24 ms·

> I guess they want to pick a fight Are you referring to Apple or Epic? It seems that Epic are the ones who wanted to pick a fight, for better or worse. edit:

> I guess they want to pick a fight Are you referring to Apple or Epic? It seems that Epic are the ones who wanted to pick a fight, for better or worse. edit: it is amusing to see this post get so many upvotes and so many downvotes. Obviously this is a very polarized community w.r.t. Apple.

klmadfejno 6y ago
Epic picked the fight but this is Apple's move at the end of the day. They could allow Epic to give the option to buy through apple or buy for cheaper skipping apple. It wouldn't be a particularly rational business decision to do so, but they do need to own the fact that putting their foot down is their call.
- hellofunk 6y ago
  > They could allow Epic to give the option to buy through apple or buy for cheaper skipping apple. How do you propose that Apple could give this option to Epic? If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone, so it is a fight that Epic picked and Apple is choosing not to continue that fight, that's all. You make it sound like it would have been just fine if Apple let Epic do what they were doing. We can debate that Apple should change its rules for everyone, but it sounds like you think they should have just let Epic continue violating their policies.
  - justinclift 6y ago
    > If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone ... Er... yes?
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      The point is that Apple doesn’t want to do that, so if they do it for one person, they’d have to do it to all. Ultimately doing something they didn’t want to do in the first place.
      - hu3 6y ago
        They already did that. "Documents show Apple gave Amazon special treatment to get Prime Video into App Store" https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/30/21348108/apple-amazon-prime-video-app-store-special-treatment-fee-subscriptions https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/30/21348108/apple-amazon-pri...
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    Apple is already allowing Epic's parent company to skirt the rules. Tencent runs the biggest app store in China.
    - nerdkid93 6y ago
      Tencent is not a parent company of Epic, they are a minority shareholder of 40% [1], while Epic's CEO is the owner with >50% ownership. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games
  - jonatanheyman 6y ago
    > If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone Apple is already allowing Amazon to "skirt their rules".
  - klmadfejno 6y ago
    You're writing this as if Apple gets a sort of status quo advantage. Their policies aren't law. They're making the choice to enforce this and they're fully capable of not doing so. It's Apple's choice. Would Apple likely have to forfeit more exceptions to other companies if they did this? Probably yes. Still Apple's decision.

klmadfejno 6y ago

Epic picked the fight but this is Apple's move at the end of the day. They could allow Epic to give the option to buy through apple or buy for cheaper skipping apple. It wouldn't be a particularly rational business decision to do so, but they do need to own the fact that putting their foot down is their call.

hellofunk 6y ago
> They could allow Epic to give the option to buy through apple or buy for cheaper skipping apple. How do you propose that Apple could give this option to Epic? If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone, so it is a fight that Epic picked and Apple is choosing not to continue that fight, that's all. You make it sound like it would have been just fine if Apple let Epic do what they were doing. We can debate that Apple should change its rules for everyone, but it sounds like you think they should have just let Epic continue violating their policies.
- justinclift 6y ago
  > If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone ... Er... yes?
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    The point is that Apple doesn’t want to do that, so if they do it for one person, they’d have to do it to all. Ultimately doing something they didn’t want to do in the first place.
    - hu3 6y ago
      They already did that. "Documents show Apple gave Amazon special treatment to get Prime Video into App Store" https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/30/21348108/apple-amazon-prime-video-app-store-special-treatment-fee-subscriptions https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/30/21348108/apple-amazon-pri...
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  Apple is already allowing Epic's parent company to skirt the rules. Tencent runs the biggest app store in China.
  - nerdkid93 6y ago
    Tencent is not a parent company of Epic, they are a minority shareholder of 40% [1], while Epic's CEO is the owner with >50% ownership. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Games
- jonatanheyman 6y ago
  > If they allowed Epic to skirt their rules, they'd have to do the same for everyone Apple is already allowing Amazon to "skirt their rules".
- klmadfejno 6y ago
  You're writing this as if Apple gets a sort of status quo advantage. Their policies aren't law. They're making the choice to enforce this and they're fully capable of not doing so. It's Apple's choice. Would Apple likely have to forfeit more exceptions to other companies if they did this? Probably yes. Still Apple's decision.