• Zoolander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    They already allow side-loading (albeit, admittedly, via a cumbersome mechanism). That is not what Epic is asking for. You’re either ignorant of what changes Epic is demanding here or you’re being disingenuous in your argument.

    • bamboo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apple allows sideloading with a 7 day, 3 app limit via a cumbersome process. It’s intentionally limited to make it non-viable for most people. Epic wants to be able to publish their games without using Apple’s infrastructure or paying them huge fees. I have no love for Epic but what they want is entirely reasonable.

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Got it. So you don’t actually understand what Epic is asking for and you ignored that I admitted Apple’s current sideloading is cumbersome. 99% of users do not need to sideloading apps, much less more than 1.

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        without using Apple’s infrastructure

        This is disingenuous. You can’t deliver an iOS app without Apple infrastructure. You don’t count XCode and iOS itself? You don’t think Apple will need to offer iOS settings and support for 3rd party stores? They absolutely will.

        What Epic really want is to profit from Apple’s platform and marketplace without paying anything in return.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          No other general-purpose platform demands payment just to have basic access like iOS does. macOS doesn’t, windows doesn’t, android doesn’t, ChromeOS doesn’t, linux doesn’t. And yet, the companies making these systems are all quite profitable. What makes iOS so different that it can’t follow the basic rules established by its competitors? I personally don’t care that Epic themselves happen to be slimy, they just happen to be in the right this once.

          • scarabic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            demands payment just to have basic access

            This isn’t remotely what they do, and I think you know it.

            They take a percentage of payment transactions only. You can have “basic access” without paying them a dime. I manage an app with 30 million monthly users and we pay Apple zero. Because we don’t transact inside our app.

            So you want to show me a payments platform that doesn’t take a percentage of the business? I’ll wait.

            What you’re doing here is shouting down eBay because they won’t let you sell products on their platform without taking a percentage. They’ve assembled a massive buyer market for you to tap into. They’ve given you tools to use. And WHAT??? They want a piece of the profits??? OUTRAGE!

            And to answer your question, what makes iOS so special is how much money developers make there. It dwarfs everything else you mentioned combined. You’re cheering on developer greed. They’ve absolutely flocked to this platform with its supposedly prohibitive fees. It’s hard to take your argument seriously.