This is all helping the DOJ’s case against them. Idiots should work this out before the government makes them.
So where does this leave people that already have Fortnite downloaded, can they still continue to play it on their iOS device or does the app get disabled/removed?
Good question.
I hope this gets us closer to Apple revising their policies, and I admire Epic’s guts in forcing this confrontation.
I kinda don’t specifically want direct purchase options in apps though.
As a consumer, I like the safety and convenience of purchases through Apple’s store, and I’d hate to lose that. But there are a million different angles on all of this that leave me wondering if a solution that’s good for everyone is even possible.
Apple could charge industry standard rates as a payment processor of roughly 3-5%.
I thought Steam charged 30% as well? As well as Google?
Apples view is they do a lot more than just payment processing.
Apple, Steam and Google do indeed charge 30% as content distribution platforms.
In this case I’m suggesting that for in-app purchases the platform holders be treated as a “payment processor” meaning “someone who only processes payments”. For in-app purchases there is no content being distributed so this seems like a fair model.
But what about all the F2P games? That doesn’t seem fair to the platform holders, which do perform a lot of heavy lifting.
I feel the same, but like Google, they should allow side loading. Epic did that on Android but went into the Play store as well, I guess because of improved visibility (and complained about doing so).
The platform holders distribute the downloads and updates. They may choose to market the content. They secure and operate the platform ecosystem. There’s some value there to be sure, but it isn’t 30%. And I think it’s even less valuable for an in-app purchase, which Epic showed could easily be done without involving the platform holders at all.
All of that said, I don’t actually think Steam, Google, and Apple are doing anything wrong with their rules. Competition is a good thing, as Epic Games store vs. Steam showed. Eventually someone will blink to try and earn more business.
I’m all for changing the % of revenue split, and largely indifferent to what they land on. But I don’t think that’s a long term solution.
And Apple is providing more than payment processing as the platform owner. Which is why it all gets messy.
30% is quite high, but Google/Apple/Steam definitely do a lot more than a payment processor. The store, the infrastructure, the QA, the handling of payments, the tools, etc. Minus the payments, a company like Epic gets all the benefits of that and if you could just bypass paying the platform holders by having IAP, that’s the easy solution for everyone to get a free ride and keep most everything themselves.
In any case, I do hope to see the 30% drop but I don’t think treating the platform holders like payment processors (and giving them a similar cut) is fair or viable for them either, they do a lot more than that.
I’d like that in theory. A user-beware option to flip some security setting and allow side loading. But once there’s a crack in the dam, once some major app (Instagram? Tik Tok?) that the masses crave leaves the App Store and breaks through the initial barrier to entry for the users that wouldn’t have found or cared about side loading on their own, more and more apps will follow until there’s very little incentive for anyone to remain on the App Store, and its safeties are effectively moot.
Epic files suit. They were daring Apple to pull Fortnite so they could get this litigated.
You would think that it would encourage others to go side load anyway, but I think only nerds would be willing (or even know about it). That’s why Fortnite was side loading only on Android, but they moved to the Play store later. (I assume that is why at least, but Sweeney complained about doing so).
They really did have this all planned out. A new short mocking Apple.
Oh absolutely. Filing a suit this fast means that they had all the paperwork lined up and ready to file days ago and were just waiting to pull the trigger.
The real fun question is what are they after? Just backing Apple down in a settlement? Or litigating this all the way to get a precedent out there against device makers demanding a cut of all commerce in their walled garden?
I really will enjoy watching this play out because I don’t particularly like either party. So they can trade heavyweight punches all they want and I’m simply amused.
It clearly is worth 30%, given Epic eventually started also distributing the game via the Play store and paying the cut, despite all of their big talk around side loading. The alternative is there. Just because people choose not to use that alternative instead of Play doesn’t mean Epic is entitled to being hosted there at terms of their own choosing.
What I hope for as the outcome is that Apple is forced to open up the platform to alternate stores. And then I’ll be able to install a browser that is not hot trash.
Let them fight.
LOL, Apple really is getting played badly.