canukstorm
About
- Username
- canukstorm
- Joined
- Visits
- 205
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 4,215
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,796
Reactions
-
Intel details power efficiencies of its upcoming Xe LP graphics architecture
mdriftmeyer said:You’re high if you think this is comparable to AMD. Hell RDNA 2.0 is out in a month or so, and RDNA 3.0 in 2021.
Nothing Raja has will touch either AMD or Nvidia. -
Epic sues Apple after Fortnite removed from App Store
mdriftmeyer said:Perspective summed up well on ArstechnicaAn Apple App Dev posted views on 30%
DOOManiac Ars Tribunus Militum- POPULAR
I don't know about Android, but this is absolutely 1000% against Apple's rules for doing in-app purchases on their platform. I'm curious to see how fast the ban hammer comes, and how this plays out.
[edit]
Well that didn't take long. Seems this whole thing was scripted from the start...
[/edit]
Given the work-to-cut ratio, 30% may have been fair a decade ago when there wasn't a new app every 10 seconds and you actually got something out of being on their store, but these days, with the economies of scale being what they are, its just way too much. Especially on in-app purchases.
But I do want to dispel the myth that Apple/Google/Steam are doing "nothing". Here's what me and my fellow developers are getting for our 30%:
- Credit Card transaction processing
- No liability from credit card processing. This is a big deal so I list it twice.
- Handles all refunds, stolen credit card chargebacks, fraud
- Placement (even if buried) on an easy to use store used by millions of customers
- Fast, reliable hosting & distribution on global CDNs
- Scheduled release times, possibly staggered by region
- Regional pricing (sometimes automatic)
- Platform services (user logins, leaderboards, in app purchases, authentication, anti-piracy measures)
- Maybe 5 minutes of marketing as your app/game shows up in the "new" section for the blink of an eye on launch day. Maybe.
Every time I get upset about the 30% cut I remember all this - especially credit card legal liabilities - and I am fine with it again. Would prefer if it was only 15% or 20%, but I would much rather have the status quo as it is now than have to deal with that mess myself.Last edited by DOOManiac on Thu Aug 13, 2020 4:23 pm
Up +104 (+116 / -12) Down
-
Epic sues Apple after Fortnite removed from App Store
-
Epic sues Apple after Fortnite removed from App Store
urahara said:OutdoorAppDeveloper said: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? -
Epic sues Apple after Fortnite removed from App Store
Beats said:DAalseth said: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.
I agree 100% with Apple.tundraboy said:mark fearing said: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...
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.
"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.