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

Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

macrumors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 638 posts

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#461

Post by fomine3 »

mantap wrote: post #430
moksly wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re vastly underrating the seriousness in which a company like Apple would treat this matter. They aren’t a petty child or a bully. They’re a company, and their market research likely show them that the key advantage they have over Android is their closed, easy to use and secure ecosystem. If Epic succeeds in breaking that, they’ll lose a lot more than 30% of the 20 ish millions a month that Epic is curren…

Apple prevents people who paid $10000s for their top-of-the-line computer, from using an equally top-of-the-line GPU from Nvidia, because ~10 years ago some Nvidia laptop GPUs had problems and Apple is obsessive about punishing them. Apple does act like a petty child, and a rather obnoxious one at that. They are the worst kind of company, one that considers it is doing you a favour by allowing you to be their custome…

I suspect that why Apple prevents using NVidia is because they won't support Metal and force support CUDA.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#462

Post by ActorNightly »

butterisgood wrote: post #307
411111111111111 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously doubt that. Apple hardware has always been more about being a status symbol then utility. To the average Apple user it's just not cool enough if it isn't availble on Apple hardware. Even looking back I'm still surprised how effectively Apple polarized people into fans vs haters after steve jobs rejoined back then...

I doubt you know what you’re talking about. It’s never been about a status symbol for me. I don’t regret switching to Apple 20 years ago and the very little amount of time I spend fighting the OS to do what I need it to on a daily basis. If anything, I have to put up with schmucks telling me I bought apple hardware for looks more than I enjoy any sort of status symbol for owning it.

While Mac computers aren't bad, its generally a consensus that they are not worth the price for any tangible thing (same performance/functionality and the ability to repair the computer easily can be had for lower cost).

This is also compounded by the recent bloat in Catalina with permissions, and continuous locking down of Apple to the point where you can't run a lot of free software on it (like VMWare Player) that you can on other computers.

There is definitely an aspect of aesthetics when it comes to why people purchase this, so the guy you are replying to is kinda correct.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#463

Post by fomine3 »

mlindner wrote: post #440
supernovae wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of Microsoft, they denied the Xbox gaming app on the store after it had already been going through wide beta use on ios. They denied it on the grounds that they need to review every xbox game. Which is nonsense. They don't review every netflix movie, they don't review every spotify song, they don't review other content. The app that was denied doesn't actually download the games either, its a remote/onlin…

Games are executables, movies are not, nor are songs. Why are people (intentionally?) ignoring this point. Apple reviews all executables.

Stadia is non-executable but Apple bans. They just banning what they don't want.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#464

Post by subsection1h »

lolsal wrote: post #274
drenvuk wrote: post #260

I don't get why on Hackernews anyone would ever defend Apple here. Regardless of whether they're right to do this if Epic wins their court case against them we stand to gain the most benefit. Apple's incredibly high walled garden is honestly the scariest thing for me. If I develop for windows I can simply distribute my application on my site easily. With Android I can tell people to download from F-Droid if necessary…

> Epic caused their own pain here, sure but What other way can we actually get a semi open platform that we're not being taxed on? As an Apple user, the whole point here is that it's not an open system. I just can't get riled up over a developer not following the rules of a platform. I use Apple because the Apple ecosystem is valuable to me - the store, the SSO, the Apple ID, the UI/UX, the hardware - all of it. I do…

Hacker News in 2020: Where "hackers" prefer closed systems and perceive no value in developers who don't want to "play nice" with closed systems.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#465

Post by donmcronald »

hapticmonkey wrote: post #416
drenvuk wrote: post #260

I don't get why on Hackernews anyone would ever defend Apple here. Regardless of whether they're right to do this if Epic wins their court case against them we stand to gain the most benefit. Apple's incredibly high walled garden is honestly the scariest thing for me. If I develop for windows I can simply distribute my application on my site easily. With Android I can tell people to download from F-Droid if necessary…

Apple's defense is that their walled garden and strict rules are what's stopping their ecosystem from becoming a cesspool of scams or fake or harmful apps. Users (who are not "power users") trust Apple's ecosystem. The user experience of installing from their app store and using their sign in method is so much better than the experience of installing from the web and signing in via other methods. It frustrates me tha…

You're taking on risk for that sign in convenience though. What do you do if Apple bans your account? If the services you're using have absolutely zero info about you, how do you prove who you are and get your account back?

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#466

Post by nodamage »

tramav wrote: post #446
nodamage wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And the EU will levy the world's biggest fine at Apple, I predict north of $5 billion if not $10 billion for abusing their status with this being a notable case. Apple only has ~25% market share in the EU. Their "status" is as the minority player in the market. It's questionable whether this is high enough to violate EU antitrust laws, which have usually required at least 40% to show market dominance.

The law talks about "a dominant position within the internal market or in a substantial part of it". If we look at the iOS platform, Apple could be seen to have a dominant position there since it is the market maker there.

The EU appears to have specific criteria for when a single company's product can be considered its own market. [1]

Dominance on the aftermarket is excluded to the extent that a customer:

1) can make an informed choice including lifecycle pricing, that he 2) is likely to make such an informed choice accordingly, and that 3) in case of an apparent policy of exploitation being pursued in one specific aftermarket, a sufficient number of customers would adapt their purchasing behaviour at the level of the primary market 4) within a reasonable time.

The case that established this precedent found that printer manufacturers did not have dominance in the market of "printer cartridges compatible with their printers" based on the above criteria. Whether or not this would apply to the iOS platform will have to be decided by a court.

[1] https://europeanlawblog.eu/2013/09/26/the-efim-case-no-domin...

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#467

Post by fomine3 »

labcomputer wrote: post #393
danShumway wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic isn't fighting for the little guy, they wanted their own store That's the point. This is also what the little guys want. Epic isn't fighting for the little guy, but they are fighting for terms that are mutually beneficial for both Epic and the little guy. For the devs who support Epic in the lawsuit, it's never directly been about the 30% cut. It's about this article, right here -- that Apple requires you to s…

> I understand why people disagree with me Respectfully, it feels like you don't. For example: > I understand why people think that the average consumer might be too stupid to actually own their own hardware and make their own decisions. It's not about stupidity. I like the fact that my 94-year-old grandmother (who isn't stupid, by the way) doesn't have to worry about accidentally downloading malware from the App Sto…

Apple still can enforce security inspection even they allowed third party app store or payment with taking some fee. Security inspection and content inspection is different thing.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#468

Post by jsjohnst »

schmichael wrote: post #275
paulpan wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Epic absolutely needs other major game studios, and major software companies, to join in their protest to effect the desired change. Interesting point about the looming iOS14 update. Makes you wonder whether Apple will ultimately fall at their privacy sword, similar to how Google fell at its own "Don't do evil" motto. E.g. it's meaningless bravado when not applied to universally to all countries, aka China.

I wish Mozilla would join them by publishing a Firefox for iOS with their own renderer and Javascript (which they have been prevented from doing). Get booted and join the lawsuit. That's the activist Mozilla I can get behind.

> I wish Mozilla would join them by publishing a Firefox for iOS with their own renderer and Javascript

It would likely be unusably slow if they did. Apple doesn’t allow apps in the store with the required entitlements to make an optimized JavaScript engine of entirely Mozilla’s design.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#469

Post by modeless »

nodamage wrote: post #449
modeless wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antitrust requires demonstrating harm to consumers, not just to Epic.

1. Not necessarily. Per se violations do not require proof of consumer harm, for example. Epic's tying claim against Apple is an alleged per se violation. 2. It was already established in Apple v. Pepper that developers had standing to sue Apple over App Store policies. The case then went up to the Supreme Court which ruled that consumers also have standing to sue. 3. Showing consumer harm may help Epic win their sui…

Epic needs a strong case, not a minimum viable case. They need to demonstrate the full extent of the problem. An allegedly illegal contract shouldn't stop them from doing that.

Re: Apple Disabling 'Sign in with Apple' for Epic Games on September 11

#470

Post by nodamage »

maxsilver wrote: post #239
jmpman wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace Apple’s iOS ecosystem with Microsoft’s Xbox, Sony’s PlayStation or Nintendo’s Switch. Either you destroy the console ecosystem by forcing them all to open up, or classify iOS as somehow different... or you leave them all to enforce their business agreements through mutually accepted legal term. If Epic doesn’t want a different agreement than Apple, they can negotiate alternative legal terms.

> Either you destroy the console ecosystem by forcing them all to open up, or classify iOS as somehow different. Console ecosystems are already open-by-law, based on past cases from the 80s and 90s. You can already publish a game to a Switch or PlayStation without ever going through Nintendo or Sony (so long as you don't steal any copywritten assets to do so). You can even publish your own software, that modifies any…

> Console ecosystems are already open-by-law, based on past cases from the 80s and 90s.

I'm curious what cases you think actually established this precedent? Keep in mind that a court saying "reverse engineering is not copyright infringement" is not the same thing as a court saying "a hardware manufacturer is legally obligated to permit the distribution of third-party software on its hardware".

> You can already publish a game to a Switch or PlayStation without ever going through Nintendo or Sony (so long as you don't steal any copywritten assets to do so).

I don't believe this is accurate, at least not in the sense of commercially publishing a game in a physical store or on Nintendo or Sony's digital storefronts. I'm certainly not aware of any games that have been published in physical stores without the publisher having signed a publishing agreement with Nintendo or Sony.

Post reply on HN