Mobile Tim Apple v Tim Epic - update: Apple has terminated Epic’s developer account lololol

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

BWWWWWAAA AAHAHAHHAH HAHAHAHAH AHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

 

Go to around 52:00 in the video to see the Facebook posts and tweets that Epic included in their most recent legal filing to claim that access to Fortnite on iOS is in the "public interest" 

[Ghost_MH]

26 minutes ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

BWWWWWAAA AAHAHAHHAH HAHAHAHAH AHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

 

Go to around 52:00 in the video to see the Facebook posts and tweets that Epic included in their most recent legal filing to claim that access to Fortnite on iOS is in the "public interest" 

 

That's one of the dumbest argument I've ever seen, and we have a joke in the Trump admin.

 

If Epic wants to make a public interest claim, their best bet would be arguing that Apple pulling they're ability to release signed software on macOS or iOS will negatively impact developers who rely on their software for a living.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Apple fires back in court, says Epic Games CEO asked for special treatment (CNBC)

Quote

Apple responded to Epic Games’ lawsuit accusing it of anticompetitive behavior in how it controls the App Store, telling the court that the Fortnite maker violated Apple’s rules and shouldn’t be placed back into the store temporarily while the legal battle rages. 

 

In its filing, Apple alleges that Epic Games asked for an individual arrangement with Apple, producing three emails from Epic CEO Tim Sweeney that bolster its claim.

 

Of course, Epic/Sweeney and their attorneys HAD to know that Apple would produce those emails in its own filings.

[Brian]

"We hope that Apple will reflect on its platform restrictions and begin to make historic changes that bring to the world's billion iOS consumers the rights and freedoms enjoyed on the world's leading open computing platforms including Windows and macOS." pic.twitter.com/cRJRO8dQbG

— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) August 21, 2020

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

 

[Duderino]

I understand that Epic’s primary motivation has to do with their own monetary gains, but I also don’t understand the backlash to their goal.

 

Phones today are general-purpose portable PCs, with an arbitrary Apple/Google tax tacked on with software  purchases.  Apple no question has a double standard when comparing their terms for phones and PC software.  I’m glad Epic is challenging the status quo.

[SimpleG]

46 minutes ago, Duderino said:

I also don’t understand the backlash to their goal

 

One giant ass corp vs a Mega corp fighting over money combined with the cringy as fuck video they released plus the "what happend you man you used to be the cool under dawg but now you just another greedy company" shtick comes off as  

 

[stepee]

16 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

 

One giant ass corp vs a Mega corp fighting over money combined with the cringy as fuck video they released plus the "what happend you man you used to be the cool under dawg but now you just another greedy company" shtick comes off as  

 

 

So their goal is one giant ass corp vs a Mega corp fighting over money combined with the cringy as fuck video they released plus the "what happend you man you used to be the cool under dawg but now you just another greedy company"?

[SimpleG]

25 minutes ago, stepee said:

 

So their goal is one giant ass corp vs a Mega corp fighting over money combined with the cringy as fuck video they released plus the "what happend you man you used to be the cool under dawg but now you just another greedy company"?

He didnt ask what the goal was he asked why the backlash

 

I also don’t understand the backlash to their goal.

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, Emperor Diocletian II said:

 

 

I was wondering if anyone posted anything about Wordpress.

 

You can't even buy anything wit the Wordpress app.

 

33 minutes ago, SimpleG said:

He didnt ask what the goal was he asked why the backlash

 

I also don’t understand the backlash to their goal.

 

A combination of hatred for Epic and/or love of Apple completely clouds the good that Epic winning here would result in. I don't care if Epic winds up being happy as a result. There are a TON of publishers and developers that would benefit greatly.

[Keyser_Soze]

Just don't buy things through the app buy it through the web.

[Duderino]

  

42 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

A combination of hatred for Epic and/or love of Apple completely clouds the good that Epic winning here would result in. I don't care if Epic winds up being happy as a result. There are a TON of publishers and developers that would benefit greatly.

Precisely.  This is bigger than Apple, Epic, and gaming.

 

A loss for Epic here would be a loss for all smart phone and mobile developers that are stuck with the excessive fees of these single storefront monopolies.

[crispy4000]

It all begs the question: In what kind of walled garden are you allowed to take a 30% cut?  In what mediums?

 

If the courts rule in Epic’s favor, there’s a lot that could be challenged.

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Just don't buy things through the app buy it through the web.

Doesn’t address the root problem, or the prize both companies are fighting for.

[Bacon]

I hope Epic loses because fuck Epic 

 

I don't like Apple either, but

[SimpleG]

10 minutes ago, Bacon said:

I hope Epic loses because fuck Epic 

 

I don't like Apple either, but

Ive made dislike of them fairly clear on this board but honestly I dont give 2 fucks if they win or lose, nothing changes for the consumer.

[Moa]

Is there a compelling reason other than owning Apple stock that somebody should support them in this?

[Keyser_Soze]

2 hours ago, Moa said:

Is there a compelling reason other than owning Apple stock that somebody should support them in this?

 

There's no compelling reason that anyone should support either side.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

4 hours ago, Moa said:

Is there a compelling reason other than owning Apple stock that somebody should support them in this?

The most significant reason would be to preserve the notion of the inviolability of a legally binding contract consensually entered into.

[Remarkableriots]

Time to cut Apple up into Apple Slices! 

[XxEvil AshxX]

 

6 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

There's no compelling reason that anyone should support either side.

 

There is now!

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-pressures-wordpress-add-in-app-purchases-30-percent-fee-2020-8

 

Tl;dr version: Apple is forcing Wordpress to put in-app purchases into their 100% free software just so they can get their 30% cut.

 

Fuck Apple.

[Keyser_Soze]

6 minutes ago, XxEvil AshxX said:

 

 

There is now!

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-pressures-wordpress-add-in-app-purchases-30-percent-fee-2020-8

 

Tl;dr version: Apple is forcing Wordpress to put in-app purchases into their 100% free software just so they can get their 30% cut.

 

Fuck Apple.

 

Already posted and my solution got poo poo'd

[Ghost_MH]

6 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

There's no compelling reason that anyone should support either side.

 

Sure there is. You can't ignore all the small developers that would benefit from a larger cut. Not everyone that makes an app is EA, Facebook, or Netflix, you know. Just looking at my phone, it certainly would be nice if Broken Rules Interactive, 88 Games, or Inkle got a bit more money to make more games.

 

It's there any reason to not be in support of that?

[Keyser_Soze]

6 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

It's there any reason to not be in support of that?

 

Sure, but not in the way Epic is going about doing it.

 

Also, I'd argue the smaller the developer the MORE money they would get even if they lose 30% of the profits.

[Ghost_MH]

19 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Sure, but not in the way Epic is going about doing it.

 

Also, I'd argue the smaller the developer the MORE money they would get even if they lose 30% of the profits.

 

That doesn't make any sense. If smaller devs have to give up 20% instead of 30%, that's 10% that fits straight into their pockets. This was the issue Hey was having with their email app. They couldn't afford to offer Some a 30% cut, so they didn't offer in app payments. Instead, you had to purchase a subscription through they're website. Apple still kicked them off and refused to show them to patch their app.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That doesn't make any sense. If smaller devs have to give up 20% instead of 30%, that's 10% that fits straight into their pockets. This was the issue Hey was having with their email app. They couldn't afford to offer Some a 30% cut, so they didn't offer in app payments. Instead, you had to purchase a subscription through they're website. Apple still kicked them off and refused to show them to patch their app.

Charge more for the app or IAP in places where your costs are higher. This is what companies do all the time.

[Keyser_Soze]

14 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That doesn't make any sense. If smaller devs have to give up 20% instead of 30%, that's 10% that fits straight into their pockets. This was the issue Hey was having with their email app. They couldn't afford to offer Some a 30% cut, so they didn't offer in app payments. Instead, you had to purchase a subscription through they're website. Apple still kicked them off and refused to show them to patch their app.

 

It makes sense they make more money if the smaller developer is 2 people, if 2 people sell a $100,000 on the app store they are making more money than a dev with 30 people who sell the same amount.

[Ghost_MH]

5 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Charge more for the app or IAP in places where your costs are higher. This is what companies do all the time.

 

Sure, but I don't see how that's beneficial to consumers.

[Ghost_MH]

9 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

It makes sense they make more money if the smaller developer is 2 people, if 2 people sell a $100,000 on the app store they are making more money than a dev with 30 people who sell the same amount.

 

Yes, but both studios make more money if Apple's and Google's cuts were smaller or even nonexistent.

[Keyser_Soze]

1 minute ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Yes, but both studios make more money if Apple's and Google's cuts were smaller or even nonexistent.

 

I'm sure they'll get by as long as people keep buying.

[Ghost_MH]

Just now, Keyser_Soze said:

None of what is going on is beneficial to consumers and you originally said to get behind "backing small devs" so you can't get behind your own argument?

 

What? I think more money going to developers I want to support is a good thing and of a benefit to me because it means developers I like will have more money to do more stuff. Why shouldn't we be all about actual creators getting to keep more money for their creations?

 

There's a reason I back creators on Patreon. There's a reason I signed up for Defector. If all those BIPOC chefs that quit Bon Appetit created they're own website, I'd sign up for that as well.

[Duderino]

54 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Sure, but not in the way Epic is going about doing it.

Filing an anti-trust lawsuit is the right way to take Apple to task on this.  The Supreme Court ruled that companies have the right to do so.

[Keyser_Soze]

9 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

What? I think more money going to developers I want to support is a good thing and of a benefit to me because it means developers I like will have more money to do more stuff. Why shouldn't we be all about actual creators getting to keep more money for their creations?

 

Ignore that (which I deleted) because I thought you were responding to me but you were responding to @sblfilms

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Sure, but I don't see how that's beneficial to consumers.

That hasn’t been your point during this exchange. You keep talking developers, developers, developers  

 

I don’t know if the answer to the consumer question is clear. In the early days of smartphones and app stores, I do think Apple’s walled garden approach created a better experience for users. I

 

n some ways I think it probably still does for people like my parents in their early 60s or even my wife in her late 30s who don’t feel comfortable using PC OSes, especially downloading and installing software, but are quite confident in doing so on their iPhones.

 

And the walled garden comes with inflated costs because Apple is charging for access to their users. Each business has to decide if that access fee is worth it.

[Ghost_MH]

3 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

That hasn’t been your point during this exchange. You keep talking developers, developers, developers  

 

I don’t know if the answer to the consumer question is clear. In the early days of smartphones and app stores, I do think Apple’s walled garden approach created a better experience for users. I

 

n some ways I think it probably still does for people like my parents in their early 60s or even my wife in her late 30s who don’t feel comfortable using PC OSes, especially downloading and installing software, but are quite confident in doing so on their iPhones.

 

And the walled garden comes with inflated costs because Apple is charging for access to their users. Each business has to decide if that access fee is worth it.

 

Nah. Supporting developers is good for consumers. Any money that goes to devs I like is more money going toward keeping products and services I enjoy alive.