I think that this is what has changed the game since the App Store launched more than anything. Apple now competes directly with Spotify and Netflix. Spotify has to give Apple 30% for all new subs via IAP but Apple doesn’t have to give anyone anything. It’s similar to AT&T zero rating HBO Now. I don’t know whether it’s illegal, but it sure feels anticompetitive to me.
2 Likes
No it actually doesn’t. Apple, being monopolists, do no allow anyone else’s rendering engine to run on iOS. Chrome on iOS is therefore just a front end for Safari. (It’s the same for Firefox and others.) Accordingly, the Javascript engine, and the features it exposes, are controlled by Apple and Safari, and thus the reason what I said… previously “but it requires the browser engine to support more powerful functionality which Safari doesn’t offer.”
2 Likes
Yep, I don’t like it. I’m not an anti-trust lawyer or a regulator so I’ll just stick to the idea that it doesn’t feel fair to me. Spotify is in a tough spot regardless because they have to negotiate royalties with a cartel.
1 Like
That’s precisely how I feel as well.
Thank you, I stand corrected but again you prove my point. If Epic is so stifled by the fee’s Apple charges they could create their own platform. For example, Ninetindo created the switch with it’s own payment system and they have no problem having their own walled garden while still offering games on iOS.
Epic has more than enough money and followers to do it too, I think Epic fails to acknowledge Apple created the fertile ground from which Epic has grown, and at some point Epic can choose to grow up and go out on it’s own but you don’t sue the company that makes money while making you twice as much.
Don’t be such an Apple apologist that you can’t contemplate that someone can do something differently and better than Apple. They HAVE created their own platform, it’s called the Unreal Engine… and they have their own store, it’s called the Epic Game store, where their cut is 15% or less. Epic is not the greatest company, but in this one case they are fighting a good fight.
1 Like
True, Epic is fighting but good for what? Apple has created countless unicorns off its platform and companies who benefit from iOS can decide at any time to do it better themselves. That’s what Steve Jobs did when Microsoft dominated the app world, why can’t it happen again?
Btw, you never mentioned that both Xbox and Playstation charge Epic 30% and there’s no mention of them in Epics lawsuit which tells me Epic is fine paying 30% just not to Apple.
1 Like
I don’t know what sort of agreements that one gets in the console gaming industry… but the biggest difference is that each deal is negotiated, rather than there being a blanket rule. Also the console gamer creators are free to monetize in game purchases however they would like, they’re not required to use the console game store as Apple is requiring.
My biggest complaint is not that Apple wants 30%… hell they could charge 2000% for all I care (not an Apple fan, so wouldn’t affect me.) What I am complaining about is the fact that they ban any other choice. If I make my app with my own sweat and tears, AND I pay $99/year to Apple for the privilege to build for their platform, they shouldn’t lock me out from monetizing my app in whatever weird way I want. If I want to have my customers pay me in Dogecoin, that should be my option. This is what Epic is fighting, and I think it is a good fight.
2 Likes
Got it…thanks for the heads up
1 Like