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

Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 456 posts

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#421

Post by wayneftw »

gruez wrote: post #378
kec wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were the real reason, why is rocket league still available on both the ps4 and Nintendo switch?

presumably because those platforms have way more users than linux?

Yeah, not only that but Linux users are known to be hostile to commercial software companies.

Given that, the microscopic market, and the additional programming complexity I don't see a reason why any game company should go out of their way to support Linux ever.

(As a Linux desktop user, I'm thankful when they do though. I'm so glad that Beyond Compare from Scooter Software works on my main workstation, for instance. Also Zoom, Slack and VS Code among others... Looking forward to trying MS Edge some day soon.)

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#422

Post by floatingatoll »

ben_w wrote: post #400
floatingatoll wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can this be done without loss of security for typical users? It cannot. Typical users are not capable of 'vetting' app stores for their security capabilities.

It doesn’t have to be directly end-users — could it be like the HTTPS chain of trust, only with Apple and Google as the roots of certification?

What incentive does Google or Apple have to associate their name with someone else’s security judgment calls?

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#423

Post by madeofpalk »

brnt wrote: post #222
madeofpalk wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic Store successfully taking games exclusive People keep bringing this up as a negative, but ignore a) that many games are exclusively on Steam and b) Epic gives guaranteed revenue to developers, derisking development. There is absolutely nothing wrong imho with companies wanting to make their own stores, set their own rules, with whatever exclusivity, to make money for themselves, AS LONG AS there is (fair and e…

> Competition is good! On Linux, the Epic Store does not compete and therefore it does not add choice for me.

EGS exclusivity doesn't limit distribution for other platforms, im not sure if this also applies for Linux as well.

Being on Steam does not guarantee the game will be on Linux. It sounds like your real problem is developers not bothering about shipping their game on Linux.

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#425

Post by madeofpalk »

eertami wrote: post #138
madeofpalk wrote: post #76

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…

Epic games exclusives are not the kind of competing I want, and they're not a win/win/win. I'm happy to buy games on GOG or the Humble store for instance, but I will never in a million years install the privacy and security nightmare that is the Epic Game Store on a PC I own. Sure, steam is not perfect but they've not had issues on the scale of Epics software. I've played thousands of hours of Rocket League, but stil…

> Epic games exclusives are not the kind of competing I want

EGS represents the choice in the market, and the market can act on that. Developers have the choice to go on the store, and they have the choice to take exclusivity agreements, or they can choose to go on steam or to offer direct downloads. Customers and chose whether they want to purchase a game from EGS, or go elsewhere.

"a product exists that I don't like" is not "bad competition". If you don't like Epic Game Store, then continue to not use it and go to a competing service/game.

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#426

Post by pr0zac »

mirthflat83 wrote: post #184
enragedcacti wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all the apps that I need Correction: all the apps that Apple thinks you need, regardless of whether or not it aligns with what you need or want.

Please give me examples of apps I’m missing out on as an average consumer because I’m all for missing out on malwares

Ironically, one example is an app that was useful for detecting malware or other security problems: https://www.sektioneins.de/en/blog/16-08-11-sysinfo-what-hap...

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#427

Post by soylentcola »

mirthflat83 wrote: post #184
enragedcacti wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> all the apps that I need Correction: all the apps that Apple thinks you need, regardless of whether or not it aligns with what you need or want.

Please give me examples of apps I’m missing out on as an average consumer because I’m all for missing out on malwares

Can't speak for today (since I don't have an iOS device at the moment) and I understand that some of these things were eventually added as options, but when I used an iPad 2 back in the day, some of the things I jailbroke it for:

Systemwide adblocking, non-Safari browser that wasn't artificially limited, ability to connect bluetooth mouse (mostly for when I used the iPad to remote into other computers), modified keyboard with a number row, file manager, some minor homescreen/launcher tweaks for usability, and one that allowed non-iPad apps to run at a higher resolution (at the time, non-universal apps would run in the old iPhone res, but scaled up instead of running at the higher, newer phone resolution).

I'm sure there were other little tweaks, but the main thing was that there weren't any decent Android or Windows tablet options at the time and while the iPad did many things quite well, there were all sorts of little quality of life things that I was just used to having. They weren't included in iOS and there was no way to (officially) change the launcher or keyboard or any of those other things.

It would have been quite nice to have other software repos besides just the App Store which didn't require me to exploit security flaws to use. Instead I just stopped buying iOS devices after that iPad.

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#428

Post by IncRnd »

Google234 wrote: post #100
IncRnd wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about it? You, personally, making that choice shouldn't force everyone else to pay 30% eternally to Apple.

You don’t have to pay 30% to Apple. Jail break your phone is you want or just buy one of the 1000s of other phones for. Sale

> You don’t have to pay 30% to Apple. Jail break your phone is you want or just buy one of the 1000s of other phones for. Sale

That's a completely unreasonable sales strategy for a company to take, telling their customers to jailbreak their phones or to purchase a different phone.

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#429

Post by 29083011397778 »

floatingatoll wrote: post #422
ben_w wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t have to be directly end-users — could it be like the HTTPS chain of trust, only with Apple and Google as the roots of certification?

What incentive does Google or Apple have to associate their name with someone else’s security judgment calls?

Most people don't understand the difference between "Google Play served a malicious app" and "Their Android device had a malicious app installed".

This is one reason Google Play Protect scans all apps installed, not just those installed through the Play Store. "That way, no matter where you download an app from, you know it's been checked by Google Play Protect"[1]

[1] https://www.android.com/play-protect/

Re: Tim Sweeney on Apple and Google

#430

Post by IncRnd »

JimDabell wrote: post #314
IncRnd wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, he cannot feasibly do that, which is exactly why Epic has sued Apple.

> he cannot feasibly do that Apple did. They were worth approximately the same as Epic are now when they launched the iPhone. They hadn’t any meaningful presence in the phone industry and people thought it was ridiculous that they were trying. Palm CEO Ed Colligan: > We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone. PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not goi…

You misunderstand. People won't discard their iPhones in order to purchase a Fortnite phone without the iPhone apps. It is not feasible to even consider that.
Post reply on HN