This is why devs are afraid of publicly criticizing Apple, let alone testifying against them in the court.
Apple has shown that they will then prevent you from accessing 50%+ of the US market.
In short Apple is a bully, has been for more than a decade now, and it has worked out well for them.
napkin · 8h ago
But you’ve left out part of the narrative: Developer pushes an App update which purposefully violates the TOS, expecting rejection- having planned in advance to kick off an expensive PR campaign and legal battle.
I don’t deny Apple’s pettiness… Nonetheless, can you provide a different example of why devs are afraid of publicly criticizing Apple?
ApolloFortyNine · 7h ago
>I don’t deny Apple’s pettiness… Nonetheless, can you provide a different example of why devs are afraid of publicly criticizing Apple?
Every subscription service should have a banner on their pages saying signing up through iOS takes 30%. Many just disabled signing up.
Of course maybe this isn't the best example since Apple actually made it against their rules to tell users it'd be cheaper to purchase on their site.
Apple's rules undeniably cost end users money. Epic proved it by taking some of that 30% fee and giving it back to the consumer (you got more Fortnite credits buying on Epic store instead of Apple store).
Why people try to defend Apple I'll never understand, my guess is some people who own an iPhone have decided that's 'their team' and who wants to see their team lose? But I'm not sure.
jillyboel3 · 6h ago
> Why people try to defend Apple I'll never understand, my guess is some people who own an iPhone have decided that's 'their team' and who wants to see their team lose
It's this. Apple somehow managed to cultivate cult-like behavior in their users, which I've also never understood.
kjreact · 16m ago
Because everyone who likes how Apple has made it easy for users to manage their subscriptions and enjoy the overall user friendliness of their products we are thus cultists who just blindly do as we’re told. Maybe some people don’t agree with your views; that doesn’t make them cult followers for having a different opinion.
Edit: fuck I just got trolled. According to jillyboel profile we are all just fascists. And dang is preventing him from spamming his trolls on HN.
dogleash · 3h ago
> my guess is some people who own an iPhone have decided that's 'their team' and who wants to see their team lose?
Apple vs Android is Coke vs Pepsi for Zoomers.
benoau · 8h ago
And you've left out part of the narrative: the terms that Epic broke were illegal in the state of California. Hooli's contract is thus invalid.
As for different reason, how about this official policy from ~2015:
> If your App is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps.
Yeah, not arguing the legal specifics. It’s good for Apple to be challenged in court.
But Epic did go out of their way to ‘trash’ Apple in the press. For this and other reasons I can’t generally relate to Epic. (e.g. targeting kids with microtransactions, burning piles of money on Epic Games exclusives.)
I would also not want to do business with Epic
benoau · 7h ago
Apple is the primary beneficiary by far of games like Fortnite because they allow and tax them in aggregate, even without Fortnite they offer thousands of games for kids to spend a grand or ten in. The legality of the tactics employed by the gaming industry, that can only occur with the platforms complicity, are being challenged in Europe which is hopefully going to end a lot of these practices and derail both Tims grifting off children and cultivated addicts.
So don't put yourself in the position where you have to do business with Epic, like forcing them to use your store to get software on the platform over a billion users use.
Apple could easily just do what various courts have ordered them to do: Open up the ecosystem and allow anyone to distribute apps. This has the added benefit of allowing apple to stop doing business with the entities they don't like, because they are no longer involving themselves in a transaction between the user and the business the user has chosen.
It will also save their executives from a prison sentence if they keep this up.
coldpie · 8h ago
Yeah, there's no good guys in this fight. Apple may be behaving badly, but Epic broke the terms they agreed to, tried to use the courts to force Apple to change their App Store business model, and even kicked off a public PR campaign trashing Apple... and now they're whining because Apple is not treating them nicely after all that? You went nuclear on Apple, Epic. That's not going to make them interested in having you as a business partner.
jillyboel · 7h ago
Shrug. They can open up the apple ecosystem so you don't need their store and then they can refuse to do business.
Apple put themselves in the position that they have to do business with entities they don't approve of, thankfully the courts are reminding them of this. Soon one or more of the apple execs will wind up in prison.
coldpie · 7h ago
Yeah, though Epic put themselves in the position of having the gatekeeper of an important part of their business want nothing to do with them, and now they're being whiny babies about it. Both parties suck here.
jillyboel3 · 7h ago
No, apple is clearly the evil one. They are bullying many, many, many other companies and individiuals in a similar, and often even worse, fashion. Those don't speak up because they're afraid of Apple's wrath. Thankfully Epic did have the balls to stand up, and now various various legal entities are forcing apple to make changes that benefit everyone (except apple).
coldpie · 6h ago
These are billion-dollar companies using the courts to fight over who gets a bigger slice of the pie. They are not your friends or allies.
mvdtnz · 2h ago
Sweeney is an ally to anyone who wants to freely distribute software.
jillyboel3 · 6h ago
Of course not, but resulting changes to Apple's policy are still a good thing for everyone else. Anything that forces apple to bully other organizations and people less is a good thing.
coldpie · 5h ago
Epic broke the terms they agreed to, filed the lawsuit, launched an advertising and PR campaign to support it, and continue to make whiny complaints after they got what they asked for, but Apple are the bullies here? I'm not convinced.
jillyboel3 · 5h ago
Terms that were illegal and thus not binding in many jurisdictions. If I were to write: "By replying to this comment you agree to my Terms of Service which require you to paypal me 10k", you would laugh and disregard it. Same thing.
Anyway, just look at how apple forced their payment service so they can take a 30% cut of every transaction made by any iPhone user. Then they banned price differences between Apple's own payment service and external, cheaper, ones. This forces companies to raise their prices by 30% everywhere. So we're all paying more to fund apple's greed. This is just one example of many, and you have to look beyond the apple vs epic fight since that is just the most public instance. Apple are the bullies.
Apple are involving themselves in business between their customers and companies those users have chosen to use. Apple are the bullies.
coldpie · 5h ago
Yeah, so like I said, Epic got what they asked for. Why are they still complaining?
jillyboel3 · 3h ago
Re-read the post we're commenting on please.
archagon · 4h ago
I trust Sweeney’s intentions far, far more than I do Cook’s. The man is a bona fide hacker from the trenches and does not hide his true feelings behind a corporate firewall.
arccy · 8h ago
a successful PR campaign given now we have court rulings that show apple is an abusive company.
abiding by apple's abusive TOS won't improve developers' situations, you have to stand up to them.
No comments yet
TechRemarker · 8h ago
They didn’t ban them for publicly criticizing, they banned them for intentionally breaking the rules. So yes, this makes devs more afraid of knowingly breaking the rules like how jail makes people more afraid of breaking the law. And yes fornite team has been quite a bully in their incessant tweets but glad to see Apple not stopping to their level.
apple4ever · 2h ago
Yes they broke bad rules and were right to do so.
Devs are more afraid of breaking the rules because the rules change all the time, and they know Apple is petty and cares more about money than being good to customers and developers.
isodev · 8h ago
I think a big portion of the problem is that Apple is both the platform (phone) and the store. Similar to Google and Chrome for the web, it creates a conflict.
Bad faith movies like slapping warnings, geo blocking dev tools (remember you have to be in Europe to be able to develop an alternative web browser engine lol), limiting side loading etc … feels like “let’s milk the cashcow until people don’t need iPhones anymore”. The longer they can drag it the better. Disappointing tbh.
gmerc · 7h ago
They did this even to Facebook back in the day, primarily holding app updates hostage to kill Instant Games
high_na_euv · 9h ago
Imagine if Microsoft banned Steam Or Rockstar on Windows
The outrage would be massive, that would be giant scandal
xethos · 8h ago
Microsoft locking out third-party applications with Windows S, and/or pushing users to Microsoft's own game store, was actually a real threat to Valve. That's one of the major reasons Proton is a thing: Valve realized they were entirely dependant on a party they had no leverage over, so they built and invested in Linux.
Should Microsoft ever make a move now, Valve isn't completely at their mercy.
pjmlp · 8h ago
Valve is still at the Microsoft's mercy to tolerate Proton's existence.
They should have made it attractive for developers already targeting UNIX like systems, with PlayStation and Android NDK, to actually bother shipping GNU/Linux builds of their games.
Instead, they translate Windows games.
mystified5016 · 7h ago
> Valve is still at the Microsoft's mercy to tolerate Proton's existence.
No, they aren't. Valve is way, way too big a bear for Microsoft to poke. If they banned Steam, the backlash would be severe.
It would also result in even more users switching to Linux to keep access to the games they've already paid for, and which work under Linux due to proton.
Microsoft is at Valve's mercy. Valve doesn't need Microsoft, but Microsoft very badly needs Steam around to keep gamers on windows.
pjmlp · 6h ago
XBox is one of the biggest publishers, where would all those Windows gamers go?
To a platform emulating Windows? (no need to correct me on how WINE works)
If at all they would be migrating to Nintendo and Sony consoles, if not having second thoughts about XBox consoles and cloud/GeForce Now.
Additionally, most of what Valve stands for will be gone the day Gabe is no longer at the company, enjoy while it lasts.
FirmwareBurner · 9h ago
This is why the EU is hitting apple and why the US needs to.
Too many devs have their livelihood at the mercy of Apple's(and Google's) Damocles's sword. At least with Google you can easily sideload.
If even megacorpos like Epic have issues with Apple imagine what being an indie dev or small company will be like.
DanielHB · 9h ago
Apple gets around this by saying they are "Promising to Create 30000 american jobs" which the politicians then peddle in their election campaigns. But then it never happens because it is all a promise...
The politicians of course only care about the PR stunt and give them concessions either way.
FirmwareBurner · 9h ago
A youtuber did a dissection of all the big tech jobs Trump "created" with his talks with big tech, and all of the new US jobs announced by the likes of Apple or Nvidia were jobs they were planning to create anyway, before Trump got elected Trump is just taking credit for it as if he did anything.
Job creation, retention or destruction is a powerful political tool that companies use everywhere as leverage to get politicians to do what they want. You can see the auto sector in Germany. So the US defending Apple is understandable. All countries protect their domestic big players.
jillyboel · 9h ago
This is why apple needs to be broken up into a software company and a hardware company. They're so, so clearly abusing their current position.
horsawlarway · 9h ago
Just take the app store away.
From all of them - take it away from Google too. Frankly - Microsoft never actually got much buy in for their store, but take it away from them as well.
Hardware that has only a single approved distribution channel for software, that is owned by someone other than the owner of the hardware, shouldn't be legal.
Further - if you own a piece of hardware, you legally should own EVERY fucking key. If there's a lock in that device, hardware or software based, that has a key - you get a damn copy.
---
Some physical comparisons that show how outrageously unethical this setup is:
You buy a home, but your realtor gets the only copy of the keys. "Don't worry" they say, "I'll just pop by and open er up whenever you need to get in and out. Oh, and by the way, I don't like Ikea - so I won't open the door if you're trying to move Ikea furniture in. Great working with you guys, enjoy your new home!".
You've just bought a new car, you tried turning into your neighborhood, but suddenly the car stops. You call the dealer: "Oh, I see your neighborhood road was paved by PavingCo, They don't pay our manufacturers' yearly inspection fee, so we can't certify that our car can safely drive on that road. So we disable it when the GPS detects you're about to drive there."
---
This is fundamentally about ownership. Hardware manufacturers are playing with utter fire here, because this is the first time in history there exists enough infrastructure that a device can phone home and ask "Is this ok?" to the maker, rather than operating as the owner desires.
As far as I'm concerned - you don't own a device that does that. You're just renting it, and the manufacturer can and will extort you with rent-seeking behavior at EVERY turn.
Phones are only the first stop - this is going to spread to absolutely everything that uses electricity unless this gets extinguished real fast. We're already starting to see the same games in Cars, IoT devices, TVs, etc...
I'm eagerly awaiting the day my drill stops working because I'm not trying to drill the manufacturers' overpriced screws with it...
shadowfiend · 9h ago
Epic didn't publicly criticize Apple or testify against them in court to get into this situation, they willfully and deliberately broke the legal developer agreement that they signed to get press coverage (they could have filed suit on the anti-steering rules regardless).
Not only did they do this, they then filed suit to say that Apple shouldn't have been allowed to suspend their account—and lost (though arguably won the broader war since anti-steering is currently dead).
There are a ton of things Apple is doing wrong around developer stuff and anti-steering rules and all of it, but I dunno, I feel pretty good about them saying to a specific developer, “actually, you've shown yourself to be willing to ignore the legal agreements you sign, so we're not going to be doing business with you any longer“. Epic's stunt should cost them, if they then want to talk about how they've martyred themselves for developers everywhere. Good work, but a martyr who comes back to life isn't really a martyr, right?
aaomidi · 9h ago
Yeah this type of behavior will eventually get Apple broken into two. And they’ll deserve it.
HDThoreaun · 8h ago
Apples terms of service were illegal. Illegal agreements are not binding
shadowfiend · 7h ago
While I don’t claim to know the finer points of the law, I believe the judge was pretty crystal clear that Apple was 100% within their powers to kill the developer account that Epic used to do this.
Gareth321 · 10h ago
Apple is just being petty now. They're legally allowed to keep Epic out, but why? As a message to others who might wish to legally contest Apple's monopolistic (or at least duopolistic) practises? You lost, Apple. Be a gracious loser. This action is only going to foment even more animosity from developers, gamers, customers, judges, and importantly, legislators. This absolutely will be used as a datapoint for future rulings, and cases are ongoing or being filed all over the world now.
tesch1 · 9h ago
No shoes, no shirt, no service.
Epic wanted their own store and they got their own store. It cost them and Apple a bunch of money, which indirectly is not good for anyone's customers... my sense of justice is not perplexed as to why they are not allowed back in.
Would you want to do business with someone who just sued you after breaking their previous contract with you?
kouteiheika · 9h ago
> Epic wanted their own store and they got their own store.
They don't. Quoting the article:
> "Apple has blocked our Fortnite submission so we cannot release to the US App Store or to the Epic Games Store for iOS in the European Union," Epic stated via its Fortnite account
If someone prevents me from selling my own product in my own store then it's not my store.
smileybarry · 9h ago
I suspect they just put their eggs in one basket and used the same package identifier for the DMA version of Fortnite and the App Store version, and the app’s state in review limbo messed with the iOS notarization process (which is a minimal review and not an automated CLI like macOS).
That’s something they could’ve avoided by using different IDs for different stores, like everyone else does on e.g. Amazon AppStore. (Maybe even Samsung and Play Store use different IDs)
But that’s assuming they’re not just refusing to release anywhere until Apple relents in the US.
Gareth321 · 7h ago
But they didn't get their own store. They're still blocked from distributing to iPhones everywhere except the EU. And that process is incredibly user hostile (for which Apple will likely receive another fine for violating the DMA).
As I say above, Apple is legally permitted to do this, but I think they're inviting additional and heavy-handed legal interdiction. They're burning so much of their brand and goodwill on this war against developers. They went so far as to risk actual prison time for their executives, just so they could screw developers out of as much money as possible.
golondon · 9h ago
Man, just let it go. More you try to block Epic or any other, more you are pushing people away from yourself.
Be Apple, innovate, give us second iPhone moment so you wouldn't worry so much about revenue drop in services. Or make payment via Apple so good, your customers would go for it even with price difference. Just stop stupid, monopolistic tactics.
strogonoff · 8h ago
Companies do not innovate for fun. The point of innovation is getting to be able to profit from it.
Apple has built the touchscreen smartphone that the world to date still could not move on from, and it still leads in that category. By working both hardware and software fronts, they have grinded out an ecosystem that was compelling and money-making to small developers (handling legal and tax logistics pretty much worldwide for you) and to the end users.
Apple Pay is yet another example: you’d think somebody would have come up with a way to conveniently and securely pay with, say, a phone, and yet everybody needed for the teacher to do it first and only then jumped on copying the feature with barely enough creativity to call it “%SOME_BRAND_NAME% Pay” and put their logo on it. Now it’s incredibly convenient, it’s everywhere online, and it basically turns every shop out there into Amazon’s patented “one-click purchase” experience.
Saying they should not be able to profit from their innovation because they just did too good of a job intuitively seems like the opposite of American values. This is not some rusty ISP monopoly with a geographically captive market, sitting on decades old software as secure as Swiss cheese, doing mostly nothing. People switch between ecosystems all the time, there are no strong lock-ins; you have to be on top of it to stay competitive, and Apple generally is. This is one of the rare cases where a company keeps generating and implementing (pretty well) idea after idea in multiple areas with a valuation, contrary to trends, built not on empty future promises but on a concrete, sound business model that provides real value to people who are willing to pay for it, despite having a lot of choice.
horsawlarway · 7h ago
Eh... get outta here. Profit is fine, rent seeking is not.
I don't care if they're "rusty" or or not. Sell a good hammer, make money selling the hammer: Everything is fine.
Sell a good hammer, double dip with rent seeking and charge for every nail the user drives? Fuck off. Happy to see them get wrecked in the court system.
strogonoff · 7h ago
If you want to live in a world where the pinnacle of innovation is another hammer, be my guest, I’m sure the Amish will welcome you.
If you like this one, with all the futuristic tech it brings, don’t get on a high horse whenever those who dare to innovate also dare to make money from it. Have the brains and the balls to do it yourself and be as flush as they are.
This isn’t “rent”—landlords don’t have to incessantly innovate.
resource_waste · 8h ago
That is how the world Ought to be, not how the world Is.
As I do with Microsoft, I only use Apple products when its absolutely necessary.
My personal choices are whatever is best, Fedora for my home OS(Don't call Fedora Linux, Fedora is so far and beyond Linux, you don't want to associate them).
My Pixel phone... Idk, looking for something new. But at least I have been using Fdroid and its pretty amazing.
But yeah I bend to their will when I'm doing corporate stuff, never personal.
blibble · 9h ago
they've started adding warnings to any apps daring to use external payments too
really hope they add to the fine for this, seems like Apple never learns.
drcongo · 8h ago
Those have been there for over a year.
jillyboel · 9h ago
So pathetic, especially the red triangle. It's like they thought "well it's a warning, so we use the warning icon but we need to make it scary so it's red!!".
anshumankmr · 9h ago
Though I am very pro Epic in this, I feel this is the least harmful way Apple can warn users who are apprehensive of alternative payment systems while those who want to go ahead can. Like Fortnite's user base would not be deterred by this.
chrismustcode · 9h ago
Would you be okay for Google to warn anyone when entering a website on chrome that they are taking a risk because they offer payment options other than Google pay?
Its about freedom and openness of platforms.
‘It’s fine because people will ignore it’ doesn’t make something okay.
anshumankmr · 8h ago
>Would you be okay for Google to warn anyone when entering a website on chrome that they are taking a risk because they offer payment options other than Google pay?
Its about freedom and openness of platforms.
>‘It’s fine because people will ignore it’ doesn’t make something okay.
I can give an anecdotal example of my father who is bit old, knows some basic tech, but had been at the receiving end of some financial fraud (some clowns pretended to be stock trading experts, thankfully nothing happened as he figured it out before any money was sent).
You and I might be technologically sophisticated enough to know what's what. That being said I feel the likelihood of scammy apps like those on App store for iOS a lot less likely but not zero. That being said, on Chrome, one does have many many options for reliable payment gateways and not using them can be an easy way to figure out if it is risky or not.
If Google were to force Google Pay on Chrome, that would be clearly wrong. Options should exist.
And I feel Apple should allow Fortnite for that very reason. You cannot ban someone for not wanting to use Apple Pay, the same way Chrome cannot and should not ban a website if they are using a non Google related payment gateway.
scarface_74 · 9h ago
I see plenty of sites that link to outside websites that issue a warning first. The app is not a browser.
candiddevmike · 9h ago
> This app does not support the App Store’s private and secure payment system. It uses external purchases
It's poorly worded for maximum FUD.
blibble · 9h ago
this showed up in the recent court case too:
> In Slack communications dated November 16, 2021, the Apple employees crafting the warning screen for Project Michigan discussed how best to frame its language. Mr. Onak suggested the warning screen should include the language: “By continuing on the web, you will leave the app and be taken to an external website” because “‘external website’ sounds scary, so execs will love it.” [...] One employee further wrote, “to make your version even worse you could add the developer name rather than the app name.” To that, another responded “ooh - keep going.”
Apple’s malicious compliance then pretending to ask for permission. Apple was trying to get the EU to rubber stamp the scare tactics. Instead the EU said let’s see that works out for you.
And fwiw we have hard evidence of Apple acting in bad faith. Gruber keeps giving Apple PR the benefit of the doubt but they absolutely do not deserve it.
fenomas · 8h ago
At the end of that link, where it describes how the EC gave conflicting instructions, demanded action without saying what needed to be done, and then gave a sudden negative judgment... I know some iOS developers who'd say that sounds eerily familiar. :D
kanwisher · 10h ago
This has been going on for 4 years, they have won multiple times in court. The last time the judge actively insulted apple for ignoring the previous engagements and even suggesting criminal proceedings on some of the executives, and now they ignore the courts again
vessenes · 9h ago
By “they” you mean Apple, if you’ve read the opinions. And they did fly too close to the sun recently on one point. But that point was not about whether or not they have to let epic on their platform.
traspler · 8h ago
The title is a bit misleading, Apple did not reject the submission, just not approved it (yet). I know ignoring a submission is practically the same as blocking or rejecting it; but I think this case is already messy enough so that these things should be read with more nuance.
Also the situation is much more complicated. In the EU, Fortnite has been available for a while through their own Epic Games AppStore. This submission seems to have been for both, the EU distribution and the US AppStore. I am surprised that such a situation is even possible, I thought if you opt-in your app/account for EU alternative AppStores you are kind of blocked from the standard AppStore submission as the requirements for the alternative distribution path are different from the AppStore. At the same time it seems to give Epic more arguments for pressure on Apple as sabotaging the release in the EU might be against the DMA laws.
Well, I hope they keep pushing hard so that lawmakers notice how broken anything related to selling software is.
I know, wishful thinking, but I'd love more ownership for the hardware I buy.
A few days ago Nintendo announced that if you do anything outside of what they allow, they will BRICK YOUR NINTENDO SWITCH. Like, how's that even legal
outcoldman · 6h ago
I really hope that they will be forced to change "approval" to "verified" process.
So most companies/devs will be able to just publish on App Store, and apple can after that "verify" that the app confirms with their standards.
insane_dreamer · 5h ago
That won't happen. It's Apple's platform so they have the right to decide who gets onto it. Just like Walmart gets to decide whose products are sold through Walmart.
docdeek · 10h ago
Doesn’t Apple usually offer a reason why they reject a app or a game? From the article and the linked tweet no reason is given.
zuhsetaqi · 10h ago
I understood, that Apple did not reject it but just did nothing with the submitted app and didn't give any reply.
isleyaardvark · 9h ago
It's the same reason it has been since the judgement, Epic violated the TOS so Apple removed Fortnite. The court found for Apple on that count, and has never ordered Fortnite's reinstatement.
Tim Sweeney is using language in a way to make it appear as though the recent ruling ordered Fortnite's reinstatement, and a lot of people are falling for it.
canuckintime · 8h ago
Apple themselves said during that the initial trial that they would reinstate Fortnite. Turns out Apple lied
anshumankmr · 9h ago
Pocket veto
umrashrf · 8h ago
That’s why making stores like Apple for our own smartphone is on the cards for us
drcongo · 8h ago
Good.
rvz · 9h ago
As expected [0], it isn't over yet and Apple doesn't care.
They even went as far as to blocking downloads from third-party app stores:
> The Verge has confirmed that the game is no longer available to download on iOS from the Epic Games Store or the alternative marketplace AltStore PAL in the EU, where it had previously been available. It’s not yet clear if Apple blocked the game’s availability through those stores, or if Epic itself chose to make it unavailable. We’ve reached out to both Apple and Epic for comment.
That tells you the reach into how Apple can block app installs even from third-party app stores.
Tim Sweeney is good at PR, and the media tends to fall for it.
The judge didn’t say Fortnite had to be let back on the App Store. She said that Apple needed to allow payments through external payment processors. Apple can’t force Epic to use their payment system anymore, but they absolutely still can decide they don’t want to distribute Fortnite on the App Store. It’s their store.
terinjokes · 9h ago
This seems to be true for the Apple App Store, but doesn't explain the lack of notorizing the update for Epic's own EU storefront.
vessenes · 9h ago
They lost on almost all counts actually; precisely the reason the judge was angry about failure to comply with the relief she did order. (In her opinion; appeals court will see. It looks colorable to me that she may feel Apple outsmarted her and just “technically” complied. But we will see during appeals.)
hajile · 9h ago
Apple won 9 out of 10 issues. The one they lost about external payments is by far the least important issue of the case.
ygvamjq2ol · 9h ago
epic violated an agreement years ago why let them off the hook?
I don’t deny Apple’s pettiness… Nonetheless, can you provide a different example of why devs are afraid of publicly criticizing Apple?
Every subscription service should have a banner on their pages saying signing up through iOS takes 30%. Many just disabled signing up.
Of course maybe this isn't the best example since Apple actually made it against their rules to tell users it'd be cheaper to purchase on their site.
Apple's rules undeniably cost end users money. Epic proved it by taking some of that 30% fee and giving it back to the consumer (you got more Fortnite credits buying on Epic store instead of Apple store).
Why people try to defend Apple I'll never understand, my guess is some people who own an iPhone have decided that's 'their team' and who wants to see their team lose? But I'm not sure.
It's this. Apple somehow managed to cultivate cult-like behavior in their users, which I've also never understood.
Edit: fuck I just got trolled. According to jillyboel profile we are all just fascists. And dang is preventing him from spamming his trolls on HN.
Apple vs Android is Coke vs Pepsi for Zoomers.
As for different reason, how about this official policy from ~2015:
> If your App is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150411105225/https://developer...
But Epic did go out of their way to ‘trash’ Apple in the press. For this and other reasons I can’t generally relate to Epic. (e.g. targeting kids with microtransactions, burning piles of money on Epic Games exclusives.)
I would also not want to do business with Epic
https://www.beuc.eu/reports/game-over-consumers-fight-fairer...
So don't put yourself in the position where you have to do business with Epic, like forcing them to use your store to get software on the platform over a billion users use.
Apple could easily just do what various courts have ordered them to do: Open up the ecosystem and allow anyone to distribute apps. This has the added benefit of allowing apple to stop doing business with the entities they don't like, because they are no longer involving themselves in a transaction between the user and the business the user has chosen.
It will also save their executives from a prison sentence if they keep this up.
Apple put themselves in the position that they have to do business with entities they don't approve of, thankfully the courts are reminding them of this. Soon one or more of the apple execs will wind up in prison.
Anyway, just look at how apple forced their payment service so they can take a 30% cut of every transaction made by any iPhone user. Then they banned price differences between Apple's own payment service and external, cheaper, ones. This forces companies to raise their prices by 30% everywhere. So we're all paying more to fund apple's greed. This is just one example of many, and you have to look beyond the apple vs epic fight since that is just the most public instance. Apple are the bullies.
Apple are involving themselves in business between their customers and companies those users have chosen to use. Apple are the bullies.
abiding by apple's abusive TOS won't improve developers' situations, you have to stand up to them.
No comments yet
Devs are more afraid of breaking the rules because the rules change all the time, and they know Apple is petty and cares more about money than being good to customers and developers.
The outrage would be massive, that would be giant scandal
Should Microsoft ever make a move now, Valve isn't completely at their mercy.
They should have made it attractive for developers already targeting UNIX like systems, with PlayStation and Android NDK, to actually bother shipping GNU/Linux builds of their games.
Instead, they translate Windows games.
No, they aren't. Valve is way, way too big a bear for Microsoft to poke. If they banned Steam, the backlash would be severe.
It would also result in even more users switching to Linux to keep access to the games they've already paid for, and which work under Linux due to proton.
Microsoft is at Valve's mercy. Valve doesn't need Microsoft, but Microsoft very badly needs Steam around to keep gamers on windows.
To a platform emulating Windows? (no need to correct me on how WINE works)
If at all they would be migrating to Nintendo and Sony consoles, if not having second thoughts about XBox consoles and cloud/GeForce Now.
Additionally, most of what Valve stands for will be gone the day Gabe is no longer at the company, enjoy while it lasts.
Too many devs have their livelihood at the mercy of Apple's(and Google's) Damocles's sword. At least with Google you can easily sideload.
If even megacorpos like Epic have issues with Apple imagine what being an indie dev or small company will be like.
The politicians of course only care about the PR stunt and give them concessions either way.
Job creation, retention or destruction is a powerful political tool that companies use everywhere as leverage to get politicians to do what they want. You can see the auto sector in Germany. So the US defending Apple is understandable. All countries protect their domestic big players.
From all of them - take it away from Google too. Frankly - Microsoft never actually got much buy in for their store, but take it away from them as well.
Hardware that has only a single approved distribution channel for software, that is owned by someone other than the owner of the hardware, shouldn't be legal.
Further - if you own a piece of hardware, you legally should own EVERY fucking key. If there's a lock in that device, hardware or software based, that has a key - you get a damn copy.
---
Some physical comparisons that show how outrageously unethical this setup is:
You buy a home, but your realtor gets the only copy of the keys. "Don't worry" they say, "I'll just pop by and open er up whenever you need to get in and out. Oh, and by the way, I don't like Ikea - so I won't open the door if you're trying to move Ikea furniture in. Great working with you guys, enjoy your new home!".
You've just bought a new car, you tried turning into your neighborhood, but suddenly the car stops. You call the dealer: "Oh, I see your neighborhood road was paved by PavingCo, They don't pay our manufacturers' yearly inspection fee, so we can't certify that our car can safely drive on that road. So we disable it when the GPS detects you're about to drive there."
---
This is fundamentally about ownership. Hardware manufacturers are playing with utter fire here, because this is the first time in history there exists enough infrastructure that a device can phone home and ask "Is this ok?" to the maker, rather than operating as the owner desires.
As far as I'm concerned - you don't own a device that does that. You're just renting it, and the manufacturer can and will extort you with rent-seeking behavior at EVERY turn.
Phones are only the first stop - this is going to spread to absolutely everything that uses electricity unless this gets extinguished real fast. We're already starting to see the same games in Cars, IoT devices, TVs, etc...
I'm eagerly awaiting the day my drill stops working because I'm not trying to drill the manufacturers' overpriced screws with it...
Not only did they do this, they then filed suit to say that Apple shouldn't have been allowed to suspend their account—and lost (though arguably won the broader war since anti-steering is currently dead).
There are a ton of things Apple is doing wrong around developer stuff and anti-steering rules and all of it, but I dunno, I feel pretty good about them saying to a specific developer, “actually, you've shown yourself to be willing to ignore the legal agreements you sign, so we're not going to be doing business with you any longer“. Epic's stunt should cost them, if they then want to talk about how they've martyred themselves for developers everywhere. Good work, but a martyr who comes back to life isn't really a martyr, right?
Epic wanted their own store and they got their own store. It cost them and Apple a bunch of money, which indirectly is not good for anyone's customers... my sense of justice is not perplexed as to why they are not allowed back in.
Would you want to do business with someone who just sued you after breaking their previous contract with you?
They don't. Quoting the article:
> "Apple has blocked our Fortnite submission so we cannot release to the US App Store or to the Epic Games Store for iOS in the European Union," Epic stated via its Fortnite account
If someone prevents me from selling my own product in my own store then it's not my store.
That’s something they could’ve avoided by using different IDs for different stores, like everyone else does on e.g. Amazon AppStore. (Maybe even Samsung and Play Store use different IDs)
But that’s assuming they’re not just refusing to release anywhere until Apple relents in the US.
As I say above, Apple is legally permitted to do this, but I think they're inviting additional and heavy-handed legal interdiction. They're burning so much of their brand and goodwill on this war against developers. They went so far as to risk actual prison time for their executives, just so they could screw developers out of as much money as possible.
Be Apple, innovate, give us second iPhone moment so you wouldn't worry so much about revenue drop in services. Or make payment via Apple so good, your customers would go for it even with price difference. Just stop stupid, monopolistic tactics.
Apple has built the touchscreen smartphone that the world to date still could not move on from, and it still leads in that category. By working both hardware and software fronts, they have grinded out an ecosystem that was compelling and money-making to small developers (handling legal and tax logistics pretty much worldwide for you) and to the end users.
Apple Pay is yet another example: you’d think somebody would have come up with a way to conveniently and securely pay with, say, a phone, and yet everybody needed for the teacher to do it first and only then jumped on copying the feature with barely enough creativity to call it “%SOME_BRAND_NAME% Pay” and put their logo on it. Now it’s incredibly convenient, it’s everywhere online, and it basically turns every shop out there into Amazon’s patented “one-click purchase” experience.
Saying they should not be able to profit from their innovation because they just did too good of a job intuitively seems like the opposite of American values. This is not some rusty ISP monopoly with a geographically captive market, sitting on decades old software as secure as Swiss cheese, doing mostly nothing. People switch between ecosystems all the time, there are no strong lock-ins; you have to be on top of it to stay competitive, and Apple generally is. This is one of the rare cases where a company keeps generating and implementing (pretty well) idea after idea in multiple areas with a valuation, contrary to trends, built not on empty future promises but on a concrete, sound business model that provides real value to people who are willing to pay for it, despite having a lot of choice.
I don't care if they're "rusty" or or not. Sell a good hammer, make money selling the hammer: Everything is fine.
Sell a good hammer, double dip with rent seeking and charge for every nail the user drives? Fuck off. Happy to see them get wrecked in the court system.
If you like this one, with all the futuristic tech it brings, don’t get on a high horse whenever those who dare to innovate also dare to make money from it. Have the brains and the balls to do it yourself and be as flush as they are.
This isn’t “rent”—landlords don’t have to incessantly innovate.
As I do with Microsoft, I only use Apple products when its absolutely necessary.
My personal choices are whatever is best, Fedora for my home OS(Don't call Fedora Linux, Fedora is so far and beyond Linux, you don't want to associate them).
My Pixel phone... Idk, looking for something new. But at least I have been using Fdroid and its pretty amazing.
But yeah I bend to their will when I'm doing corporate stuff, never personal.
https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_now_showing_warnings_on_eu_ap...
Its about freedom and openness of platforms.
‘It’s fine because people will ignore it’ doesn’t make something okay.
>‘It’s fine because people will ignore it’ doesn’t make something okay.
I can give an anecdotal example of my father who is bit old, knows some basic tech, but had been at the receiving end of some financial fraud (some clowns pretended to be stock trading experts, thankfully nothing happened as he figured it out before any money was sent).
You and I might be technologically sophisticated enough to know what's what. That being said I feel the likelihood of scammy apps like those on App store for iOS a lot less likely but not zero. That being said, on Chrome, one does have many many options for reliable payment gateways and not using them can be an easy way to figure out if it is risky or not.
If Google were to force Google Pay on Chrome, that would be clearly wrong. Options should exist.
And I feel Apple should allow Fortnite for that very reason. You cannot ban someone for not wanting to use Apple Pay, the same way Chrome cannot and should not ban a website if they are using a non Google related payment gateway.
It's poorly worded for maximum FUD.
> In Slack communications dated November 16, 2021, the Apple employees crafting the warning screen for Project Michigan discussed how best to frame its language. Mr. Onak suggested the warning screen should include the language: “By continuing on the web, you will leave the app and be taken to an external website” because “‘external website’ sounds scary, so execs will love it.” [...] One employee further wrote, “to make your version even worse you could add the developer name rather than the app name.” To that, another responded “ooh - keep going.”
from https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.36... (page 36)
these people should be jailed for contempt
https://daringfireball.net/2025/05/that_eu_app_store_warning...
And fwiw we have hard evidence of Apple acting in bad faith. Gruber keeps giving Apple PR the benefit of the doubt but they absolutely do not deserve it.
Also the situation is much more complicated. In the EU, Fortnite has been available for a while through their own Epic Games AppStore. This submission seems to have been for both, the EU distribution and the US AppStore. I am surprised that such a situation is even possible, I thought if you opt-in your app/account for EU alternative AppStores you are kind of blocked from the standard AppStore submission as the requirements for the alternative distribution path are different from the AppStore. At the same time it seems to give Epic more arguments for pressure on Apple as sabotaging the release in the EU might be against the DMA laws.
A few days ago Nintendo announced that if you do anything outside of what they allow, they will BRICK YOUR NINTENDO SWITCH. Like, how's that even legal
So most companies/devs will be able to just publish on App Store, and apple can after that "verify" that the app confirms with their standards.
Tim Sweeney is using language in a way to make it appear as though the recent ruling ordered Fortnite's reinstatement, and a lot of people are falling for it.
They even went as far as to blocking downloads from third-party app stores:
> The Verge has confirmed that the game is no longer available to download on iOS from the Epic Games Store or the alternative marketplace AltStore PAL in the EU, where it had previously been available. It’s not yet clear if Apple blocked the game’s availability through those stores, or if Epic itself chose to make it unavailable. We’ve reached out to both Apple and Epic for comment.
That tells you the reach into how Apple can block app installs even from third-party app stores.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43896104
To be clear I think Apple is in the wrong here and the App Store tax is absurd. But what court decision says that Epic won?
The judge didn’t say Fortnite had to be let back on the App Store. She said that Apple needed to allow payments through external payment processors. Apple can’t force Epic to use their payment system anymore, but they absolutely still can decide they don’t want to distribute Fortnite on the App Store. It’s their store.