either Look at it this way. I have a store. You want to sell something, a computer let's say, in my store. I can and should get a cut of the price for my trouble of hosting your product That's fair. But should I then demand a cut of everything else that is bought with that computer? I sell a Dell computer so anything purchased from Dell on that computer has to pay a toll back to me even if you're a thousand miles away from my store? Of course not, that would be absurd. Yet Apple is demanding a slice of everything bought on Amazon Prime, and Kindle, and all in game purchases, and more, even if those transactions have nothing to do and go nowhere near Apple's store. That has never felt right to me. Apple should get a cute of sales in their store. But that should be the end of it. Oh and don't go around saying if they don't like it they can go elsewhere, to Android for example. Apple has the only store where developers make significant money. The profits from the android store is a fraction. It's like saying if you don't want to pay my forever cut on sales you can go to the other store in the poor section of town where nobody can afford your stuff. Not really a choice for most developers. It's this kind of behavior that's getting Apple in trouble with antitrust hawks.
Please learn to write in paragraphs, and to use proper grammar and spelling. You sound like a child.
I used the declarative form for a reason. If you're not familiar with the style or purpose, that isn't my problem.
Comments
***Hey you “Grammar Nazi” don’t you dare criticize my grammar. I’m deaf reader and English isn’t my primary language, American Sign Language is.***
Do you think Amazon and eBay should provide free service to third party seller too? After all, they are in the same boat as Apple. How about superstore should provide free space for other companies to sell their products? Supermarket already have The store setup anyway! How much it will cost them for the electricity and labour salaries anyway?
or you just think Apple should do things for free for the good of human race?
"It’s unclear, of course, what Epic actually hopes to get from Apple, either voluntarily or forced by the courts, but they’re asking for the whole shebang: they’re claiming it is illegal for iOS not to be as open to native third-party software as the Mac."
https://daringfireball.net/2020/08/epic_app_store_war
Right now, on the Mac, one can download software a) via the Mac App Store or b) side-loading apps so long as apps are signed & notarized (a feature of GateKeeper). As far as I know, the Mac, in no way, has been negatively affected from a privacy or security standpoint when apps are installed via option (b). So why can't GateKeeper be implemented on iOS or iPadOS. For a $2 Trillion company, I highly doubt it's a technical issue. I agree with Epic taking up this issue but at the end of the it'll be up to the courts to decide if it gets that far.
This idea that there's choice because users can just buy Android is a false notion. Should Americans just move to Canada because Canadians have access to universal health care and far cheaper pharmaceutical prices? Legally speaking, a company does not always retain full control over products and market they create once those products/markets grown large and important enough to society and the economy. It happened in the 1970s/80s with Bell Telephone, and it will likely happen again with many software/tech companies as we move further into a tech-based economy.