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

Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 285 posts

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#221

Post by carlosjobim »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #199
carlosjobim wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The manufacturer will not help you to run your car on the wrong fuel or run any code on your car. Just like Apple or any other device manufacturer.

The problem is when there's DRM getting in the way of the natural right to mess with your own belongings. Cars have traditionally not had that, and I think it should not be allowed.

Physically, Apple does not hinder you from doing anything you want with your device. If you take out the chips and put in other components, that's your business, not Apples. If you manage to hack the software on the Apple chip to work exactly as you prefer, Apple cannot do anything.

But what hackers are demanding is that Apple alter their software to work exactly as they want and assist them with this, even though most of them will not ever purchase an Apple device. To the detriment of normal customers who want devices that work well.

Why are these requirements not levied against other product manufacturers? Why don't you try to force Tesla to make their cars run on diesel? Why don't you try to force McDonalds to make you a Whopper?

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#222

Post by lenkite »

nottorp wrote: post #22
supermatt wrote: post #5

That third party app stores are subject to review by apple is a problem in itself.

That the only way to get applications on your phone is going through Apple, or a gatekeeper approved by apple, is a problem in itself too. That the first "app store" approved is built on predatory free to play gaming money is also a problem.

> That the first "app store" approved is built on predatory free to play gaming money is also a problem.

Those are also the only guys who have enough money to compete with Apple's lawyers.

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#223

Post by throwitaway1123 »

troupo wrote: post #213
throwitaway1123 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just because you played Quake doesn't mean the web is good for "vast majority of apps" It means that at least 15 years ago it was more than powerful enough for all of the 2D Candy Crush style games which make up the overwhelming majority of mobile gaming apps. > The web can barely display simple text and images without jank because that is inherent limitation of the DOM that you cannot escape I've seen you repeat t…

> Of course PWAs aren't popular on platforms that deliberately go out of their way Strange how we went from "The web is absolutely more than good enough for the vast majority of apps" to "majority of mobile gaming apps." > I've seen you repeat this phrase over and over again like a mantra on HN, but without examples I mean, almost every single web "app" out there suffers from this. The DOM isn't built for highly dyna…

> Of course PWAs aren't popular on platforms that deliberately go out of their way

You've got your signals crossed. That was another commenter who wrote that statement [1].

> Strange how we went from "The web is absolutely more than good enough for the vast majority of apps" to "majority of mobile gaming apps."

We didn't go from one thing to another. I addressed a subset of the app market: gaming apps. Just like your Slack example addressed a subset of the app market: chat apps.

> I mean, almost every single web "app" out there suffers from this. The DOM isn't built for highly dynamic interactive applications. It's a system to deliver static text and images.

This is not a technical argument, it's a philosophical one. The council of browser elders never convened to proclaim that web browsers are only meant to deliver "static text and images", that's just your philosophical viewpoint. In fact, Apple is currently pushing WebXR to support the new Vision Pro, so apparently they didn't get the memo about "static text and images" [2].

> Now you're pretending I said something I didn't.

You said that the web is not performant enough. CPU speed is a pretty big component of performance.

> I mean, Slack's app needs up to 20% of CPU even on an M* Mac (last I tried it was M1 Max IIRC) to render a few animated emojis.

Slack's desktop app or Slack's web app? If you're talking about the Electron app, well then yeah bundling Chrome is never going to win efficiency awards, but now you're pretending I said something that I didn't. I'm not defending Electron apps. Everytime I discuss the web on HN someone does a bait and switch and starts talking about Electron. Don't conflate Electron with the World Wide Web.

If we're talking about chat apps, then I've watched high definition streams on Kick, Twitch, and YouTube where the chat is streaming in over Websockets faster than I can read it. The human brain at that point becomes the actual performance bottleneck. But tell me more about how the web can only handle a few lines of text (by commenting on a website).

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40891602

[2] https://webkit.org/blog/15443/news-from-wwdc24-webkit-in-saf...

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#224

Post by ffgjgf1 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #71
nottorp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That the only way to get applications on your phone is going through Apple, or a gatekeeper approved by apple, is a problem in itself too. That the first "app store" approved is built on predatory free to play gaming money is also a problem.

>That the first "app store" approved is built on predatory free to play gaming money is also a problem. That's how 70% of apple's revenue is gained. AKA, the biggest players who are capable of advertising their own store without visibility from the default mode of purchase. I'm sure eventually we'll get FDroid equivalents on IOS, but Apple is still playing coy as of now. So nothing but the deepest pockets will challe…

> That's how 70% of apple's revenue is gained

That’s factually incorrect and a completely absurd figure. The make way more money from device sales

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#225

Post by talldayo »

ben_w wrote: post #217
talldayo wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but people still find a way to turn it off or bypass it and then get infected by malware/spyware/adware. Or they leave it on, and install malware/spyware/adware anyways: https://www.pcmag.com/news/beware-theres-a-fake-lastpass-app... So suffice to say, their whole security scheme leaves a bit to be desired.

> So suffice to say, their whole security scheme leaves a bit to be desired. Indeed, but always was it so, and always will it be. Also, that story is exactly what I mean when I say that what Apple does is, despite the flaws, still better than nothing: you can't pull a fake app hosted on its own website — you might not even be able to go after the host or the domain registry without a court order, and even then the co…

> you can't pull a fake app hosted on its own website

You can stop signing it, or register the hash of the program as malware. There, that's two easy ways to stop end-users from consuming harmful software.

> The analogy here would be [...]

It's more like if the police was trying to rationalize some ridiculous security system (say, drones) that didn't help catch criminals in the first place.

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#226

Post by ben_w »

talldayo wrote: post #225
ben_w wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So suffice to say, their whole security scheme leaves a bit to be desired. Indeed, but always was it so, and always will it be. Also, that story is exactly what I mean when I say that what Apple does is, despite the flaws, still better than nothing: you can't pull a fake app hosted on its own website — you might not even be able to go after the host or the domain registry without a court order, and even then the co…

> you can't pull a fake app hosted on its own website You can stop signing it, or register the hash of the program as malware. There, that's two easy ways to stop end-users from consuming harmful software. > The analogy here would be [...] It's more like if the police was trying to rationalize some ridiculous security system (say, drones) that didn't help catch criminals in the first place.

> You can stop signing it, or register the hash of the program as malware. There, that's two easy ways to stop end-users from consuming harmful software.

The first requires them to be signed in the first place. That violates the prerequisite of your point because your words were "they leave it on, and install malware/spyware/adware anyways" — so that's not a way to actually stop end-users from consuming harmful software, by your own words.

The issues with the App Store are "Apple is a gatekeeper that gets to say no and we don't like the set of reasons they've given themselves to be allowed to do that" and "Apple is a gatekeeper that charges money and we don't like that charge".

The right to stop signing some app, the right to register a hash as malware, both have the exact same capacity for mis-use if you regard Apple themselves (or any other gatekeeper) as being a threat to your freedom. Unless you turn off "run only trusted apps", but again that violates the prerequisite of your point, because then "stop signing it" has no effect.

And come on, hashes? Self-modifying code was a thing when my compiler only output for 68k/System 7.

> It's more like if the police was trying to rationalize some ridiculous security system (say, drones) that didn't help catch criminals in the first place.

It's specifically an example of them catching a bad actor and stopping them. "Pulls" is right in the headline.

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#227

Post by johnnyanmac »

ben_w wrote: post #128
johnnyanmac wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I genuinely gain the security of some measure of defence against other people doing things at my expense. If I need security, I buy anti-virus. But I can't opt out of Apples "security". I don't see that as a good thing. If apple wanted to offer that at checkout, I wouldn't mind at all. Worst case scenario, I backup all my stuff. My phone exploding should not ruin any more of my livliehood than losing a few days of p…

> If I need security, I buy anti-virus. But I can't opt out of Apples "security". I don't see that as a good thing. If apple wanted to offer that at checkout, I wouldn't mind at all. I can't opt out of the police. I can opt out of Apple's security by using literally any other brand of phone. > Worst case scenario, I backup all my stuff. No, the worse-case scenario is that malware knows everything you look at and ever…

> I can't opt out of the police.

Given my cultural history, I sure do wish I could.

Regardless, police have people holding them accountable some 20% of the time. No one's holding Apple accountable in the US, apparently.

>No, the worse-case scenario is

Okay... I'm a regular Joe. That sucks but let's not pretend I'm leaking government secrets even if all that happens. I see bad malware on phone (with my data backed up), I reset my phone. It's software, not a serial killer.

You can argue identity theft and all that, but that's not a unique feature to IOS/Android/Windows/Linux. So I don't count that as a bonus/demerit to any given platform.

>I have no more reason to trust open source than closed source

I already gave a reason. The ball is in my court and I can take it home. There are bad actors but also good actors when bad actors arise. Thars a better check and balance than some conglomerate who never had my best interests in mind.

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#228

Post by johnnyanmac »

archagon wrote: post #178
Scion9066 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historical inertia. macOS has implemented code signing and only allowing apps from the App Store or trusted developers as default for quite a while now but people still find a way to turn it off or bypass it and then get infected by malware/spyware/adware. Because it's expected that you can run any app on a desktop/laptop platform though, they can't just fully restrict it, and it shows.

If "historical inertia" is the only thing keeping macOS a general purpose computing platform, that is extremely troubling. Because it means Apple will not hesitate to lock it down in the future if it's able (e.g. through subversion of notarization). To me, this is one of the main reasons to fight for an open iOS: if people get accustomed to corporations revoking access to their software for arbitrary reasons, and if…

I mean, it's been happening for a decade now. They only take Metal as a GL, for instance. Their architecture is conforming to IOS.

Without any intervention, it's a matter of when instead of if.

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#229

Post by johnnyanmac »

wellthisisgreat wrote: post #133
johnnyanmac wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Tencent didn't get all their investment money from Gacha in the asian market? Got some, but thinking Tencent got all their money from Gacha is like saying Google got all its money from Search. Tencent's reach is in nearly every industry in China. >And please don't tell me Tencent is a minority investor or that there are non predatory IAPs I won't, but do you really believe all add-ons are predatory? This attitude is…

> all add-ons are predatory? All gaming IAP that are not full on expansions (not skins, not standalone characters, etc.hm) are predatory

Non-expansions... (and a bunch of exceptions you list, but are not limited to).

Seems like a pretty blurry line in the sand. Even blurrier when price 100% has an impact on perception. Skins are an exception but if I told you some skins are $60, would that be predatory?

Re: Apple okays Epic Games marketplace app in Europe

#230

Post by johnnyanmac »

kibwen wrote: post #137
johnnyanmac wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment. what's the appeal? consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. These stores probably take 2-4 years to prepare properly. A dev won't use half their generation to get around a 30% fee. I think one understated part of the consoles is that that 30% does go into proper support, compared to apple/google that act more as gatekeepers. Larger stu…

> consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. Consoles remain alive way longer in poorer regions of the world. The lock-in from console manufacturers is designed to artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence. I don't want a single CPU in my home that I don't have the right to repro…

Sure. I 100% agree. But I wasn't arguing as a customer, I was arguing as a potential studio making a storefront on the console. Would I support that store for 5-10+ years for 3rd world countries? Would it even be profitable given exchange rates?

The 1st world customers wants to keep advancing to the next generation. 3rd parties want to make money and mostly get it from 1st world countries.

>artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence.

Planned obsolescence isn't to stop producing a product you no longer want to sell. If there's one thing consoles are good at, it's supporting repairs well after the next gen rolls end. Nintendo just stopped supporting the Wii U (their worst selling console) repairs due to a lack of supplies, and that is about 6 years after they EOL'd it in terms of software support. Phone/PC manufacturers should take notes.

Meanwhile, hardcore gamers have been complaining about the switch performance for years. They are disappointed there was no mid gen refresh. Consumer demand very much wants companies to keep making better hardware.

>There's no reason for gaming consoles to be an exception.

Personally, I just don't see gaming consoles as general computing devices. They could be, but they way they are presented/marketed aren't. So I have about as much desire to reprogram on my PS4 as I do my smart fridge (which probably is running some variant of Linux underneath, albeit embedded).

Post reply on HN