Unfortunately Apple's the sherrif in the app store and doesn't give a damn.
Unreal.
241–250 of 513 posts
Unfortunately Apple's the sherrif in the app store and doesn't give a damn.
Unreal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t Epic take a cut out of every single purchase made of a game built with Unreal Engine? Seems kinda hypocritical that they’re taking this stance when their licensing model is arguably just as burdensome on developers. In my opinion, Epic should not put their app on the App Store if they don’t like the terms, just as they would tell a developer to not use their engine if they don’t like the terms.
Businesses don’t exist to define a moral compass. They exist to make money. Any large and successful company will happily play the “do as I say and not as I do” card as often as they think they’ll get away with it. I’m not saying it’s right but it’s pointless being shocked by the hypocrisy of the logic that businesses are run by.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW brick and mortar stores usually take 40%.
not sure what the brick and mortar equivalent is. what does that mean? retailers pay suppliers some wholesale cost for their goods. doesn’t seem like an analogous situation to a marketplace that takes a fixed cut of every sale.
Question: How is Apple's 30% cut different from the transaction fees that are charged by Visa / Mastercard and payment processors like Stripe? I can see the big percentage but is the argument in favour of removing the entirety of the cut or reducing it down?
Discussion of Apple topics here on HN almost always gets reduced to the argument that Apple is not a monopoly, so what they are doing is OK. I want to present an alternative viewpoint. It's not a monopoly issue, it is an anti-competitive issue. In Canada, we have three major cell carriers. None of them has a monopoly, or anything close to it. None of them has even 50% market share. You can have a 10 GB smartphone pla…
Indeed. It is a common misconception that antitrust only applies to monopolies. You can engage in anti-competitive behavior of various kinds, illegally, without actually having a monopoly in strict terms.
People will take sides in this and I think they will be missing the point. These are just 2 greedy corporations strong-arming each other and trying to win some hearts in the public space. Epic would do the same if they were in Apple's position and Apple would do the same if they were in Epic's position. This is just 21st century politics and it’s all about money.
Discussion of Apple topics here on HN almost always gets reduced to the argument that Apple is not a monopoly, so what they are doing is OK. I want to present an alternative viewpoint. It's not a monopoly issue, it is an anti-competitive issue. In Canada, we have three major cell carriers. None of them has a monopoly, or anything close to it. None of them has even 50% market share. You can have a 10 GB smartphone pla…
I suspect this is/was part of the push to get non-incumbents into the cell market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good lord - on HN the monopoly comments are so crazy sometimes. What is the monopoly issue Apple has? Use android if you don't like Apple's product line. Apple is at 22% share.
>on HN the monopoly comments are so crazy sometimes what's crazy is harping on a technicality about the word "monopoly" and then to ignore the actual issue that is implied by the criticism, market power. Even two companies aren't a market, if you get hung up about monopoly call it a duopoly. The state of affairs is ridiculous. There should be a thriving market of competing stores, payment systems, operating systems a…
That sounds terrible. Myriad incompatible ways to find apps, having to give your financial information to lots of different systems you have to investigate individually, or not be able to do business with someone using a different system, apps only being available on the small number of devices running the OS they were developed for.
All the things you mention benefit massively from network effects, which can greatly benefit consumers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a developer doesn't like Unreal's terms, there are other game engines. If a developer doesn't like Apple's terms, there are no viable alternatives for iOS distribution.
But there are other Smartphone platforms with their own store, correct? I don’t know why people feel it’s their undeniable right to be able to provide an app to iOS users.
If Apple is using its market power to increase profit at the expense of reducing selection and/or increasing prices for consumers, then that's a very serious problem. It's exactly the reason antitrust laws exist.