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

951–960 of 1001 posts

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

#951

Post by valparaiso »

simion314 wrote: post #913
valparaiso wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not my opinion. It's fact that court doesn't compare open platforms (Windows, Linux Distros, macOS) with closed ones - iOS, Nintendo, Xbox, PlayStation. Please see preliminary hearing video where judge rejected such arguments like yours. Epic lawyers failed very badly.

It does not matter what a judge said in the past when we want to create some new laws, the new laws will invalidate the old stuff.

You can't invalidate walled gardens because every company uses it. From Tesla to NASA.

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

#953

Post by gwd »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #939
gwd wrote: post #919

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look through my comments and you'll find I'm not some "the free market will magically solve all our problems" ideologue. Monopolies / monopsonies are a thing, and both workers and consumers need to be protected from them. Your attitude would make sense if there were no other smartphones around, and it was "buy an iPhone or go without". But there are plenty of good smartphones with alternate business models. If you do…

Because it's duopoly, there are no other options. You're free not to use alternative stores or so-called sideloading.

My understanding is that you can do both on Android.

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

#954

Post by reader_mode »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #490
reader_mode wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh - eventually things work out for the best of the consumers most of the time - for eg. epic game store just gave a bunch of titles free no strings attached a while ago, EA store used to have free stuff as well. End of the day you have to have enough value to get people to inconvenience themselves - I'd rather that this value gets shelled out to users as enticement to install some app store than Apple capturing tha…

This is short-sighted. The App Store is good because it is closed and curated. That's a main driver of the product experience. Removing the App Store irrecoverably damages the iPhone - a curated, non-malware infested, high quality phone with a consistent experience. I have yet to see any argument how the App Store harms consumers. It helps developers make more money (Play Store revenue is half that of the App store's…

Lol the framing is ridiculous - Apple had nothing against ripping off gambling kids as long as they were getting their 30% cut so please cut the fanboy crap.

Apple is using it's market position and it's leading to inefficient pricing. I guarantee you if Apple was forced to allow other payment methods on their store that their % cut would go down because the convenience they offer is not worth 30%.

And App Store can be as curated as they want if they provide the hooks to allow third party stores and app deployments.

I generally agree that you have the device choice - but considering the size of this market and Apple market position this is a right place for regulators to step in and fix the market inefficiency - just like the Windows/IE thing. And while they are at it they should probably look at digital store policies in general to prevent this kind of thing, Google isn't much better than Apple and they keep bundling stuff with the phone as well.

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

#955

Post by africanboy »

nmfisher wrote: post #896
africanboy wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hypothetical: if you modify the software in a Tesla, and your modification allows a hacker to remote control it, and this power is used to commit vehicular homicide, how much of the burden of responsibility do you have? Hypothetically: a friend borrows your car, but you didn't fix the break fluid leak, and he runs over someone. Who's at fault? > With regards to phones however, I explicitly want the devices heavily…

> Hypothetically: a friend borrows your car, but you didn't fix the break fluid leak, and he runs over someone. > Who's at fault? Legally the answer is crystal clear. If it was intentional? He is. Unintentional? You are. I don't really see the comparison.

> Legally the answer is crystal clear. > If it was intentional? He is. Unintentional? You are. > I don't really see the comparison.

That's weird...

In any country in the World the answer should be "it can only be decided by a judge, nobody can tell a priori"

In the case you tweak the software in your car and something happens, the justice system is there exactly to settle these kinds of issues.

That's the comparison.

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

#956

Post by hanselot »

gretch wrote: post #878
userbinator wrote: post #873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may boggle the tech-savvy mind, but another way of reading the incredibly successful 10 year history of this horribly locked-down, oppressive OS is that the market has spoken. And it's happy. Don't forget that the market was pushed that way by Apple's highly influential marketing. People didn't really choose to give up their freedom of their own free will --- they were persuaded to, and only found out about the do…

Marketing isn't magic. You can't just take anything and sell it uphill. If you could, why would anyone try to innovate on any level? Why are software engineers and product people paid more than marketing people at the same company? Is Apple > Blackberry just because Apple had better marketing? Or Nokia? On the other hand, if you have something genuinely desirable, then yeah marketing help people find that thing.

If marketing isn't magic, prey tell how something as user-hostile as the airpods exist.

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

#957

Post by intended »

sildur wrote: post #907
intended wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My grandfather had 4 different sms services when I tried to debug his phone. He was tech illiterate. Yet without any effort or choice, people had engineered multiple ways to compromise the basic functionality of sending a message. If I could have burned his phone in a fire and given him an iPhone, I would have.

Did he obtain the SMS apps from alternative app stores?

No idea. My grandfather would not have been able to go to an App Store unless someone did it for him though.

He struggled with the tech until someone showed him how something worked, at which point he diligently studied that one app for all it’s worth - but this was limited to YouTube and audio recording apps.

For him to have multiple messaging apps? Can’t see him do it intentionally - most likely he got hit by a pop up which then merrily used it to install a new messaging service.

It was a nightmare because he kept losing track and therefore control of what was going on with his phone. I’m sure the data security and privacy settings on those messaging apps would have been more upsetting.

For his use case a simple big standard iPhone would have made him happier, instead of having to wait for someone else to help him out.

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

#958

Post by varispeed »

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…

Wow a reasonable and on point comment that didn't get a rain of downvotes from Apple fan boys.

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

#959

Post by adamdusty »

Terretta wrote: post #563
adamdusty wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is going to not put their app on the apple app store. Look at steam for example. Almost every game on steam can be purchased somewhere else, like icth.io or the game's website. 30% is industry standard among monopolistic players (Google play store, Apple app store, Steam). There are many other storefronts that take less of a cut, and don't require IAP to go through a specific payment system that the platform a…

How is Steam a “monopolistic player” when you say “almost every game on steam can be purchased somewhere else” and go on to mention Gog, MS Store, Epic Store, and “the list goes on”? That Steam, and others you mention, charge 30% categorically undermines the whinging about Apple’s 30% being out of line. I’m also curious about people’s thoughts on Sony pulling CDPR’s Cyberpunk 2077 from their Playstation store.

You're right about steam. Monopoly isn't the right word.

Steam is the only one on that list that takes 30% that I know of. MS store went through a period where they would pay you to put your app there.

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

#960

Post by no_wizard »

matsemann wrote: post #434
no_wizard wrote: post #105

It’s all about money. I don’t think epic wants a new App Store. In fact I do t think the majority of developers with legitimate complaints with the App Store want competing app stores. They all want, from what I can boil down to, the majority of the time, two things: 1. Control over payments (to cut out the 30%) 2. More control over releases and updates (particularly upgrade pricing) I think if Apple caved in on thes…

3. Not having Apple make a competing product where they get 100% of the revenue and 30% of your revenue. (Which is the case Spotify is arguing over)

Thats where Case #1 comes in. This wouldn't be such an issue for them if it weren't for the 30%. I think you could make a separate argument about consumer transparency in this arena, but I don't know how much that'd hold water, much the same as Safari being the default browser isn't anyone's complaint in these antitrust hearings.
Post reply on HN