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

Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 996 posts

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#371

Post by yholio »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #305
amaccuish wrote: post #97

What 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…

In Windows world, you can just pick a new certificate vendor. In Apple world, they have a monopoly and get to dictate who gets 'full access' to both their mobile devices and their desktops/laptops. They could still do unsigned MacOS apps from here out, but Apple has purposely made it difficult for end users to run them.

Lock-in was their business model back in the 80s, it still is to this day. It got them to the verge of bankruptcy then, it will be their downfall now.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#372

Post by grishka »

Razengan wrote: post #339
grishka wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Video game consoles are specialized hardware. 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: >…

> No.

You and I know that they're locked-down computers with hardware DRM and a bit of custom silicon, but most users don't see them like that. To them, it's a device that is only capable of running games.

> 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".

I'm an Android developer myself but I've seen iOS apps released, and I'm friends with many iOS developers. You're going through this bureaucracy lottery every time you release an update. You can never be sure of its outcome, and you can never know how long it would take. Even most governments are more predictable.

Sure there exist rules that are genuinely in the interest of the user. But then there are rules that are in the interest of Apple as a business (the 30% cut for digital goods). There also are rules that are following US laws, and they're stringently enforced regardless of your target market because Apple happens to be a US company.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#373

Post by floatingatoll »

amaccuish wrote: post #97

What 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…

Epic expressly snuck code through the door to activate a user-visible feature in direct prohibition to App Store rules. Apple could have revoked their developer certificate in response, which would have essentially killed all installations of Fortnite iOS/Mac worldwide within 24 hours. That they are merely revoking their ability to sign new code and giving them 2 weeks to perform an orderly shutdown is far less draconian than they're capable of being here.

Notarization is about protecting users who are not capable of making an informed decision about code safety from developers who refuse to comply with Apple's terms of service. Epic willfully violated their terms with Apple to make a point, and Apple is responding in the same way that they did to Facebook: taking away their access to the users, because they cannot be trusted to comply with the restrictions placed on their behavior.

Most (if not all) of the restrictions on the App Store exist to protect users from app developers who prioritize their own greed over the rights of privacy and safety that Apple promises the users of the App Store. Developers are the threat model, and there's nothing inherently wrong with Apple's response to Epic declaring themselves a rulebreaker — and, thus, a threat.

(If Epic was not trying so hard to be able to sue for damages, they might have been able to negotiate, same as Facebook did. But they wanted to be a martyr for the cause, so here we are.)

Consider this thought experiment: At your employer, an IT employee goes rogue and installs malicious code on your computer to read your email. How would you feel if IT leadership said "they promised not to do it again" and allowed them to continue unsupervised work on your computer while you're away? Most people would feel awful, because you can't trust the IT employee's word — they literally just broke their agreement not to snoop! — and because your leadership clearly doesn't care about your privacy.

Should Apple "fire" Epic, now that Epic's word can no longer be trusted? This answer should, in theory, match the answer above. I bet for most software developers, it does not. I encourage thinking through that dissonance rather than rejecting the thought experiment.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#374

Post by pauliusj »

Larrikin wrote: post #38
Bud wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that Google, Microsoft, and Sony are also hostile and tone-deaf, then? One assumes so. All those platforms extract the same kinds of fees from Epic that Apple does. But mysteriously, Epic only wants to go after Apple.

They are suing both Google and Apple

Google is being sued for a different reason. I think it is for blocking a deal with a phone maker where they would have epic store installed

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#375

Post by gruez »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #305
amaccuish wrote: post #97

What 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…

In Windows world, you can just pick a new certificate vendor. In Apple world, they have a monopoly and get to dictate who gets 'full access' to both their mobile devices and their desktops/laptops. They could still do unsigned MacOS apps from here out, but Apple has purposely made it difficult for end users to run them.

>In Windows world, you can just pick a new certificate vendor

I mean if they really wanted to they could blacklist your CN or O value in the certificate, or add you to the windows defender/smartscreen detection list, which will effectively kill your app for a good segment of the windows userbase.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#376

Post by misnome »

danudey wrote: post #212
woofie11 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A one-sided agreement containing a retaliation clause, followed by exercising that clause, is retaliation. Say you're desperate and need water in a crisis, and I offer you some, but only if you sign an agreement which gives you water, but says I can punch you in the face whenever you say something I don't like. Say you say something I don't like, and I punch you in the face. Did I just retaliate? Or did the contract…

Apple said "Here are the terms, you can use our services if you agree to them, and if you break them we'll close your account." Epic said "Okay, we agree.", then broke the terms they agreed to, so Apple is closing their account. This seems like pretty straightforward break of the terms of use to me. The reasonable way Epic could have proceeded is to have submitted an update with the "third party store" stuff added, g…

> Instead, Epic pulled a publicity stunt by sneaking it in, specifically so that Apple and Google would remove their app

I definitely remember cases from the early years of the App Store where people would deliberately sneak e.g. tethering apps into the App Store in the guise of a game, and usually came to public attention when their account was banned.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#377

Post by sircastor »

kodablah wrote: post #131
sircastor wrote: post #64

A lot of this feels to me like Rpic thinks they’re a bigger deal than they are. No doubt they make a lot of money, and they’ve made Apple a lot of money. I think though that their attempt to take Apple in the court of Public opinion is going to fall flat, because there are a lot more iOS users than Fortnite on iOS players.

> I think though that their attempt to take Apple in the court of Public opinion is going to fall flat, because there are a lot more iOS users than Fortnite on iOS players. This naively assumes an iOS user is on Apple's side, and assumes that the court of public opinion excludes those users with neither iOS nor Fortnite yet have general opinions and business-stake on iOS options. I should also note that, for some of…

I think most iOS users don't actually care, but they know that they get their phones from Apple, and some game company is trying to mess something up.

I agree that the legal and the PR plays are separate, but if Epic were just trying to handle the legal issue, they wouldn't be making as big of a deal out of it. They're expecting to get something else from this.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#378

Post by chillacy »

breakfastduck wrote: post #359
chillacy wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not dissimilar to how civil disobedience in the 60s thoroughly planned and tuned for maximum PR impact. Rosa Parks went on that bus knowing she'd make a scene. Does that change the reality being uncovered?

I dont think a massive company like Epic with all the bad practices they've implemented themselves suing another mega rich company is anything like Rosa Parks getting on that bus, though. Intentions are important considerations with something like this.

The part which OP disagreed with was the intentionality, and I likened it to another example where the disobedience was deliberate. Of course with any analogy other factors will be dissimilar.

It's interesting you point out the bad practices they have themselves as being important though. The civil rights movement in the 60s boosted Rosa Parks above Claudette Colvin even though they both could have had similar legal battles only because of optics:

> For many years, Montgomery's black leaders did not publicize Colvin's pioneering effort. She was an unmarried teenager at the time, and was reportedly impregnated by a married man

Epic certainly shouldn't get to score virtue points here, but we shouldn't require someone to be a saint to point out unfairness.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#379

Post by gamblor956 »

baddox wrote: post #191
woofie11 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antitrust doesn't require a monopoly.

Okay, then since we've failed to argue that Apple is a monopoly, what's the next antitrust argument, and how does it apple to iPhones but not to game consoles (which have the same if not stricter restrictions to third-party software developers)?

You are free to make and sell games for the PlayStation and Xbox without going through Sony or MS...

However, in order to get a key that works with their DRM or console OSs, you do need a license.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#380

Post by modeless »

jmull wrote: post #238
0x402DF854 wrote: post #23

From a preliminary statement of Epic's motion: > Just over two weeks ago, Apple’s CEO Tim Cook was asked during a Congressional hearing whether Apple has “ever retaliated against or disadvantaged a developer who went public about their frustrations with the App Store”. Mr. Cook testified, “We do not retaliate or bully people. It’s strongly against our company culture.”

Do you mean to imply Tim Cook lied in that statement? That doesn't work, though. Epic clearly, purposely, and egregiously violated Apple's TOS. It seems like that is the reason Apple's terminating their accounts, not in retaliation for "going public". (BTW, I think Apple needs to let companies control their own payment systems outside the App Store.)

Epic needed to demonstrate that they and consumers were harmed in order to have standing to sue. It's not illegal to "violate" a TOS that is itself illegal. The legality of what Epic did is yet to be decided in court.
Post reply on HN