focher

Would be better if they just published a Universal Binary instead of making a user have to know which architecture they are using.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day play a video game, judged not by their ability to sell virtual currency, but by the content of their bank account after getting digital stores to reduce their commissions from 30% to the artificially defined percentage that I have determined to be appropriate based on what I want it to be.” - Tim Sweeney

A true icon of our times.

Count me in for having an issue with Electron when it is the lazy go to for some big names. I understand smaller developers wanting to have a bigger market across platforms, and something like Electron helps them. But Slack? Seriously, they can afford the engineering and development resources to support Windows, MacOS, Linux, Android, and iOS natively. They’re just being lazy and cheap, and Slack is just one example.

Why isn’t this released as a Universal Binary? Lame to require the user to select the architecture.

rotateleftbyte said:

I hope Apple have hard evidence (not hearsay) to back up the claim about Epic throwing its toys out of the pram before. That won't go down well with a jury.

This is not a jury eligible case. The determination as to whether the App Store even falls under antitrust regulations is a matter of law to determine. Juries only determine matters of fact (when the facts are disputed). There are no facts to litigate here. If Apple and the App Store are determined not to fall under antitrust because the App Store isn't a "market" or Apple is found not to be abusing its position even if the App Store is a market, then it's just a contract dispute. If that plays out, Epic doesn't do well on that front as the contract terms are pretty clear.