191–200 of 456 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. He's just using keywords like monopoly and stuff to gather support. And overall I don't understand why people take sides in corporate battles like any of those mega corporations stand for morals or the greater good or anything like that.
Because one side of this dispute benefits us as customers. It's that simple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the "best case scenario" for developers and Epic, but not for me as a customer. I vastly prefer the iPhone model where I can go to a single place to download all the apps that I need with a single payment method. I don't have to go to a specific url in the browser, download an executable, install a separate store for each game I want, and then finally install the game from that separate store. I don't know who w…
Well of course you're going to prefer an anti-competitive approach if you view competition as burdensome. This has analogies in many industries. You should divorce your personal anti-competition desires from the non-personal discussion. Encouraging choice is often a better way to give more people what they want.
Having choice isn't always better. I think the Apple iOS store is a very clear example where choice leads to negative experience for users. As I've mentioned before, Apple collectively bargains on behalf of users against developers. They enforce (albeit imperfectly) certain standards and force nefarious developers to implement things like sign in with Apple.
They only, and I mean only, affect of releasing developers from the App Store is that they'll sign on with some 3rd party store, and if you want to use Spotify, or Netflix, or Facebook you'll get it from a 3rd party store where they charge the exact same prices but then infest the applications with hostile anti-patterns, tracking, etc. That's it. When you advocate for "choice" here, you're simply advocating for the choice for users to pay the same prices they've been paying except also being exposed to anti-patterns that Apple is working to prevent. Choice in this case, is clearly bad.
I'll also add, I have yet to hear a peep from Epic w.r.t having to go through Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo for releasing Fortnite via their locked-in app stores. The iPhone is no more or less a computing device than those are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they cost game devs money in lost sales from me. I still don't get how the exclusives are a good deal for the creators. They get more publicity and probably some extra money for the contract. But does it really offset the lost sales? There was a large number of times when I went though: this game looks awesome, I'll buy it, oh it's exclusive for whatever-platform-i-don't-have, ... and likely not remember about it e…
Is installing another store really so burdensome? It costs nothing but a few minutes of time. GOG Galaxy can even help consolidate them.
Microsoft is apparently not one of the monopolies he wants stopped, because he is incredibly hostile towards Linux and Linux support for games. I can't stand this dude and his ramblings.
Hey there, I work in the Linux gaming space. Epic and Tim Sweeney are not hostile towards Linux. The worst you can say is they're indifferent (and can you blame them, given the size of that market?), but even that is not true. Epic's game engine supports Linux. Could they do more to support Linux gaming? Sure. But that's not the same as being "incredibly hostile."
https://www.rocketleague.com/news/ending-support-for-mac-and...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Following Apples way of thinking, Standard oil was not a monopoly. You could choose to source your energy from coal, power your train with steam etc. But the fact is that it was one.
That comparison would be calling every other phone on the market not just inferior, but entirely different technology. Seeing as they all can access the same networks and be comprised of varying hardware and use varying operating systems I just don’t think that’s true. It’s like Apple being the sole supplier of a specific type of unleaded fuel. And people like me choosing that fuel because it might be more expensive…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its a bit of a chicken/egg problem here. If there is no apps/appstore the OS will be a flop, but if there is no free OS there will probably not be a free app-ecosystem. Used to have a Nokia N9, awesome phone, great OS, but there weren't any apps to speak of which I think is a large part of why MeeGo died. Honestly the one way I see out of this is if web-apps largely replace native apps, which means that a new…
You’ve hit it. There’s a reason the web once was a threat to Microsoft’s monopoly: it led to rich experiences they couldn’t control. The web is so popular, Apple couldn’t block it. The trick to attacking them anticompetitively is to enhance the browser to take advantage of modern hardware capabilities and then go after the iOS browser restrictions as anticompetitive. Google Stadia is an example of this arguably. But…
JavaScript + WebGL are very capable, right now, and for the past ~5 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think Sweeney is correct, although I also think Epic tried to do the same. Their success with some of their games created capital that they used to create their own platform. Maybe as a defense mechanism or maybe because they wanted part of the pie. I agree but people who are criticizing Epic for this are missing the real point. It is good if Epic can actually take a big chunk of the pie. Sure you could say they'…
Epic's platform is not a monopoly even if they successfully made one. steam is not a monopoly, even if they currently have a large market share, because the user is able to install their software outside of the steam platform. Some games choose to not release on multiple platforms - but that's not a monopoly. And other games _do_ choose to release on multiple platforms, or choose to release independently of a platfor…
Same goes for Apple. The term "monopoly" is not really useful in this discussion. It's more about having a small number of gatekeepers. There are currently exactly 2 gatekeepers of mobile devices in the entire world: Apple and Google.
It is possible that Epic could get into a similar position as what Apple is today, but for games. My point is that I support something like this happening, even though people may think that Epic is just another gatekeeper. Gatekeepers can't be avoided, so the solution is to have more gatekeepers, so they can't abuse their power easily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “As smartphones become more and more a part of the fundamental infrastructure of society” This perspective underpins a lot of the pushback against Apple & Google but I just don’t understand it. Any cell phone, and especially a smartphone, is not integral to modern society. Random usage by consumers is recreational. Businesses have a million ways to replace things they ask employees to rely on smartphones for. In fa…
17% of people in the US use their smartphone as their only portal to the internet [1]. Is your argument that as long as they can go use a computer at a library that their smartphone is a luxury item? Access to the internet (or someone to access it for you) is basically a prerequisite for existing in modern society and phones are how people choose to do it most of the time. This like saying "hey, if you don't like buy…
Oil is a natural resource. This is software that didn’t exist 12 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Windows/Epic situation really is the "best case scenario". You can download and install software from anywhere. Plus, there's an "app store" from the OS vendor, plus a few specality competing ones for things like games, where both consumers and developers have the choice of where they download/publish. Epic competing with Steam has been a great success for everyone I think. Developers get secure funding for games…
It's the "best case scenario" for developers and Epic, but not for me as a customer. I vastly prefer the iPhone model where I can go to a single place to download all the apps that I need with a single payment method. I don't have to go to a specific url in the browser, download an executable, install a separate store for each game I want, and then finally install the game from that separate store. I don't know who w…
Also if I want to buy a subscription for soemthing like Intellij as a developer I would feel like garbage to use a store and give a 30% cut to Microsoft or Apple for the privilege of allowing me to install something, the developers deserve those money and a big corporation because they host some files.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey there, I work in the Linux gaming space. Epic and Tim Sweeney are not hostile towards Linux. The worst you can say is they're indifferent (and can you blame them, given the size of that market?), but even that is not true. Epic's game engine supports Linux. Could they do more to support Linux gaming? Sure. But that's not the same as being "incredibly hostile."
Epic purchased Rocket League developer Psyonix and ended Linux support for the game shortly after: https://www.rocketleague.com/news/ending-support-for-mac-and...
[1] https://support.rocketleague.com/hc/en-us/articles/360042201...
[2] https://support.rocketleague.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043307...