Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint • Hacker News Board

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

#981

Post by smichel17 » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 12:02 AM UTC

pkulak wrote: post #708

elefanten wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except as soon as it becomes a remotely feasible action (with simple instructions) for the general consumer, a bunch of businesses will start requiring their users to disable "default Grandma mode". Imagine onboarding for Netflix including a pleasantly designed screen saying "Before you can use Netflix, you must Enable Third-party Stores. Go to Settings > Privacy..." If that comes to pass, there will be no highly-gua…

I've noticed that if something is possible, your children or grandmother with do it, somehow. I hand out Chromebooks to relatives because of the low support requirements, and yet STILL every time I get one of those things back there are dozens of outright dangerous extensions installed. These are folks who know how to click on the icon for their email and that's it, and yet the garbage finds a way in. It's like tryin…

It's totally possible to have both: on first init, have the user choose whether they want to prevent installing apps from 3rd party stores. Changing this setting requires performing a factory reset.

Problem solved. If you want the walled garden, opt in at the beginning, and now your children/grandmother are safe as long as they don't literally reset their phone, wiping all their pictures/apps/whatever.

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

#982

Post by ChrisLomont » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 2:07 AM UTC

kaba0 wrote: post #709

ChrisLomont wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that will be the end of third party apps. Apple will hire devs to make apps, and then you're not third party, and no more royalties....

That would be a pretty stupid thing to do, like will apple create an app for my bank? Mobile phones are general purpose computers.

Pretty much all CPUs are general-purpose. The vast majority don't run anything third party. Phones having general purpose computers isn't any kind of argument for who has what access.

And if the alternative for a vendor is being forced to lose enough revenue by letting any third party do whatever they want, then Apple will make an app for your bank, by contracting the bank to pay for the development.

The reason the third party platform is currently huge is because Apple created a platform for devs to publish on. If the rules were the ones prescribed above Apple would have likely taken a different route. Changing the rules because people are unhappy is simply bad precedent.

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

#983

Post by hda2 » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 2:35 AM UTC

Betelgeuse90 wrote: post #932

munk-a wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back when Android had very strict permission controls I think this argument was quite valid since there was a market competitor without a locked down store but with a similar level of control. Control of the phone can't only be achieved by curating a store - it can also be achieved by allowing clear user controls and a phone without the locked down store but with the controls doesn't exist... So I can't go anywhere.

I'll quote another guy from this thread: "I like that TrueCaller on my iOS device works for most features without getting any permission from me, while on Android it refuses to buzz from the splash screen unless you give it every permission - including full contact access and phone. I like that on iOS a famous payment app from India (PhonePe) works flawlessly with zero permissions but on Android? It needs both locati…

Apple doesn't have to change it's policies when (not if) it is forced to allow people to install alternative stores. Those companies will still have to play nice with apples terms if they want to remain on Apple's app store.

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

#984

Post by Karunamon » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 4:12 AM UTC

suifbwish wrote: post #976

Karunamon wrote: post #885

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just not sure why I should be forced to accept restrictions on hardware I bought and paid for.

Unfortunately, unless they told you that you would be receiving something they did not give you before you made the purchase, you are entirely responsible for the fact you have a piece of restricted hardware. Why buy something you know you aren’t going to like?

Why should society accept general purpose computing devices being arbitrarily locked down?

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

#985

Post by Siira » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 4:25 PM UTC

smichel17 wrote: post #981

pkulak wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've noticed that if something is possible, your children or grandmother with do it, somehow. I hand out Chromebooks to relatives because of the low support requirements, and yet STILL every time I get one of those things back there are dozens of outright dangerous extensions installed. These are folks who know how to click on the icon for their email and that's it, and yet the garbage finds a way in. It's like tryin…

It's totally possible to have both: on first init, have the user choose whether they want to prevent installing apps from 3rd party stores. Changing this setting requires performing a factory reset. Problem solved. If you want the walled garden, opt in at the beginning, and now your children/grandmother are safe as long as they don't literally reset their phone, wiping all their pictures/apps/whatever.

Or even sell two different physical models. This is not a hard problem at all.

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

#986

Post by Siira » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 4:41 PM UTC

pjanoman wrote: post #881

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…

Users are completely free to not use an Apple product. They have lost no freedom of their own will. Users choose this ecosystem over many other options.

People in North Korea have not lost their freedom. They can choose from the many options available to them, including going to South Korea. It’s been observed that most do not choose so.

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

#987

Post by kaba0 » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 5:39 PM UTC

ChrisLomont wrote: post #982

kaba0 wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a pretty stupid thing to do, like will apple create an app for my bank? Mobile phones are general purpose computers.

Pretty much all CPUs are general-purpose. The vast majority don't run anything third party. Phones having general purpose computers isn't any kind of argument for who has what access. And if the alternative for a vendor is being forced to lose enough revenue by letting any third party do whatever they want, then Apple will make an app for your bank, by contracting the bank to pay for the development. The reason the t…

What is the vast majority here? Because servers, desktop pcs, laptops, mobile phones and tablets I think constitutes quite a big share of CPUs.

Will apple make app for every sort of app currently available in the App Store? That’s an unrealistic claim.

Changing the rules because people are unhappy is a bad precedent?? We should only change it when they are happy or what? It’s not about unhappiness, it is about disallowing them for controlling something that is an emergent property of the system they created, but is bigger then themselves. It directly effects most people on Earth, so it should not be decided by a private corporation, but by democratically elected governments. It is no longer only Apple’s freedom to do however they want

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

#988

Post by efdee » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

kingsleyopara wrote: post #830

ryandrake wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In both cases, I as the user, have no choice: 1. Apple wins = I have no choice but to use the app store. 2. Epic wins = I have no choice but to install multiple different app stores to run many different apps.

I'd argue you have less choice if Epic wins as you as the user no longer have the choice to choose a walled garden (iOS) vs open platform (Android).

If Epic wins, you can still use the walled garden. I don't see your loss of choice.

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

#989

Post by babypuncher » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

joshuaissac wrote: post #461

babypuncher wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that choice of app store actually matters to you, then you have the option to choose an Android phone instead of an iPhone. You're not being relegated to some obscure platform with no app support like people who didn't want to use Wintel in the '00s.

Google Play Store's revenue is half of that of the Apple App Store, so choosing only Android instead of both platforms would cut the expected app revenue by about two-thirds. Google also has similar app tax policies to Apple (and there is an ongoing lawsuit by Epic against them), so they really are relegated to the more obscure app stores.

I wasn't talking about developer choice, I was talking about end user choice. Given that statistic, I think it is pretty obvious that we as developers stand to make more money on iOS than Android regardless of Apple's 30% cut.

There are a few reasons for the discrepancy though. Someone else already mentioned the higher average quality of apps on the App Store.

One facet is the difficulty involved in pirating iOS apps compared to Android, likely because Apple makes sideloading so difficult. Pretty much any kid can spend 20 minutes searching around on Google and figure out how to get paid games for free on their phone.

Another variable is average user affluence. Apple is popular in developed countries with sizable middle class populations, and they position themselves as more of a luxury brand. Android devices run the gamut from ultra premium to ultra budget, catering to user in every socioeconomic class. Apple users on average probably have more spare cash to spend on apps.

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

#990

Post by kingsleyopara » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 8:39 PM UTC

efdee wrote: post #988

kingsleyopara wrote: post #830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue you have less choice if Epic wins as you as the user no longer have the choice to choose a walled garden (iOS) vs open platform (Android).

If Epic wins, you can still use the walled garden. I don't see your loss of choice.

My understanding and usage of a "walled garden" is to mean a closed ecosystem. By definition it no longer exists if Epic wins.

Continuing the analogy: Some people want a walled garden to keep their kids safe, but your suggesting to remove the walls and just advice kids to stay on the lawn instead.