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

Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#651

Post by adambyrtek »

gpanders wrote: post #541
enragedcacti wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funnily enough the new Chromecast with Google TV is a better experience for you than Apple TV. All of the services except Apple TV that you mentioned are searchable and playable from the home screen and Google doesn't have to take 30% of their revenue to make it happen.

I am not sure what the GP is referring to, but the Apple TV does exactly this. On my Apple TV I can search for shows on HBO, Amazon, ESPN, etc. All of my recently watched shows, regardless of streaming service/channel, show up on the main "TV" page. I can use Siri to search across all services, e.g. if I ask Siri to play The Office it will find it on Peacock and play it directly from there. The large exception here i…

Just FYI, Netflix works without any issues on the new Chromecast with Google TV.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#652

Post by sdfhbdf »

40four wrote: post #593

These conversations always rapidly devolve into the same old generic iOS versus Android nonsense. But I'd like to try to keep a super narrow scope here. The specific problem Epic and others are fighting here is "App Store payment system and control over app downloads" Now to be fair, as far as 'App store payments' goes, both Google & Apple charge the 30% fee on all transactions. The reason Epic is battling Apple here…

Just wondering if you've seen apple's pretty recent annoucement of the App Store Small Business Program which for the first $1 million reduces that "tax" to 15%.

https://developer.apple.com/app-store/small-business-program...

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#653

Post by sdfhbdf »

ryukafalz wrote: post #216
maratc wrote: post #169

Anytime Epic/Apple thing comes up, a very relevant quote is what their judge (YGR) said on their case: > “Well plaintiffs always want me to define relevant markets as narrowly as possible. It helps their case. And defendants always want me to define markets as broad as possible, because it helps their case.” The big elephant in the room is gaming consoles. If you see iPhone more or less in line with PC/Mac, you may a…

I also think people should be allowed to install whatever software they want on a gaming console that they own. Or a car, or a tractor, or...

It isn't illegal to jailbreak these.

Just if you want the convince, security, ecosystem, support you can expect to also in the same price point start supporting all the possible malware you will be able to sideload to your car, tractor and iPhone.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#654

Post by filoleg »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #514
insert_coin wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right to one's own work, to one's own mind outcome is arguably the only real right we can even pretend to have. What there is none is the "right" for governments to claim ownership to other's work and dictate you must do what your own free will tells you is not on your best interest, that is why they use force.

My work and private data is stored on apples's systems, so either it's my rights to do as I please or their's.

Your work data is not something within your own rights to do as you please with it, it is that of your employer.

Your private data is something within your own rights to do as you please with it, which gives you a choice of whether you want to store it on apple's systems or on someone else's systems or on the local systems that you personally own.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#655

Post by slantyyz »

simion314 wrote: post #243
BrianGragg wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the choice is taken away from you though. Just like he said with the game market. If you want to play Game A, you go and download/install Game A's publishing app store. If you want to then play Game B, rinse and repeat. You will be forced to use so many different app stores and won't have a choice to NOT use their app store "IF" it progresses like it has on the desktop. No proof it will/won't either.

I think EA created a game store because it feels parasitic that Valve could take 30% of your sells, why not make your own store and keep the 30% . What I would do is force EA to put their games on all stores, then on their own store they can give you a 25% discount because they don't have to pay the tax. Then people could decide if they want store A, B or C version. If the store tax would be low enough there would no…

You can now buy EA games on Steam though.

EA's Origin client also knows which EA games you have that were bought on Steam as well.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#656

Post by tomc1985 »

threeseed wrote: post #560
bombela wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point I barely play anymore. Because with all the intermediate updates and transient failures, it takes longer to start the game than the time you would spend casually playing during a week evening.

Exactly why people buy consoles. For the same experience as you get with an iPhone.

Except when it's not -- I rarely ever fire up my PS4 but when I do I can be guaranteed to have to wait a half hour for updates to install

Same with new games ... pop in the disc, run the install routine, download the day 1 patch...

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#657

Post by slantyyz »

stewx wrote: post #335
dubcanada wrote: post #184

I can hardly wait to use Amazon App Store to install Amazon and then open up the Epic Game Store to install random game and then open up EA Game Store to install random game and then open up Facebook App Store to install Facebook and then open up the Apple App Store to install the Blizzard App Store to install Hearthstone and then go back to the Apple App Store and update the Blizzard App Store so I can get the lates…

I recently discovered Playnite, an open source PC game library manager. It connects to all the stores and aggregates them in one place. You can also configure your own emulators for older games, etc. I can now view my DOSBox games and Steam/Origin/Epic games in one place. https://playnite.link/

There's also Launchbox [https://www.launchbox-app.com/]. You can also get Steam's Big Picture to do something similar, although it might take a little bit of work.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#658

Post by thereddaikon »

aboringusername wrote: post #11

It feels a bit hypocritical when Apple laughs at FB for complaining about their new tracking pop-up yet when the shoe's on the other foot and Apple may actually have to compete on its own platform they double down and defend their right to be judge, jury and executioner. Apple competing with third party app stores on iOS is going to be amazing. No computer platform should be allowed to prevent sideloading or other st…

The fact that you called it sideloading just shows how successful Apple has been in warping people's perception of it over the years.

Installing the software you want on your compute device isn't sideloading. Its just installing software. Apple is aberration here not all of the users who just expect to actually own the products they buy.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#659

Post by geocar »

toinetoine wrote: post #192
ericmay wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epic demands Apple do thing = bad for Apple (good for Epic) no way Epic demands Apple do a thing = bad for Apple, bad for customers (good for Epic) > Apple demand Facebook do thing = Good for Apple (bad for FB) yes way Apple demands Facebook do a thing = Good for Apple, good for customers (bad for Facebook) As a customer in these equations, I'm siding with Apple. > That's the very definition of "competition" someth…

> Epic demands Apple do a thing = bad for Apple, bad for customers (good for Epic) How is allowing developers to use alternate payment platforms "bad for customers"? Or, if not on the phone, at least to allow them to add funds to their account from the browser/another platform and use it in their iOS app?

> How is allowing developers to use alternate payment platforms "bad for customers"?

Because those "alternate payment platforms" don't prioritise consumer protection.

Deliveroo did an update their software that wiped out my login settings. They didn't support apple login, so I lost access to my account. They won't recover my email because of a special character in it, and so they continued to charge me for their "plus" service every month, and avoided any emails I tried to send asking to stop (asking me to "log in" to change my payment settings!).

Requiring apps use Apple's channel would have protected me from that experience.

Re: Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

#660

Post by gretch »

40four wrote: post #593

These conversations always rapidly devolve into the same old generic iOS versus Android nonsense. But I'd like to try to keep a super narrow scope here. The specific problem Epic and others are fighting here is "App Store payment system and control over app downloads" Now to be fair, as far as 'App store payments' goes, both Google & Apple charge the 30% fee on all transactions. The reason Epic is battling Apple here…

There is no such principle in our free society of what is and isn’t a fair and equitable business transaction. The only tool we have for that is what the market (supply and demand) will yield.

I can take a tiny piece of carbon, call it a diamond and sell it for 50,000. Is it fair and equitable? Should that be allowed?

I can take a white T shirt and print a red Supreme logo on it and sell it for 100x cost of production. Is that fair and equitable? Should it be allowed?

The development cost for a book is about $10 dollars of ink and paper. Each copy is printed and distributed for 1 dollar. It took the author 10 hours to write. But the knowledge and insights are extremely valuable. Is it fair and equitable for the author to charge $100 for a copy of this book?

If 30% isn’t allowed, is 29% okay? How about 28%? What exactly is this magic number where things become okay? Don’t businesses have the right to try and profit and not just break even? (If not why would anyone start a new business venture)

If you would argue that we shouldn’t have a free market and the govt should set all the prices in the economy, well that’s a different philosophy entirely. It’s not very popular for a host of reasons

Post reply on HN