81–90 of 1001 posts
Epic Games has filed a lawsuit [1] and published a Fortnite-themed parody of Apple's "1984" [2] to get some publicity for it. [1] https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euiSHuaw6Q4
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine if Microsoft only had 14% global market share.* [*] https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share
Why is market share relevant? Also, Apple has a much bigger market share in the US simply because most of the world cannot afford an iPhone.
I don't think this should be regulated at all. Apple should be able to impose their rules in their systems. Let's be clear about this, if people are choosing to buy these black-box closed handheld computing devices, there are consequences that come with that choice.
Who's device is it? Apple's or the customer that paid for it in full?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Valve is anticipating such move in a near future and investing in gaming on Linux.
AFAIK Valve already tried the whole Linux as a gaming platform thing and gave up completely a few months ago.
Epic Games has filed a lawsuit [1] and published a Fortnite-themed parody of Apple's "1984" [2] to get some publicity for it. [1] https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euiSHuaw6Q4
They will lose as the TOS clearly indicates the rules and Epic agreed to them. This is basic contract law. Apple has a massive team of experienced lawyers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even worse. Imagine if the World Wide Web was not open and you had to go through a closed WWW like AOL and websites were "under review" by the providers and would take a 30% cut of your revenues or clicks on your web app or subscription service and websites require going only through that provider. Thank goodness that wasn't the case.
That's a little silly as an example because AOL was exactly like this back in the day and had curated channels. You could still access external sites if AOL was your ISP as well but anything inside of the AOL application was reviewed by AOL. Also, the web is not even a great analogy period since it wasn't created by a private company. Apple created their phones, their App Store, they maintain it, and they provide the…
I know, I know, people who bought iPhones knew what they were buying into.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, couldn't we just replace Microsoft->Sony and PC->Playstation and the argument falls apart a bit? > Imagine if Sony did this on Playstation. a) prohibiting the installation of non-PlayStation games and b) insisting that all purchases done via their store give them a 30% cut. Many platforms are like this -- and many also have the majority marketshare. Is this a call to redefine what platforms can and cannot con…
FWIW, actually Sony doesn't demand a 30% cut of all revenue from any company that makes an app for their store. You can have subscriptions to non-Sony services, and Sony doesn't see a dime. Sony doesn't demand a cut of Netflix subscriptions, for example, despite having a Netflix app available for download. Similarly, it doesn't get a cut of Spotify revenue either. For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenie…
Hmmm -- not to stretch the analogy too thin, but is this similar to Apple though, where they allow you to sign in to subscription services (e.g. Netflix) with your existing account to the service, but don't allow sign ups (which would trigger payment processing)? Or is payment processing baked in there as well?
> For PlayStation you pay the Sony tax for the convenience of integrating with their payment services, not because they'll ban you for using anything else.
To clarify, has any developer integrated external payment services within a Playstation game / app / etc? From all the games and apps I've played with, I never remember any other payment system built in other than Sony's.
> It's also a super different situation in general; for example, Sony actually often pays developers to develop for their store ...
Blackberry did the same thing near the end of it's life -- I was at a hackathon where they were giving away Blackberries and cash to anyone who developed a Blackberry app -- but does not giving back really reflect as monopolistic?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is more than welcome to put whatever rules they want on their systems. My phone is not their system though, it’s mine! If I want to run tmux/fetchmail/ocamlc on it then it’s my problem not theirs!
Agreed it shouldn't be illegal , but Apple (or any hardware / software maker) should be allowed to do everything in their power to make this extremely inconvenient by putting in hardware blocks, bricking logic, updating their software regularly with new obfuscation techniques, etc. and also, voiding the warranty if there is evidence of tampering with hardware or software.
Epic Games has filed a lawsuit [1] and published a Fortnite-themed parody of Apple's "1984" [2] to get some publicity for it. [1] https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euiSHuaw6Q4
They will lose as the TOS clearly indicates the rules and Epic agreed to them. This is basic contract law. Apple has a massive team of experienced lawyers.
Epic Games has filed a lawsuit [1] and published a Fortnite-themed parody of Apple's "1984" [2] to get some publicity for it. [1] https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euiSHuaw6Q4
They will lose as the TOS clearly indicates the rules and Epic agreed to them. This is basic contract law. Apple has a massive team of experienced lawyers.