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

Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 639 posts

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#291

Post by lukeschlather »

treis wrote: post #177
dgellow wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but do we agree that Epic getting what they want would result in a more open platform than what we currently have? Because the alternative to what Epic want (so the current situation) isn't a completely open platform but one where Apple is the only boss and can do almost whatever they want. Having more bosses in competition for parts of the market is an improvement toward a more open system.

We've seen on Android that the practical effects of competing app stores are basically zero. There's too much advantage to controlling the OS and being the default. Epic getting a store on iOS is likely to be a moral victory at best. The effective solution is stopping dominance in one area from spilling over into another. Can't use iOS control to gain control of app sales and you can't use control of app sales to gai…

The fact that F-Droid exists is a huge deal. Yeah, not everyone uses it. There isn't an app for everything (by design) but the apps are way more trustworthy than anything you can get out of the iOS or Android stores.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#292

Post by kabes »

ericmay wrote: post #112
dgellow wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say Epic get what they want, that would open iOS to competing app stores and/or would make rules more flexible regarding available payment systems and/or would allow applications to be side loaded. That's more dynamism, market forces can then play their role. I understand that you may want an even more open market, but that's a quite different topic. > Having two competing kings fighting over the throne isn't "…

I think what you’d see is not much in the way of price decreases or increased availability of apps, but more dark patterns, malware, and anti-privacy measures. Apple basically collectively bargains for iPhone users via the App Store. Privacy features, sign-in with Apple, limiting tracking abuse, privacy “Nutrition Facts” and other items will go out the window. Apple will have those in their App Store, but users will…

I would think that people who care about their privacy, would be anti anything that reminds them of totalitarianism and therefore would also not like that Apple can decide what they can install on their devices. It's curious to see that people care about their privacy/data are fine with the control Apple has over their devices.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#293

Post by toyg »

pjmlp wrote: post #246
toyg wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I shiver to think what a IBM success "to secure their golden eggs" in the way Apple does today, would have meant for the world at large. P2P or the browser would have never been invented, you wouldn't have been allowed to install anything without IBM approving... brrr

PCs only turned out different from any other siloed computing platform thanks to IBM not being able to sue Compaq. As for how it would be like, just like Acorn, Atari, Amiga and Apple were at the time.

I.e. killed by a more open platform and inevitable corporate mismanagement...?

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#294

Post by wvenable »

Bender_Donaghy wrote: post #289

Change My Mind - I currently agree with Apple's strategy with blocking Unreal Engine. Why is it that a big company (like Epic) thinks it's no longer subject to the Apple Tax while us small guys thrive with the platform for which we wouldn't have the audience/opportuity without Apple. Are we all subject to the same cycle if we "make it", we'll buck against the 30% cut and bite the hand that fed us. This is bad busines…

> We wouldn't have the audience/opportuity without Apple

Is that worth 30% till the end of time? Your argument is like crabs in a bucket -- one crab tries to get a better deal and you pull him down because you have to pay.

Lets say, somehow, Epic manages to get that fee lowered to something more reasonable for everyone. Would you not be happy with that?

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#295

Post by newacct583 »

1MoreThing wrote: post #280
paulmd wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now if only the courts would apply the same "sanity" to, say, Uber threatening to fire all its drivers if they're subject to regulation. Not just in california, it's been a repeated thing, they used their employees as leverage when they were threatening to take their ball and go home if Dallas made them do background checks too. The sad part is that Epic's tactics are nothing out of the ordinary for these silicon val…

What exactly is sane about figuring out how to make 200,000 contractors full-time employees inside of a week? I don't think there's a company in the world that could pull that off. If a company says, "hey, we're a marketplace" and a court says, "actually, you're not" then the company has to figure out how to adapt. There's change and an emotional toll to the drivers in that scenario whether they become employees or n…

> inside of a week

California Assembly Bill 5 was signed into law last September and was clearly a "Going to Happen" event for at least a year prior.

There's no surprise here. Uber had plenty of time to figure out how to deal with this. And they did: they aren't dummies, this was their plan. Their considered decision was that it was in the best interests of their shareholders to play brinksmanship games with their employees' livelihoods instead of make a good faith effort to comply with state law.

Rulebreaking is, after all, part of the corporate culture at Uber, and it always has been.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#296

Post by wvenable »

paulmd wrote: post #276
causality0 wrote: post #5

A victory for sanity. Apple threatening developmental licenses and anyone who used the Unreal Engine was nothing short of mafia-esque, and just as obviously Fortnite being restored to the app store is a matter for Epic's lawsuit against apple.

Now if only the courts would apply the same "sanity" to, say, Uber threatening to fire all its drivers if they're subject to regulation. Not just in california, it's been a repeated thing, they used their employees as leverage when they were threatening to take their ball and go home if Dallas made them do background checks too. The sad part is that Epic's tactics are nothing out of the ordinary for these silicon val…

> Uber threatening to fire all its drivers if they're subject to regulation.

Do you mean Uber threating not to hire all it's drivers? Right not they're not employees and they all have become them that's a very different process.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#297

Post by dawnerd »

echelon wrote: post #286
diebeforei485 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two points- (1) Presumably Apple wanted to try to send a very quick message to others to not try to make similar moves (and to reassure other developers that Epic wasn't getting a special deal) instead of waiting 30 days. (2) I've said this before and it's important to understand this: just because a contract says Apple can do something (terminate the contract with Unreal Engine), that does not mean they can do it. I…

Per item 1, now would be a good time for every single developer on the app store to revolt in unison. Collective bargaining.

and for every dev that left you'd have a shady one step in the fill the void.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#298

Post by arvinsim »

Gorbzel wrote: post #273
yupyup54133 wrote: post #262

I'm confused. Why doesn't Apple just use their "Termination for Convenience" clause that lets them terminate any contract with a 30 day notice?

B/c in that case Apple would be doing what the haters erroneously claim they do now: making 100% arbitrary/capricious decisions when it comes to the App Store walled garden. As those of us who target iOS know, they're not transparent, but it's not arbitrary. Thank god. We'd never hear the end of unsolicited opinions about the Touch Bar and HN's annual subscription to the year of desktop Linux.

How would you know that they are not arbitrary if they are transparent?

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#299

Post by gizmo »

Bender_Donaghy wrote: post #289

Change My Mind - I currently agree with Apple's strategy with blocking Unreal Engine. Why is it that a big company (like Epic) thinks it's no longer subject to the Apple Tax while us small guys thrive with the platform for which we wouldn't have the audience/opportuity without Apple. Are we all subject to the same cycle if we "make it", we'll buck against the 30% cut and bite the hand that fed us. This is bad busines…

Is it better if Apple is accountable to nobody, or is it better if Apple is held accountable by a few businesses that can afford excellent lawyers?

Besides, the issue here isn't that Epic doesn't think the Apple rules don't apply to them. They want to raise attention to how unfair the rules are, in the hope of getting Apple to change their stance either voluntary or through the court system. I think too much money is at play here for Apple to make any voluntary concessions here, but even if Apple wins (likely outcome) a track record of being sued for unfair business practices will hopefully benefit everybody in Apple's ecosystem in the long term.

Re: Apple ordered to not block Epic’s Unreal Engine, Fortnite to stay off App Store

#300

Post by wcarey »

yyyk wrote: post #268
wcarey wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bargaining is between users and developers. Developers have increasingly taken adversarial positions with their users, who have accepted increasingly onerous terms and privacy policies because individual users are not in a good bargaining position. Apple, in contrast, is in a bargaining position to negotiate terms of use on behalf of its users with developers. For example, if I purchase a subscription to a langua…

>my ability to seamlessly cancel that subscription has been collectively bargained by Apple Bargained for Apple's benefit, not yours. The end result is that if you ever for any reason want to manage the subscription without an Apple device, you can't. Which directly feeds into the premium they charge you for their devices. It also means that the vendor is forced to implement Apple Payments, and the surcharge is ultim…

Perhaps it benefits Apple, but it also benefits me in ways I’m happy to pay for (and would be unable to pay for absent the collective bargaining).
Post reply on HN