Personally, I’m a little worried about this as a test case. It’s good that Google interprets their contract the same as Apple does, but it paints a clear contrast between the “open” android ecosystem and the “closed” iOS/iPadOS one. Now Apple will be fighting this publicly on two fronts: federal regulation and a major private suit (and that’s just in the US).
Disclaimer, as are many of you, I have a significant financial investment in AAPL. However, I’m more interested in this because I worry about the usability and security consequences of Apple having to (potentially, if it loses) change it’s approach than the financial implications.
By the way, can anyone show me how I can buy third-party items in-game in Fortnite? Having to pay $10 for a weapon or upgrade seems like exorbitant pricing of a monopolist. Surely there must be a way to bypass that, right? Epic can’t be hypocritical, can they?
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
Yeah, I wouldn't buy that car. Good think there are other brands of cars and smartphones on the market.
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
Yeah, I wouldn't buy that car. Good think there are other brands of cars and smartphones on the market.
But the other brands of cars are difficult to use, cheaply made and not reliable or safe. You want the best car, right?
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
Doesn’t Uber and Lyft, who sell cars specifically for there service, do that. These companies also try to say that there employees are Independent contract workers and are directly employed by the company, this saves the company lots of money, but screws over the drivers.
Personally, I’m a little worried about this as a test case. It’s good that Google interprets their contract the same as Apple does, but it paints a clear contrast between the “open” android ecosystem and the “closed” iOS/iPadOS one. Now Apple will be fighting this publicly on two fronts: federal regulation and a major private suit (and that’s just in the US).
Disclaimer, as are many of you, I have a significant financial investment in AAPL. However, I’m more interested in this because I worry about the usability and security consequences of Apple having to (potentially, if it loses) change it’s approach than the financial implications.
By the way, can anyone show me how I can buy third-party items in-game in Fortnite? Having to pay $10 for a weapon or upgrade seems like exorbitant pricing of a monopolist. Surely there must be a way to bypass that, right? Epic can’t be hypocritical, can they?
i suspect this just comes down to money. Which in turn violates the TOS of the App Store. And if one does it then all will do it.
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
Yeah, I wouldn't buy that car. Good think there are other brands of cars and smartphones on the market.
But the other brands of cars are difficult to use, cheaply made and not reliable or safe. You want the best car, right?
but part of making that car the best, is the restrictions that come with it.
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
Yeah, I wouldn't buy that car. Good think there are other brands of cars and smartphones on the market.
But the other brands of cars are difficult to use, cheaply made and not reliable or safe. You want the best car, right?
You make a classic mistake of thinking that others have the same priorities and beliefs you have. What is “best” for you may be the opposite of what is “best” for someone else.
I will be going to Costco and Safeway tomorrow and ask them to clear up shelf space for me to sell my home made lemonade for free. After, I will goto local steakhouse and ask them to give me a free steak because they are the biggest and most profitable steak house in town!
You can sell your lemonade anywhere you want. You can make a website and sell it and distribute it directly. You can sell it from your home. You can sell it at a farmers market in your town. Or you can check other stores to get a lower rate to sell your lemonade. You have that freedom.
If your city had a law that said you cannot sell any goods in the town anywhere (not even online) except one city-run store, and that store demanded a 30% cut, wouldn't you think that is unfair?
The problem is, there is NO OTHER WAY to sell apps for i-devices than Apple's App Store as their own rules (and devices) restrict it. Because of that, it does seem unfair to me that apps can't accept payment through other means than the App Store. Maybe the app itself shouldn't be free so that Apple gets it's money, but once the app is sold, why should Apple continue to get revenue for everything purchased in the app? Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
By your analogy, Epic Games should also be suing Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. Same walled gardens, same 30% fee for in-game micro-transactions. But they have never called even called them anti-competitive. In fact, they defend their practices:
"Consoles aren’t quite comparable. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo spend billions of dollars building hardware and often sell it at a loss for years subsidizing it through game sales."
Since you like analogies, how about you buy a car so that you can start making money doing Uber, Dashpass, etc. But the car dealer demands a 30% cut of everything you make while you are driving the car they sold you? Same thing.
If the car dealer paid my gas & insurance, I could see them getting a cut. It would still be my responsibility to maintain the (code) car.
This is interesting. I suspect Google, and now Samsung, are looking at the Apple situation as a test case. They're wondering if Epic is successful here, will they go after them next?
But why should they? They allow side-loading, don't they? Do they also block in-app purchases that don't go through Google Play or whatever Samsung's store is called?
Can we sue Epic for not allowing me to buy my Fortnite in-app items from Rockstar or someone? Do they have a monopoly on purchases made in Fortnite?
Epic has a store too. We should sue them for being "anti-consumer" and not allowing 3rd party games to sell there for free.
I've bought games from their store, but most of them only run on PC. I should sue them to make them run on Mac, shouldn't I?
Comments