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

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

#441

Post by vlozko » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

paulgb wrote: post #174

isodev wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No computer platform should be allowed to prevent sideloading or other stores from competing. The iPhone is not a computer platform, it's an integrated experience. Raspberry Pi or the PC you assemble is a platform (which you can still choose to do, if you want).

That’s one way of looking at it, but I think the reason the issue keeps coming up on HN is that it feels like a serious regression that we’ve ended up in a world where one of the most ubiquitous platforms is a walled garden. Even in the days of Windows dominance, that wasn’t a problem. The transition happened so gradually that we ended up here without a lot of discussion, which is why the discussion is happening now.

Is it a regression, though? In the days of Windows, malware was rampant. There was no sense of sandboxing so installs could get deeply embedded and hard to purge. There was certainly the uncertainty of the validity of software when downloaded.

This is not to suggest we should remove this capability from macOS/Windows but I wouldn’t call it a regression.

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

#442

Post by sigzero » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:12 PM UTC

BrianGragg wrote: post #214

SCHiM wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You install those yourself you know. I'd rather have a choice than not. I feel your pain in the sense that that I think user UX will take a hit, but I think that's less important than breaking the monopoly of the current app store. For example, I can't find apps with pornography or other types of things the high overlords at apple or Google have deemed inappropriate for me to have. That's bad. Apparently apps like Ma…

The problem is the choice is taken away from you though. Just like he said with the game market. If you want to play Game A, you go and download/install Game A's publishing app store. If you want to then play Game B, rinse and repeat. You will be forced to use so many different app stores and won't have a choice to NOT use their app store "IF" it progresses like it has on the desktop. No proof it will/won't either.

You never had a choice with Apple. That is their business model. You choose or don't choose to work in that model. Epic Games is pathetic.

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

#443

Post by colejohnson66 » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:13 PM UTC

judge2020 wrote: post #344

StavrosK wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's either a choice between "not running some specific game/app whose publisher made their own app store" and "not running any iOS app because my only option is to not have an iPhone"? I know which one gives me more choice.

No, your freedom of choice is only one level deep. You can either choose iOS, which includes 'runs only apple-approved software', or choose any other OS which runs other software. This is basically the right to repair / right to do whatever you want with your device debate. You can't force Apple to program the functionality for running other people's code into iOS, but it's legal if you figure out how. This is exactl…

Nitpick: that exemption is from 2010. The DMCA mandates an exemption be granted every three years for something. Meaning: in 2013, that exemption was gone unless it was exempted again. And again in 2016. And again in 2019. And so on. The DMCA does not include an “exempt once, exempt forever” clause, sadly.

Thankfully, we’ve had the EFF to campaign for exemptions, but it’s frustrating having to go through the whole ordeal every three years because Congress can’t be arsed to fix it.

17 U.S. Code §1201(a)(1)(C)[0]:

> (C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine—

(followed by a list of things the Librarian will consider)

[0]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

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

#444

Post by ApolloFortyNine » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:14 PM UTC

KillahBhyte wrote: post #259

FlownScepter wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick Google says iOS' market share is 14%. I don't understand this position at all. Google is by far and away the market leader. Their ecosystem is free and you can do just about anything in it. Their Play store's standards are utterly bare bones. The devices are cheaper. If what you want is an open source (ish) platform that you can hack on, modify, install software yourself, whatever, all of that is available to…

THIS! Say it a little louder for those in the back. I work in IT. I do not want to have a mini IT project in my pocket that I have to fiddle with. I want a device that is dependable above all else that I don't have to work on for my everyday driver. This is the same answer I provide every time someone at work ask my why I carry an Apple phone. To me the curation is part of the draw. I know that this phone will requir…

>I do not want to have a mini IT project in my pocket that I have to fiddle with.

Having the ability to install apps not available on the app store does not make your entire phone something you 'have to fiddle with'. If you want to live in the walled garden, you of course can do so, just as many people do on Android.

>But I don't feel the need to get on every Mac discussion complaining it should be more like Linux.

This is an interesting take, seeing how a big reason Macs are so popular amongst developers is the similarity to Linux (which the vast majority of us are going to be deploying to).

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

#445

Post by dkonofalski » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:15 PM UTC

conradfr wrote: post #390

dkonofalski wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's literally a major reason why people buy Apple products, though. If you can't sideload things, there's literally no chance of your phone being compromised by those things.

And yet the guy making bogus app clones with subscriptions makes millions from the App Store (and Apple takes its cut).

What does that have to do with anything? That's still not malware.

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

#446

Post by the_af » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:15 PM UTC

BrianGragg wrote: post #214

SCHiM wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You install those yourself you know. I'd rather have a choice than not. I feel your pain in the sense that that I think user UX will take a hit, but I think that's less important than breaking the monopoly of the current app store. For example, I can't find apps with pornography or other types of things the high overlords at apple or Google have deemed inappropriate for me to have. That's bad. Apparently apps like Ma…

The problem is the choice is taken away from you though. Just like he said with the game market. If you want to play Game A, you go and download/install Game A's publishing app store. If you want to then play Game B, rinse and repeat. You will be forced to use so many different app stores and won't have a choice to NOT use their app store "IF" it progresses like it has on the desktop. No proof it will/won't either.

There are alternative stores for the same game on the desktop. A trivial example is that some games can be installed directly by downloading a file from the developer, or via Humble Bundle, GOG or Steam.

So this business model is possible. And it's the friendliest to end users, too.

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

#447

Post by insert_coin » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:15 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #361

nickysielicki wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not about the outcome, it’s about reasoning from first principles and going where ever that leads you, regardless of how much you dislike the outcome. Nobody has to buy an iPhone, iPad, or MacBook. Apple has the right to create the software ecosystem they want to create. Their success in mobile computing is arguably a direct result of their closed ecosystem.

"it’s about reasoning from first principles and going where ever that leads you, regardless of how much you dislike the outcome" This sounds an awfull lot like the though process of religious zealots and extremists. Ignore the real world, consequences be damned, ideology comes first. There is no way we could make an error of judgement. Thats how you get a famine and 50 million dead in China. "Apple has the right to c…

The right to one's own work, to one's own mind outcome is arguably the only real right we can even pretend to have.

What there is none is the "right" for governments to claim ownership to other's work and dictate you must do what your own free will tells you is not on your best interest, that is why they use force.

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

#448

Post by enragedcacti » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

isodev wrote: post #146

Such vendors are free to create game catalogs for their games (Steam-like), taking the user to the App Store for downloads. They can also have IAPs, Subscriptions and alls kinds of payment options. Apple's own Arcade follows this same architecture so I don't see Epic's argument at all. When I am using my iPhone/iPad, I expect all apps to work with services connected to my Apple account. No user should be required to…

> I expect all apps to work with services connected to my Apple account. No user should be required to provide payment information to a shady 3rd party like Epic, Microsoft or whatever.

Apple could make everyone happy tomorrow vis-a-vis IAPs by charging standard credit card processing fees (~2-3%)instead of 30% while still protecting your payment info from app developers.

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

#449

Post by CivBase » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

jpttsn wrote: post #410

CivBase wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Apple allows you to install alternative app stores, I assume that means they allow you to "side load" apps. If that's the case, Apple can't really ban you from installing anything.

So they would be unable to ban the Pirate Bay Store, the Scamcoin Drug Store, the Cracked Epic Games Store, the Tiananmen 1989 Store?

They could, of course, ban third-party stores from their own app distribution platforms. Otherwise, I imagine not, in the same way that most other general purpose operating systems cannot "ban" things like that. I suppose they could require all apps to be signed and subject to remote signature verification before the OS lets you install them.

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

#450

Post by Polycryptus » Wed, Feb 17, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #252

SCHiM wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You install those yourself you know. I'd rather have a choice than not. I feel your pain in the sense that that I think user UX will take a hit, but I think that's less important than breaking the monopoly of the current app store. For example, I can't find apps with pornography or other types of things the high overlords at apple or Google have deemed inappropriate for me to have. That's bad. Apparently apps like Ma…

> You install those yourself you know. I'd rather have a choice than not. yes and No. When some games are "exclusives" to a certain store, if you want to play such games you end up having to install every store in existence which is not very consumer friendly. It would be better for stores to have every game possible, just like at the time of good old physical retail. It's not like there were Wallmart exclusive games…

> It's not like there were Wallmart exclusive games, right?

It doesn't matter too much, but there actually have been... Nintendo's Chibi-Robo Park Patrol was a WalMart exclusive game in the US. (in 2007)