Jump to content

~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Apple/Epic brawl will go to trial starting on May 4


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Except that's the thing I said they should do early in the thread and everyone jumped up my ass.

There's a pretty big difference between pushing purchases to the web and running the entire thing as a web app.

 

21 hours ago, ManUtdRedDevils said:

Microsoft is making moves to protect Xbox’s 30% by sacrificing it’s dead windows store

 

acastro_180226_0001.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

Microsoft joins the growing number calling for change at Apple.

 

Yeah, this is such an empty gesture. Here are all these rules we'll follow on a store no one uses or cares about, but we'd never consider applying these rules on our other app store. Though it would be interesting if all the sudden you could install a rival app store on the Xbox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In her decision, the judge fully recognized that the final decisions of this case could have significant implications for other "walled gardens".

 

Quote

Epic Games’ arguments distinguishing these other platforms as potential economic substitutes have not been sufficiently tested. First, Epic Games avers that the iOS market is distinct from other video game platforms because Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft do not make much profit, if any, on the sale of the hardware or console—unlike Apple, which allegedly makes significant profits from the sale of each iPhone. This distinction is without legal precedent under section 2 of the Sherman Act. Indeed, Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft all operate similar walled gardens or closed platform models as Apple, whereby the hardware, operating system, digital marketplace, and IAPs are all exclusive to the platform owner. As such, a final decision should be better informed regarding the impact of the walled garden model given the potential for significant and serious ramifications for Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft and their video game platforms.

 

Make no mistake about it: this ultimate outcome of this case could have VERY far-reaching consequences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Epic did it! You can be happy now that small developers that make less than one million dollars per year will have their cut down to 15% instead of 30%

 

acastro_180130_1777_0005.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

A substantial change to Apple’s longstanding App Store cut.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I absolutely applaud Apple for cutting the rate to those developers that need it the most, in an odd way it does kind of show Apple's market power.

 

Typically you see companies reduce rates for the biggest draws. Preferential treatment for anchor tenants, bigger studio cuts for blockbuster films, etc. Here you have Apple in a position where they don't need to keep their best sellers happy, because those companies have no choice. Unless that company is in a position to use their market power against Apple (like Amazon), Apple has no need to cater to the apps that people use the most.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • Commissar SFLUFAN changed the title to ~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Epic files antitrust complaint against Apple with the EU

 

Quote

"Apple’s Request 2 is very narrow. It simply requests documents sufficient to show Valve’s: (a) total yearly sales of apps and in-app products; (b) annual advertising revenues from Steam; (c) annual sales of external products attributable to Steam; (d) annual revenues from Steam; and (e) annual earnings (whether gross or net) from Steam. Apple has gone as far as requesting this information in any readily accessible format, but Valve refuses to produce it."

 

Quote

 

Now if you thought that demand from Apple was ballsy (and bear in mind Steam is a non-party to this main dispute) hold on to your hat, because Request 32 piles-on to demand documents showing:

 

"(a) the name of each App on Steam; (b) the date range when the App was available on Steam; and (c) the price of the App and any in-app product available on Steam."

 

 

Quote

 

Needless to say, Valve does not agree. Its counter-argument to the above says that Valve has co-operated to what it believes to be a reasonable extent—"Valve already produced documents regarding its revenue share, competition with Epic, Steam distribution contracts, and other documents"—before going on to outline the nature of Apple's requests: "that Valve (i) recreate six years’ worth of PC game and item sales for hundreds of third party video games, then (ii) produce a massive amount of confidential information about these games and Valve’s revenues."

 

In a masterpiece of understatement, Valve's legal counsel writes: "Apple wrongly claims those requests are narrow. They are not."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Commissar SFLUFAN changed the title to ~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Apple subpoenaed Valve to produce a ludicrous amount of Steam revenue data, Valve said "LOL no LOL"
  • Commissar SFLUFAN changed the title to ~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Judge orders Valve to comply with Apple's subpoena for Steam data
18 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

I totally get what Apple is trying to prove here, but didn't Valve adjust their cut with major publishers in response to all the rival game stores?

 

acastro_180509_1777_steam_0001.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

An unprecedented change to Valve’s financial agreement with game makers

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I totally get what Apple is trying to prove here, but didn't Valve adjust their cut with major publishers in response to all the rival game stores?

 

acastro_180509_1777_steam_0001.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

An unprecedented change to Valve’s financial agreement with game makers

 

 

 

If you already make us boatloads of money, we can part with some of our profits.  But screw the little guy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

If you already make us boatloads of money, we can part with some of our profits.  But screw the little guy.

 

Yes, but it's also only the ones that make boatloads of money that can launch their own storefront. That's why I'm kind of curious as to why Apple thinks Steam is proof competing storefronts didn't cause them to cut into their 30% cut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
QYQU6eWpWqZtpf2BpQDxha-1200-80.jpg
WWW.PCGAMER.COM

Epic Games is suing Apple over "oppressive" App Store payment cuts.
 
Quote

 

Judge Gonzalez says the case is significant enough to warrant an in-person trial, believing witnesses are less likely to lie when sworn in in a physical courtroom. If COVID numbers remain high though, the trial will go ahead via Zoom.

 

Judge Gonzalez is hoping for the trial to last two to three weeks, but Epic wants to push the length to four to five weeks. There's no set timeframe yet though, to be determined when some of the finer details of the trial get ironed out.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Commissar SFLUFAN changed the title to ~*Official War of the Tims (Sweeney/Cook) Thread*~ - update: Apple/Epic brawl will go to trial starting on May 4
  • 1 month later...

Looks like Epic is trying to argue that Apple's refusal to allow competing app stores isn't about customer safety, but also to prevent people from freely leaving the platform. Their evidence here are internal Apple emails discussing whether bringing iMessage to Android would lower consumer barriers to moving to Android.

 

akrales_190513_3338_0008_2.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

‘The #1 most difficult [reason] to leave the Apple universe app is iMessage.’

 

That's actually not a bad argument to make, especially when you have public statements from Apple saying they want stuff like Facetime and iMessage to be an industry standard and then have nonpublic statements saying that would be a bad idea because then people might move to Android. It's probably Epic's best argument, in regards to app store competition, so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Apple is now refusing the provide testimony in the Senate hearings on app store competition...

 

acastro_190322_1777_apple_streaming_0002
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

The hearing was set for later this month.

 

Apple likely feels nothing good can come from this that won't result in bad press while also believing this is all for show and Congress has no plans to do anything about their ap store practices. They're probably right here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

Looks like Epic is trying to argue that Apple's refusal to allow competing app stores isn't about customer safety, but also to prevent people from freely leaving the platform. Their evidence here are internal Apple emails discussing whether bringing iMessage to Android would lower consumer barriers to moving to Android.

 

akrales_190513_3338_0008_2.jpg
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

‘The #1 most difficult [reason] to leave the Apple universe app is iMessage.’

 

That's actually not a bad argument to make, especially when you have public statements from Apple saying they want stuff like Facetime and iMessage to be an industry standard and then have nonpublic statements saying that would be a bad idea because then people might move to Android. It's probably Epic's best argument, in regards to app store competition, so far.

 

I think this is still mostly just a PR campaign. In the end it really just matters how you define the market and if you can sufficiently differentiate iOS from other digital marketplaces like Xbox/Playstation/etc.

 

If you can define the market as "iPhone app stores" and not "digital marketplaces," and you can sufficiently make the general computing environment case, it's easy enough to make a clear anti-trust argument. If you can't, something like keeping iMessage to yourself is just good business. You have a feature that people really like and will keep them buying your products, and putting that feature on competing devices might hurt your market share? Well shucks, what's a good profit seeking business to do?

 

Honestly, something I'd find far more damning is if they can dig something up about Apple's stance on RCS. If Apple plans to avoid implementing a new messaging standard that would be an indisputable customer good because they're worried it might lessen iMessage as a lock in mechanism, that would be anti-competitive, though largely unrelated to Epic's point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

Looks like Apple is now refusing the provide testimony in the Senate hearings on app store competition...

 

acastro_190322_1777_apple_streaming_0002
WWW.THEVERGE.COM

The hearing was set for later this month.

 

Apple likely feels nothing good can come from this that won't result in bad press while also believing this is all for show and Congress has no plans to do anything about their ap store practices. They're probably right here.

These hearings are so cringe inducing bad. The lack of basic tech understanding from people who are helping run a country is awe inducing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...