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

Epic Games steps up Apple fight with EU antitrust complaint

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

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

#761

Post by kingsleyopara »

joshuaissac wrote: post #484
nxc18 wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not. Not immediately. Just like you wouldn’t move cities if the police announced they’d no longer enforce traffic laws or investigate/attempt to prevent gun violence. Then after the homicide rate doubles, there’s shootings almost daily, and you can’t get from point A to point B without a reckless driver risking your life, you might get stressed. At first you’d consider moving to the suburb, but you can’t, b…

How exactly would opening up app purchases on the iPhone to competition bring about the scenario that you describe? You gave an example with reckless driving and homicides but it is not clear how that applies to app store competition.

Lets assume Apple is forced to allow alternate app stores:

I'm [insert big company e.g. Microsoft], why should I put [insert popular app e.g. Office] on the Apple App Store when I have to give 30% revenue and deal with Apple's privacy rules etc.? From now on if users want [insert popular app e.g. Office] on iOS they will have to download it from our store.

All of a sudden every big company/popular app will have their own store with (likely) worse privacy and security standards. If I'm in Apple's ecosystem but want to use [insert popular app e.g. Office] I'll have to accept these lower standards or not use the app.

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

#762

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

elefanten wrote: post #695
Dma54rhs wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's depressing that even on hackernews where you expect people want to tinker and have control over their machines there's a probably a majority who are happy with the situation and use the think of my grandma (aka children) using iPhone situation. There could be numerous ways for Apple to let people run their own software or other stores without giving your grandma malware.

Except as soon as it becomes a remotely feasible action (with simple instructions) for the general consumer, a bunch of businesses will start requiring their users to disable "default Grandma mode". Imagine onboarding for Netflix including a pleasantly designed screen saying "Before you can use Netflix, you must Enable Third-party Stores. Go to Settings > Privacy..." If that comes to pass, there will be no highly-gua…

>Imagine onboarding for Netflix including a pleasantly designed screen saying "Before you can use Netflix, you must Enable Third-party Stores. Go to Settings > Privacy..."

Then we deal with that later?

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

#763

Post by saagarjha »

rdiddly wrote: post #752
thereddaikon wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you called it sideloading just shows how successful Apple has been in warping people's perception of it over the years. Installing the software you want on your compute device isn't sideloading. Its just installing software. Apple is aberration here not all of the users who just expect to actually own the products they buy.

Has 'sideloading' taken on some other connotation that I'm not aware of? (It wouldn't be the first time.) I thought it was just a neutral term meaning you didn't download it, you didn't upload it, you sideloaded it - you transferred the binaries from some other device nearby and connected by (probably) USB cable. Perhaps after using said device to do the downloading part. I think that concept came from Android though…

It implies that a user loading software on their own device is doing it from the side, rather than this being a normal way to install software.

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

#764

Post by wernercd »

enos_feedler wrote: post #756
jimnotgym wrote: post #754

If a locked down app store is necessary for say safety, perhaps a good analogue is a water utility company. A water company has a monopoly in an area, due to the impractical nature of duplicate infrastructure. However, in return it may be heavily regulated in terms of its safety and pricing. If you have to have a single app store then their prices should be regulated, and crucially there should be proper recourse for…

The difference between regulating the price of water and the price of an app is the innovation curve. You can regulate the price of water because the creation, distribution and consumption of H20 hasn't changed in a long time. Meanwhile, every June Apple shows up with new APIs that developers can use to tap into the billions of hardware R&D they've invested for that year. Regulating price here is stifling innovation.

it's also stifling innovation to be restricted to one store front. Imagine if all you had was Walmart, Target and KMart (iPhone, Android and Windows). "you can't build a new store because of all the R&D Walmart has put into their stores".

You act like all the R&D isn't paid for with phone sales and development kits ($99/year).

If you want to restrict the market? The price of that restriction should be regulation.

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

#765

Post by saagarjha »

suifbwish wrote: post #669
fouric wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple has the right to create the software ecosystem they want to create. So say you. I say that consumers have the right to run whatever software they want on the hardware that they have purchased. Apple can create whatever software platform they want, but it seems pretty bad that they don't allow you to use whatever software platform you want on the hardware that you paid them for .

There is nothing stopping you from rooting your iPhone and installing android on it. Problem solved. Now you can add all the spammerware you like.

Nothing except a hardware root of trust sealed by keys owned by Apple?

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

#766

Post by simias »

Arainach wrote: post #373
simias wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of cross-store games on PC. And even if some games end up being exclusive you might still benefit as a player thanks to the competition. If Epic started offering a very bad user experience game devs would hesitate to publish exclusively through them because they'd fear reduced revenue. It's also a very good thing for game devs who aren't at the mercy of the whims of a single company. Steam no longer…

> Epic started offering a very bad user experience game devs would hesitate to publish exclusively through them because they'd fear reduced revenue. This is demonstrably not true. Epic's launcher has been a laughing stock since it was announced. * It only recently got any form of Achievements (that are completely undiscoverable) * It has no way to join a party with your friends. I think it has Friends support but am…

I heard all about that but I really don't think it matters all that much for the vast majority of players. People who are really active in video game communities are indeed likely to be annoyed at this and loudly complain online, but I'm sure the vast majority of casual players won't care massively about any of this. In particular all the online features. I'm in my 30s, do you realize how hard it is to schedule anything with my friends?

Paying for exclusives is a bit of a bummer but game development is pretty damn competitive as it is, Epic injecting a lot of money to secure exclusives might actually do some good for indie devs.

In my experience most of these exclusivity deals are temporary anyway, so you just have to wait 6 months to a year to get it on your store of choice. That's a fair compromise IMO, especially since nobody bothers to release finished games anymore anyway, so you might as well get the finished version on Steam on sale a year later.

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

#767

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

dubcanada wrote: post #184

I can hardly wait to use Amazon App Store to install Amazon and then open up the Epic Game Store to install random game and then open up EA Game Store to install random game and then open up Facebook App Store to install Facebook and then open up the Apple App Store to install the Blizzard App Store to install Hearthstone and then go back to the Apple App Store and update the Blizzard App Store so I can get the lates…

I like the grocery store analogy. You can get Kellogs Corn Flakes at any grocery store. You can get General Mills Cheerios at any grocery store. You don't have to make separate trips to the Kellogs store and the General Mills store. There are exclusive store-brand items, for which you do need to go to a specific store, but there's minimal additional cost to do so. You don't need to buy a new car to get from Trader Joes to Wegman's, you can use the same car to go to both.

With app stores the situation is reversed. Exclusives are common, and many quite expensive devices only have one store available. And once you've got an expensive product from the Apple App store on your Apple device, you can't (usually) change to a Google device and the Google Play Store and still use the product without re-buying it.

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

#768

Post by jonwinstanley »

Dma54rhs wrote: post #677
thereddaikon wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you called it sideloading just shows how successful Apple has been in warping people's perception of it over the years. Installing the software you want on your compute device isn't sideloading. Its just installing software. Apple is aberration here not all of the users who just expect to actually own the products they buy.

It's depressing that even on hackernews where you expect people want to tinker and have control over their machines there's a probably a majority who are happy with the situation and use the think of my grandma (aka children) using iPhone situation. There could be numerous ways for Apple to let people run their own software or other stores without giving your grandma malware.

You can run your own software already, just create an app in xcode and install it on your phone and possibly pay for a developer license I think :-( Being able to distribute it and have others use it is another matter.

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

#769

Post by amelius »

enos_feedler wrote: post #756
jimnotgym wrote: post #754

If a locked down app store is necessary for say safety, perhaps a good analogue is a water utility company. A water company has a monopoly in an area, due to the impractical nature of duplicate infrastructure. However, in return it may be heavily regulated in terms of its safety and pricing. If you have to have a single app store then their prices should be regulated, and crucially there should be proper recourse for…

The difference between regulating the price of water and the price of an app is the innovation curve. You can regulate the price of water because the creation, distribution and consumption of H20 hasn't changed in a long time. Meanwhile, every June Apple shows up with new APIs that developers can use to tap into the billions of hardware R&D they've invested for that year. Regulating price here is stifling innovation.

Meh. Distribution of computer programs has been done since the beginning of computing. Also, there is innovation in the water supply (which most people are unaware of).

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

#770

Post by wernercd »

cmdli wrote: post #739
ahiknsr wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Except as soon as it becomes a remotely feasible action (with simple instructions) for the general consumer, a bunch of businesses will start requiring their users to disable "default Grandma mode". Android already allows side-loading and i don't think any popular app out there is asking users to enable side-loading to install their app. Why do you think the situation would be any different with iOS app store?

To be fair, Fortnite did try to get their players to use sideloading to get around the 30% cut Google took. With Apple's more aggresive consumer protection stance, it wouldn't be surprising for more companies to take that step.

> aggressive consumer protection stance

Aggressive Protection? Sounds like the Mafia. Protection, paid for by you whether you want it or not. Pay the 30% or the mafia's going to break your kneecaps.

Post reply on HN