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

711–720 of 1001 posts

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

#711

Post by kaba0 »

judge2020 wrote: post #344
StavrosK wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's either a choice between "not running some specific game/app whose publisher made their own app store" and "not running any iOS app because my only option is to not have an iPhone"? I know which one gives me more choice.

No, your freedom of choice is only one level deep. You can either choose iOS, which includes 'runs only apple-approved software', or choose any other OS which runs other software. This is basically the right to repair / right to do whatever you want with your device debate. You can't force Apple to program the functionality for running other people's code into iOS, but it's legal if you figure out how. This is exactl…

Or choose any other OS? Are you living in a fantasy world with more than two OSs? It’s not goddamn hair shampoo..

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

#712

Post by dmitriid »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #677
thereddaikon wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's depressing that even on hackernews where you expect people want to tinker and have control over their machines there's a probably a majority who are happy with the situation and use the think of my grandma (aka children) using iPhone situation. There could be numerous ways for Apple to let people run their own software or other stores without giving your grandma malware.

> It's depressing that even on hackernews where you expect people want to tinker and have control over their machines there's a probably a majority who are happy with the situation

I am happy with the situation for one simple reason: it just works. I hve to many things to deal with and tinker with elsewhere. I honestly don't want to tinker with my phone.

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

#713

Post by bstar77 »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #677
thereddaikon wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's depressing that even on hackernews where you expect people want to tinker and have control over their machines there's a probably a majority who are happy with the situation and use the think of my grandma (aka children) using iPhone situation. There could be numerous ways for Apple to let people run their own software or other stores without giving your grandma malware.

Umm, I tinker on the raspberry pi 4 my son and I share. We tinker on our gaming PCs. We also tinker on our retro electronics (game consoles, computers and receivers).

I don’t have any urge to tinker with my phone, iPad or MacBook’s hardware- and that’s why I have them. We do build software via Xcode & Unity, which is an amazing experience, but I’m ok with the hardware being mostly static.

This whole “modern computers should be hackable like DOS machines of the late 80s” is absurd. By that logic we should never have accepted systems on a chip. The only criticism is that I strongly think these devices should have replaceable batteries, even at the cost of thinness.

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

#714

Post by [deleted] »

tommilukkarinen wrote: post #218
asimpletune wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if this is a defense per se, but the reason they do this is to prevent app makers from using that to try and steer customers to out of band ways of subscribing. I guess the analogy would be if a brand forbade a retailers from revealing their margins, so customers don’t go to secondary markets and potentially/almost-certainly have a worse experience. Like counterfeit products or just in general to be subj…

30% is not just for apps but all digital content like Spotify. Now if we see a future where Apple wins and dominates: everyone creating digital content for a living will pay a 30% tax to Apple. Forever including your grandchildren. Now lets take it a step further and think a world where all services like cleaning are bought with Apple products. Everyone will pay a 30% tax to Apple, forever. The thing is, that we cant…

[deleted]

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

#715

Post by kaba0 »

the_other wrote: post #377
pennaMan wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Apple blessed us with it's ground breaking technology to restrict the software you are allowed to have on your own device we did just fine getting software on our devices using a file system and the internet.

My desktop is a device for making, exploring, working, tinkering, making mistakes, hoarding. My phone is a device that solves problems or unlocks doors (metaphorically) near-instantly. I’m tolerant to friction (some) on my “exploratory” device. I’m intolerant to friction on my pocket-tool. The latter must always just work or it is pointless. I’m happy to trade freedom for stability for that use case, and deeply frust…

Few thing is not a tradeoff, but allowing sideloading is not one. (Or it is, to apple’s profits)

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

#716

Post by tassl »

cwhiz wrote: post #645
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How you can argue for less software freedoms, while paying a 30% tax for any app you distribute, is honestly mind boggling to me. >On the one hand, Apple is acting as a store curator and demanding that its customers be made aware of tracking software. This sounds like marketing. Apple is limiting what apps their customers have access to. I wonder if you would make the same argument if Apple starts blocking websites?

>How you can argue for less software freedoms, while paying a 30% tax for any app you distribute, is honestly mind boggling to me. Why do you care what my preferences are? If you don't care for the iOS model, you should go buy an Android. Apple doesn't have a monopoly. I prefer the Apple model because I want these restrictions. I want apps to be blocked from cross-app tracking. I want apps to have to explicitly spell…

Wait, why would having a non-Apple store being allowed in iOS affect you? If people want to install non-Apple approved apps from their own devices, it doesn't imply you have to do the same.

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

#717

Post by snowwrestler »

chc wrote: post #556
JakeTheAndroid wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know that it's entirely fair to say there is literally a single competitor. While Android is a single platform, you're free to get it from a range of vendors that all add their own flavor to Android. Some are really locked down, some are root by default. So you actually have a range of competing platforms even if they are powered by only 2 OSes. And in the case of both devices (Apple and Android) you can stil…

This argument doesn't pass the "Would it work just as well as a defense of late-'90s Microsoft?" test. I would be willing to concede most of the facts you brought up, but none of that in any way mitigates the amount of control Apple holds. Nobody's saying it's Apple's fault that they're in a duopoly position in the phone space, but that doesn't absolve them of the responsibility that position holds either. What is Ap…

Microsoft was a supplier accused of abusing its market share to disadvantage other suppliers. They did not get prosecuted for being popular.

Apple is not a supplier. They only sell directly to consumers. They don’t even try to make their app store available on competing phones, even if it is technically possible.

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

#718

Post by tick_tock_tick »

dleslie wrote: post #14
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…

On the one hand, Apple is acting as a store curator and demanding that its customers be made aware of tracking software. On the other hand, Apple is acting as a platform owner and demanding that they continue to act as the sole store curator on their platform. I do not see the hypocrisy.

> Curator

No drugs, no porn, nothing offensive. Maybe if Apple stopped being such a moral busy body people this would be less of an issue.

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

#719

Post by m463 »

enos_feedler wrote: post #703

Is Epic's fight technical or business related? I can't figure it out. Sometimes it's about payment processor choice, other times it's about the revenue share. Which is it? Even though Apple collects the revenue share through its payment processor, these seem like completely separate issues. Apple could easily let Epic transact using it's own payments infrastructure yet also invoice them for the 30% of those transacti…

It could be about self-determination.

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

#720

Post by mbreese »

kaba0 wrote: post #689
suifbwish wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is if I wanted or cared about that I would get one of those phones. The consumer gets to decide which phone they use and one of the reasons I like the iPhone is actually the difficulty in adding 3rd party crapware. If I needed a phone that I can install stuff on from unverified markets I would get an android and do it completely separately from my iPhone. I like that Apple is an appliance that is what it’s…

That’s the thing, there is no such phone. And frankly, there will not be more mobile platforms because even the current two is already much for companies to develop for. Free market doesn’t work that way. Linux phones might rise, but only if they gain a good android compat layer.

You can buy a PinePhone now (well, when they are back in stock). It's a decent phone with a completely open Linux stack. The UI might be a bit sluggish, but it is a fully functioning smartphone.

If you want to see more apps targeting a third platform, then you should buy one of these phones.

That's the way the market works.

Post reply on HN