Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, Epic should get special treatment? They don't have to pay the fees? Just everyone else? How is apple supposed to run the app store? They kinda know what they are doing or why else would so many people buy their iphones?
Their app isn't on the store, so no they shouldn't pay fees beyond whatever Apple charge for the privelege of being a developer on their platform. Not sure why not paying App Store fees (because of not having an app on the store) would justify removing access to all developer accounts and tools.
Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
331–340 of 996 posts
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#332Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple needed that 30 percent cut to monitor for fraud and quality or something, going above-and-beyond other payment processors. How much do Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Gog and etc. take from publishers on their stores?
That's a misleading question, because on other platforms you can choose to avoid the store. A better question would be "what's the lowest cut you need to give up to distribute to users of these other platforms?". And the answer to that is zero on basically all of them except iOS.
> And the answer to that is zero on basically all of them except iOS
That is a lie: Microsoft's Xbox Marketplace, Sony's PlayStation Network, Nintendo's eShop.
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#334"Epic flagrantly disobeyed Apple's terms." I keep reading this all over the Internet and it makes me so irrationally angry that so many people are so ignorant. Seriously, it seems like a very large part of people online think this behavior from Apple is okay "because they set the rules".
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the contrary, there is a very solid basis. Epic has access to Apple's platform and dev tools because it has (or had) an agreement with Apple whereby it paid a percentage of profits earned in exchange for said access. Epic, btw, has the exact same kind of agreement with Sony, Microsoft, and Google, for access to their gaming platforms. All three of those companies are extracting the same 30% fee that Apple is. But…
> Epic, btw, has the exact same kind of agreement with Sony, Microsoft, and Google, for access to their gaming platforms. All three of those companies are extracting the same 30% fee that Apple is. Tim Sweeney has stated in the past that he feels like there's a better argument for game console makers taking a 30% fee. > "There's a rationale for this on console where there's enormous investment in hardware, often sold…
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple needed that 30 percent cut to monitor for fraud and quality or something, going above-and-beyond other payment processors. How much do Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Gog and etc. take from publishers on their stores?
This is a valid question - if the answer is a fraction of what Apple charges then it strengthens the case against Apple.
The answer is the same. What now? Will you put down the pitchforks?
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#337What took me aback was the withdrawing permission to notarise their apps for Mac. That was only meant to be a check for known vulnerabilities/malicious software. Apple was more within their rights to kick Fortnite until the dust has settled from the iOS store, that was the retaliation, but now a mechanism supposedly for security has been repurposed as punishment. That's a pretty nasty move and I feel the mask has sli…
And so that's why I never liked nor trusted this whole idea of code signing with non-self-signed certificates, especially on desktop OSes. This notarization mechanism introduced a single point of failure: Apple. And now there is concrete evidence of how exactly this is bad. On a device I own, there should be no parties that are trusted more than myself. It's ridiculous I even have to write this.
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#338What took me aback was the withdrawing permission to notarise their apps for Mac. That was only meant to be a check for known vulnerabilities/malicious software. Apple was more within their rights to kick Fortnite until the dust has settled from the iOS store, that was the retaliation, but now a mechanism supposedly for security has been repurposed as punishment. That's a pretty nasty move and I feel the mask has sli…
And so that's why I never liked nor trusted this whole idea of code signing with non-self-signed certificates, especially on desktop OSes. This notarization mechanism introduced a single point of failure: Apple. And now there is concrete evidence of how exactly this is bad. On a device I own, there should be no parties that are trusted more than myself. It's ridiculous I even have to write this.
Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's a misleading question, because on other platforms you can choose to avoid the store. That's definitely not true. You cannot run unsigned code on most video game consoles. And for PC game marketplaces, those platforms still have market power. Surely there's a big difference between being banned from Steam and being banned from the Discord Store.
Video game consoles are specialized hardware. They do one thing and they do it well. It's kind of understandable that these companies want to review anything released for those. They want to ensure that games are of high quality so as to not hurt the reputation of the platform itself. They want games to help sell consoles. And that's how video game consoles always worked. iPhones, on the other hand, are not specializ…
No.
> They do one thing and they do it well.
Look up console jailbreaks and home-brew.
> The problem is, both developers and users see the app store and its policies as a nuisance.
Apple does a lot to protect users from unscrupulous practices. Look up the App Store policies and see for yourself.
See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24154647 and similar comments:
> the magnitude of this is not immediately apparent unless you’ve worked in an agency / freelanced building iOS applications. You have no idea how many user-hostile and abusive things I’ve seen blown completely out of the water with the golden phrase "Apple won’t allow that". It wins arguments in favour of the user instantly and permanently.
> I’ve run up against Apple’s capricious review process more times than I can count, so I’ve got more reason than most to complain about it. But it’s impossible for me to argue that these rules don’t help the user when I’ve personally seen it happen so many times. It’s a double-edged sword to be sure, and I believe the best way of balancing things in favour of the end-user is to be more open than Apple is, but there are undeniable benefits to the user with the current system.