Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple, Epic, and the App Store

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 781 posts

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#331

Post by earhart »

danShumway wrote: post #272
enra wrote: post #236

While I don't like Apple's 30% cut on multiplatform/subscription products, I think Epic's real motivation here is to run their own App Store, build a bigger moat and get the profits themselves (they take 12% cut, 5% if you use Unreal Engine, from developers in their store). They also make exclusive deals, bribing developers with funding/marketing support, so that the games can only bought in their store for 6-12mo. C…

I'm going to heavy push back against both-sides-isms here. > I think Epic's real motivation here is to run their own App Store Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, but maybe we haven't been clear enough. For the record, we want there to be multiple app stores on iOS. > build a bigger moat and get the profits…

The problem is not that Epic would be able to prevent other stores from being installed.

The problem is that if there are multiple app stores, it encourages a race-to-the-bottom for the app stores -- why go through Apple's store with all its vetting if you can release to the Epic store instead?

So, yes, the worry is exactly that another company might offer better terms to developers -- because sometimes, those terms don't matter to users (e.g. the cut between the app store and the developer), but other times, those terms are absolutely at a cost to the users.

If Epic has a way of offering multiple stores, while preventing that race-to-the-bottom from impacting the user experience, it'd be wonderful. But that doesn't seem to be what Epic is pushing for; Epic seems to be pushing for their own profit at a cost to Apple (which is fine, IMHO -- it's just business) and to the iOS ecosystem (which is much less fine, IMHO).

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#332

Post by huhtenberg »

aaanotherhnfolk wrote: post #330

Simplest compromise I've heard so far is for Apple's cut to scale with size of IAP/subscription. 30% cut starting at $0.99 purchases. As mentioned this barely covers processing fees. 20% cut starting at $9.99. 10% cut starting at $49.99. Not only does this fix the Epic, Netflix, Hey, etc issue where high value or high volume txns get unfairly middlemanned by Apple. It also incentivizes developers away from the "race…

The simplest compromise is to let me easily install what I need from whatever source I want on the goddamn hardware that I own. The rest will follow from that.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#333

Post by tomc1985 »

kelnos wrote: post #317
tomc1985 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I recently built a living room gaming PC. Installed Steam, Epic Store, GOG, Origin, XBOX, Rockstar Social Club, even Twitch. Pretty much anything where I have a library of games. And let me tell you, what a pain in the ass it is! I keep all the games organized in Playnite. If I try to launch Epic games from Playnite, most of the time nothing happens. So I start the epic client and... oh look, it logged me out agai…

> Multiple launchers is NOT ideal. Absolutely agreed, but consider what would happen if only one of those game stores you mention were allowed to be installed on your gaming PC. Then you'd have to go through a single gatekeeper, and I bet you a bunch of the games you like just wouldn't be available at all, because they'd either have been capriciously rejected, or because their developers can't make the terms work to…

You phrase this as an either/or proposition... either 1 app store with its gatekeepers and rules (and frankly, the Steam supremacy was a good king to live under...)

The real answer is neither. Fuck all these proprietary launchers and app stores. There are other answers.... personally I feel like these platforms need to be run and controlled by a nonprofit, with a charter that holds customers' and business' needs equally without a primary duty to greedy shareholders. Either that or sideloading

edit- and I think most folks are OK with living under a good , just king. Steam is this, and many argue that Apple was this at some point in their past. Since we are all apparently too stupid to handle a truly distributed method of installing software like sideloading or old-school brick and mortar retail, we have to learn to live with a store of some kind, with all that entails. And in that case, we're OK if the platform is fair and just

> because they'd either have been capriciously rejected, or because their developers can't make the terms work to their satisfaction

edit2- this never really happened with Steam, amazingly enough. Surely there are edge cases, and there are certainly reports of Steam staff working with devs to ensure a positive release (which is a nice way of saying they have probably forced developers to alter their product), and Valve has certainly made some bad decisions (which they thankfully backed down on). But Steam was such an improvement over the old distribution model that its downsides were almost unfairly outweighed by its upsides. And now they own the market with such a large competitive moat that Epic has to give away boatloads of free games (and good ones too!) and a PR campaign of trashing competitors just to seed their userbase.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#334

Post by Cu3PO42 »

FactolSarin wrote: post #83
jasode wrote: post #6

In the spirit of this particular story, I'd like to ask HN the following question: Should closed hardware (that owns its entire stack) even be legal to sell? Yes, it's legal today but should we make it illegal? To try another example besides Apple iPhone, consider the $35000 Prima Cinema movie server to play 1st run movies at home on day of release: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22prima+cinema%22&source=ln... In m…

While I'm sympathetic to this idea, one thing that I get hung up on is game consoles. I enjoy multiplayer shooters, and I like knowing that none of my opponents are using bots. So the fact that the console is locked down is part of the value proposition for me. It's a pro, rather than a con.

I don't see a huge issue there. You need not necessarily be able to run your code in parallel to game, the console could provide the option to run either your game or other code.

Of course you can now make the argument that any form of code execution increases the attack surface. And you're right but hypervisors can be quite effective. Also the XBOX One can be put in developer mode to run arbitrary UWP apps and has not yet had any major exploits (to my knowledge), where the PS4 has no similar features, but has had several firmware versions with significant security flaws.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#335

Post by ryantgtg »

> Moreover, Amazon couldn’t even tell users to visit Amazon.com, much less offer a link or, as Android allows, a webview of the store.

I was recently baffled by this on the Bandcamp app. You can't purchase music through their iOS app, and there isn't even a link to the website where you can purchase it. Instead there's just a "purchasing music is not supported on this device" message.

Likewise, on my own app, I had a blog post (webview) about our patreon (with a link, of course). And Apple flagged it during a random bug fix app update. So I had to edit the blog post and remove the link to our Patreon. And from what I could tell, there isn't even a way to use the proper Apple Pay/whatever system with Patreon subscriptions.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#336

Post by GeekyBear »

d1zzy wrote: post #226
GeekyBear wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. It's been perfectly legal since 2010. >The U.S. Librarian of Congress ruled on Monday that consumers who circumvent digital protections on smartphones to install unapproved applications—a practice often colloquially known as “jailbreaking”—for noninfringing reasons should be exempted from prosecution under the anti-circumvention section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). https://www.macworld.com…

Yes, the "consumers" should be exempted, not anyone selling solutions to do this or just giving them up for free. Which essentially means that unless you are an uber hacker that does this for their iPhones, nobody else can do it. It's pretty pointless in practice.

You don't have to be any sort of hacker. A jailbreaking app like Checkra1n will step you through the process.

https://www.idownloadblog.com/2019/11/10/how-to-jailbreak-wi...

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#337

Post by rched »

kelnos wrote: post #307
ericmay wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, you're right. That is the outcome that we want. We want multiple stores on iOS. I thought advocates for this position had been really clear, maybe we haven't been clear enough though. Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. You want another option of App Stores because you want don't want to pay for the user base that Apple created and…

I don't own an iPhone in large part because I cannot install an alternative app store or install non-Apple approved apps. > Right, and the rest of us don't want that, and I also don't want games or apps that don't adhere to Apple's rules. Why do you care? If you don't want to install a third-party app store, then don't. The games available on Apple's store will continue to adhere to Apple's rules, and if you want tha…

> If you don't want to install a third-party app store, then don't

I've been seeing this argument a lot and it makes the assumption that allowing alternative app stores has no impact on people who choose not to use them. I don't think this is true.

An app developer may decide to only list their app on an alternative store because they pay lower fees and they can handle payments themselves. As a user you now need to choose between not using the app or giving your credit card information to the app developer you may not trust.

If you get value out of the current App Store rules, like the person you replied to, then there is absolutely a cost to allowing alternative stores.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#338

Post by com2kid »

kelnos wrote: post #317
tomc1985 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I recently built a living room gaming PC. Installed Steam, Epic Store, GOG, Origin, XBOX, Rockstar Social Club, even Twitch. Pretty much anything where I have a library of games. And let me tell you, what a pain in the ass it is! I keep all the games organized in Playnite. If I try to launch Epic games from Playnite, most of the time nothing happens. So I start the epic client and... oh look, it logged me out agai…

> Multiple launchers is NOT ideal. Absolutely agreed, but consider what would happen if only one of those game stores you mention were allowed to be installed on your gaming PC. Then you'd have to go through a single gatekeeper, and I bet you a bunch of the games you like just wouldn't be available at all, because they'd either have been capriciously rejected, or because their developers can't make the terms work to…

> Absolutely agreed, but consider what would happen if only one of those game stores you mention were allowed to be installed on your gaming PC.

That is how it was several years back with Steam and everything was just fine. The new stores that popped up are, with the exception of GoG and Itch.io, in the service of large companies.

PC gaming wasn't a dystopia 5 years ago.

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#339

Post by tomc1985 »

com2kid wrote: post #338
kelnos wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Multiple launchers is NOT ideal. Absolutely agreed, but consider what would happen if only one of those game stores you mention were allowed to be installed on your gaming PC. Then you'd have to go through a single gatekeeper, and I bet you a bunch of the games you like just wouldn't be available at all, because they'd either have been capriciously rejected, or because their developers can't make the terms work to…

> Absolutely agreed, but consider what would happen if only one of those game stores you mention were allowed to be installed on your gaming PC. That is how it was several years back with Steam and everything was just fine. The new stores that popped up are, with the exception of GoG and Itch.io, in the service of large companies. PC gaming wasn't a dystopia 5 years ago.

> PC gaming wasn't a dystopia 5 years ago.

Indeed, it was glorious. Another golden age suffocated by business interests

Re: Apple, Epic, and the App Store

#340

Post by enragedcacti »

y7 wrote: post #323
enragedcacti wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...just don't use other app stores? Honest question, what do you lose by other people having the option?

Because it leads to fragmentation. If developers have a choice of app stores, then users have to install ALL app stores if they want access to the entire market. This happened with streaming services as well: when Netflix was the only prominent one, only that subscription was enough. Now you also need Amazon, Hulu, etc.

If enough users agree with the parent comment that the app store is the best way get software then companies can weigh that user base against the 30% cut. Why should we force the users who don't like the App Store (or want apps that are incompatible with Apple's business model) to suffer on behalf of the users who don't?
Post reply on HN