[xendipity]

Woah - Epic says they would release a competing app store if it weren't for "Apple's illegal restraints".

> But for Apple’s illegal restraints, Epic would provide a competing app store on iOS devices, which would allow iOS users to download apps in an innovative, curated store and would provide users the choice to use Epic’s or another third-party’s in-app payment processing tool."

Part 16, in the Intro.

[mike_d]

Which holds zero legal weight, because Apple can point to them doing exactly that on Android to avoid paying Google Pay fees. They abandoned the plan about a year later because consumers didn't want to use it.

[discardable_dan]

To be fair, if Epic does this I won't want to use it (just like with their desktop client).

[supermatt]

> They abandoned the plan about a year later because consumers didn't want to use it.

Due to high friction caused by android treating third party stores (and the apps instalkled through them) differently to the google play store - which will most definitely be an upcoming complaint...

[maps7]

I hope Apple are forced to allow this

[Talyen42]

I don't.

I really don't want to troubleshoot my parents iPhones after they install arbitrary code from the Alternative App Store #12 after clicking on a banner ad run by an anonymous chinese entity. Holy shit.

[ahnick]

Then your parents can still use Apple's app store in such a world and pay a premium. In fact, in such a world your parent's would probably benefit too, because Apple would actually face competition and would reduce their 30% to a more reasonable level.

[canttestthis]

Apple builds trust in the iPhone by curating apps that are allowed to be installed on it. When I buy an iPhone for my family I _trust_ that Apple is doing the right thing and will prevent its users from harm. I wouldn't have that same level of trust if it was easy to just add alternate App Stores on the device.

[ahnick]

Apple curates and still bad actor apps make it onto the app store. It's not like Apple has a 100% pure record here. There is also no reason to think that Apple is the only company in the world capable of carrying out curation. If Epic Games, had their own app store I doubt they would want to allow apps on their app store that violated their users' privacy and other malicious activities just as much as Apple. Maybe you personally would never feel comfortable trusting Epic Games, but why should others even be denied the option?

[leadingthenet]

They’re not, they can use Android. If you buy an iPhone, this is an implicit choice you make.

[RIMR]

lmao, you sound like Apple's PR team...

[Jellyd]

The alternative here isn't keeping things the way they are, it is giving way to the proliferation of the freedom to innovate on other platforms due to lack of regulation. And in the current setting that means eventually you'll be troubleshooting your parents' Chinese phones.

[rednerrus]

The app store is already a wasteland. Having multiple stores will be an absolute nightmare.

[oh_sigh]

If you are in control of your parent's device, then you could just set an admin password and not allow other app stores to be utilized.

Or, you should tell your parents to not have a phone, then you will never be on the hook for tech support at all if that is really your concern.

And I love the implied ageism and xenophobia in your post too.

[RIMR]

What a self-serving reason...

[viro]

why? so epic can make more money? they don't care about you ... they just want more money

[ahnick]

It's not about Epic or any single company. It is really about consumers. Allowing multiple app store choices on mobile devices would lead to competition and really highlight the fact that 30% is far too much to be asking as a tax for the app store.

[viro]

You say that but google has literally proven that to not be true.

[ahnick]

2 things here:

1) Amazon has been running there own app store successfully and that has worked out well enough for them that they continue to do so and a lot of Kindle Fire owners seem to enjoy that experience.

2) Few companies are Amazon though and the ability to operate 3rd party software outside of the purview of Google's own store is severely hamstrung for most others. This has also been called out by Epic Games previously.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/21/21229943/epic-games-fortn...

Google puts software downloadable outside of Google Play at a disadvantage, through technical and business measures such as scary, repetitive security pop-ups for downloaded and updated software, restrictive manufacturer and carrier agreements and dealings, Google public relations characterizing third party software sources as malware, and new efforts such as Google Play Protect to outright block software obtained outside the Google Play store.

So even Google may eventually face legal issues regarding their anti-competitive app store practices. If big tech is forced to legitimately compete with other app stores, then continuing to charge a 30% fee will become untenable.

[NoSorryCannot]

No, they haven't. Android usually permits software beyond the Google Play store but this is deliberately an obscure and deeply second-rate option. Android does what it can to steer users away.

[badwolf]

Epic literally tried to only have Fortnite available via direct apk/themselves. It did not go well.

[gameswithgo]

That actually isn't true. Tim Sweeny has majority control and does care. For him this is ideological.

[viro]

umm Tim Sweeny? you mean the first person to do store exclusives in PC gaming?

[dgellow]

Store exclusives have been a thing since forever.

[La1n]

It's funny cause that is literally how steam started too.

[viro]

where on PC?

[chrisan]

That'd be Blizzard without even googling if there was a steam exclusive

[ironmagma]

As an indie developer, entering into the Apple ecosystem really isn’t economically worth it considering the risk of total annihilation on top of the huge chunk of revenue you lose. An open ecosystem would change that calculus significantly.

[timwaagh]

Exactly we want them to have more money. That is the reason. We just love fortnight so much that epic receiving more money is our greatest dream.

[cj]

> they just want more money

They charge $10 for 1000 credits when purchasing via Apple.

They charge $7 for 1000 credits when paying Epic directly.

They aren't making more money with the change. Although there's nothing stopping them from increasing the price in the future.

[skizm]

I think it is $10 via apple, $8 via Epic. They're gaining an extra $1 on direct purchase, but that isn't really the point of this.

[Macha]

I mean, they already have the infrastructure on PC, and third party app stores exist on Android already (most notably Amazon's).