[canofbars]

The real problem here is that companies are forced to accept apples terms. Because apple controls every level of the stack, to opt out of the App store ToS you have to opt out of the store, the OS, and the hardware.

If there was a way to install apps outside of the store this would not be an issue. Most users and developers would still use the app store since it provides value but devs who feel that they can supply their own marketing and payment processing can do it themselves.

[applecrazy]

> devs who feel that they can supply their own marketing and payment processing can do it themselves.

The issue I have with that is that then a ton of companies think it's a good idea to ship a crappy "launcher" that needs to run on startup, taking up resources in the background while providing little to no added functionality. We can see that with PC games; it used to be just Steam, but now there's the Epic Games Launcher, Origin, GoG, and a bunch of more obscure launchers that need to be installed to play particular games.

[simion314]

And this is a good thing, competition between this stores is good for the users, some users got free games, some developers got better deals.

The "needs to launch on startup" is FALSE , you can have this launchers set no to start at all and you launch the game and the launcher will start if needed (not all Steam games need Steam in background).

FYI GOG launcher is optional, you can just download the game from the website with a browser and then install it as in old times.

Competition is good and except the Epic drama I did not see anyone complaining the GOG, HumbleBundle, itch.io or downloading from Patreon is a bad thing for PC. I expect though if Apple blocks all launchers on the new OSX for ARM then an army of people will say that downloading a small game directly from Patron is too complicated and insecure for the average Apple user mind.

[danielheath]

It's not a good thing that I need 6 stores installed to play the games I've bought, each with their own updater pulling several gigabytes a week off the net just to keep the store app up-to-date.

I'd be interested to see whether any jurisdiction would hand down a consumer mandate for unbundling the DRM component from the storefront app; the former only updates occasionally.

[simion314]

Better to have the option of 5 stores that you can launch when and if you want then only have a Windows/Apple Store that will have more expensive games, will censor stuff based on "american values", will DRM shit so you can't say swap a .dll with something that works better(some old games that work bad on Win10 can be fixed by using a different directx.dll), you could not mod the games - basically you are telling PC people that a console is the best thing because it has 1 small advantage but it fucks you in 12 different ways(more expensive stuff and no freedom)

[Gorbzel]

Simply put, none of the things you’ve said are better are actually better.

Launcher apps are garbage, but you just move right past that to one single game that can be downloaded directly out of hundreds that can’t.

[simion314]

Fortnite is not the only game rejected by Apple. There are many small games that have versions for Windows,Mac,Linux and Android but not iOS.

You are ignoring that except the exclusives you can game most of your games on one store. I do not support exclusivity for one store either and I would prefer I always had the option to buy the products directly from the developer. Like my Intellij subscription I don't want that Microsoft or other big american company gets 30% of the money this hard working developers deserve because I am forced to use a middle man.

[phepranto]

I find it hard to believe that all stores combined patch a single gigabyte in a week, let alone every store patching multiple gigabytes. The size of the stores and their patches are negligible compared to installing any modern game.

[TeMPOraL]

Competition is good for the customer when the goods are commodities. Media - books, songs, videogames - are mostly non-substitutable goods: if you want to watch Star Wars, you won't settle for an episode of Friends instead. As soon as exclusive releases are allowed, customer benefits from competition evaporate.

[tasssko]

the commenter is right and you have missed the point. There is no competition in this space. You can only get Fortnite from the Epic Games Launcher.

[AnthonyMouse]

But the Epic Games Launcher is free and doesn't preclude you from using any other launcher/store for anything else, so how does that harm competition?

By contrast, if I want iMessage on my phone, Epic has to distribute Fortnight to me though Apple.

[Fnoord]

The irony is that Epic pays companies a sack of money to have exclusive right for a title, to have it temporarily only available on EGS. I don't like to be bound to any launcher or store. Apple doesn't force you to only use their own launcher; only on their own platform, or if you use their platform to complete the sale (which sounds as odd as it is).

[AnthonyMouse]

> The irony is that Epic pays companies a sack of money to have exclusive right for a title, to have it temporarily only available on EGS.

But that doesn't require you to use EGS for anything else, and the cost of using multiple game stores is minor, because installing them is free.

And how do you mean that Apple doesn't force you to use only their own launcher and platform? If I want iMessage, I not only have to buy their phone hardware, and their platform, and get it from their store, I also have to get everything else from their store even if I don't want to. To avoid this I would have to buy two separate phones at a cost of hundreds of dollars, with two separate phone contracts and phone numbers, and then carry them both around. Nobody is going to do that, whereas installing multiple game stores on your PC is the rule rather than the exception, exactly because you can easily have more than one on the same device.

[simion314]

Apple is even worse:

- as a developer you don't get "a sack of money" but you get a 30% tax (larger then Epic

- as a user you don't get free games, discounts or the option to wait for the exclusivity to expire. On top of that you will never(probably) have the option to touch the game files and mod it.

[pjmlp]

If I want a store competition I go to shopping mall.

The only store that has a place on my devices is the OS vendor store.

[harpratap]

No one's stopping you from using only Apple store. Why force your choice on other consumers? Let people decide what's best for them

[pjmlp]

They have the choice to buy other brands.

[dr_dshiv]

They also have the choice to avoid smartphones altogether. What they want, though, is the ability to use apple hardware and non-apple software. The only reason they can't is because Apple won't let them, unless they pay a 30% commission

[rhn_mk1]

The GoG launcher doesn't fit here as an example; it's entirely optional.

[Crosseye_Jack]

Unless you want to play online.

Some of the titles on the store allow peer to peer connection multiplayer which doesn’t have any drm checks. But most titles that use servers to simplify matchmaking or connection with other players have a check that validates that gog galaxy is logged into an account that has purchased the game.

[thaumasiotes]

No, GoG Galaxy is not entirely optional. It is required to run many newer games, and can be required even if you're not trying to play multiplayer.

I don't understand how this is supposed to be compatible with GoG's marketing as "the DRM-free home for games".

[speeder]

What game requires GoG Galaxy?

EDIT: even googled it, found out Darkest Dungeon by default install a version that does need GoG Galaxy, but the DRM-free version is available on GoG site too, just need to choose that downloader instead. But that was it. Didn't found any other obvious complaints of GoG Galaxy being required.

[thaumasiotes]

Northgard requires Galaxy for single-player content. It's not subtle about it.

Your response says more about what you can tell with a quick google search than anything else.

I'm fascinated that I've been complaining about this here on HN for months, and the only response I ever get -- which comes up every time -- is "what are you talking about, that's not true". This isn't a matter of opinion. It's not even difficult to check. And yet, there are so many people whose worldview apparently rests on the opposite of the facts.

[Crosseye_Jack]

Looks like in the case of Northgard their conquest mode has some server side stuff happening in that mode which then requires the use of GOG Galaxy :-S

https://www.gog.com/forum/northgard/warning_gog_galaxy_is_re...

[rhn_mk1]

When checking Northgard, Galaxy seems to be required for "online content". So it at least seems right that Galaxy is not optional for some stuff.

However, I haven't found any evidence that Galaxy is required for single player. In fact, I found evidence to the contrary: the game has a Linux version, where Galaxy is not available.

[vbezhenar]

If you don't like their launchers, don't use their apps, it's simple as that. They're free to create a software in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not to use that software.

[DonaldPShimoda]

If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone, it's simple as that. They're free to manage their platform in a way they feel appropriate. You're free to use or not use that platform.

---

I'm not necessarily saying I think Apple is in the right, but your argument doesn't hold because it works equally well when applied at a higher level, which runs counter to your point.

[canofbars]

>If you don't like the App Store, don't use an iPhone

This is not the main issue, its on the other end. If you are a developer, and you don't like the App Store, you have no options. You can't publish on an alt store because those are not allowed. So your only option is to not provide services to 50% of your customers and thats assuming the google play store doesn't have the same issue you are avoiding.

A real world example of this is vape companies provide an app which lets you do things like lock your vape so kids can't use it. Apple said those apps are not allowed on the app store. The vape company has no options, they just can't sell products to apple users now.

The problem is these tech companies hold way to much power. It would be like if 2 landlords owned literally every single block of land in the entire country. Now normally it would be fair for the landlord to pick which types of businesses to rent out to but when both options say your business isn't accepted and the only alternative is to build your own island in the ocean and create a civilisation on it so you can open your store then something is seriously wrong.

[jbverschoor]

Same for Nintendo, PS, Xbox, Android. And the other 'appstores' - steam, epic, etc

Quite frankly, the lockdown of the OS and rejection of this is one of the primary reasons I'm on iPhone.

[tasssko]

I couldn't agree more. It will only get worse if companies are allowed to create their own Appstores. Using these devices is already a difficult user experience we should be doing more to protect consumers who have already invested in the ecosystem. Apple is indirectly doing this.

[tomxor]

> Quite frankly, the lockdown of the OS and rejection of this is one of the primary reasons I'm on iPhone.

_You_ are neither the vendor OR the citizen in the parent comment's metaphor, trying to build or be part of a civilization in the middle of the ocean.

Please do not try to justify a restriction because you happen to personally be happy with the current offering, the world is larger than you. There being more freedoms for others will not stop you from restricting yourself.

[canofbars]

Yes all of those examples should also be liberated.

[vbezhenar]

So you're happy as a consumer that developer's freedom is taken away from them, but you have more freedom. That's understandable, but you should realize that some developers value their freedom and will just avoid such a locked-down platform. There are plenty of apps missing in iPhone because of that.

[Lev1a]

That's not so simple with the hypocrite named Epic who preach about competition being better for all while buying exclusive distribution rights from devs/publishers on PC, sometimes even for games that had been long announced to be coming out on Steam and/or were crowdfunded on that and other premises.

Case in point: "Satisfactory". I was pretty excited about the game when it was first shown, then found later

* it would be removed from Steam,

* I'd have to get an account for another store,

* use a store made by some incompetents who couldn't implement basic functionality like a "shopping cart" even months after release (does it have one by now?)

* give part of my money through Epic to fucking Tencent and install a piece of Chinese spyware on my PC in order to run it. Also no implicit Linux support because no Proton and because Sweeney loves to bend over for Microsoft exclusively.

[jfim]

You can buy it on Steam now: https://store.steampowered.com/app/526870/Satisfactory/

[Fnoord]

Sure, years later.

Compare to Iron Harvest, for example.

You could invest in the development via Kickstarter. Which boils down to making the project happen (due to lack of otherwise investors aka due to crowdfunding). Now, basically right after release, you can buy the game from Steam, too, but you pay full price for it (in contrast to the crowdfunders).

Contrast this to EGS. Stuff gets released on Steam many months later, say 6 months or a year, due to EGS getting the sack of money for being the sole distributor. Then, they release for full price on Steam. Why would I pay full price for a 6-12 month old game? I won't.

[colejohnson66]

A recent example of Epic exclusives was Borderlands 3. It was highly anticipated, and then it came out that it would be exclusive to EGS for 6 months. I refuse to use EGS (for my own reasons), so when the hype died down after a few months and it arrived on Steam, I forgot to buy it. In fact, I still keep forgetting.

[Lev1a]

After they had held the game hostage for a year my excitement for the game was very much gone and I didn't buy it in the end.

[drexlspivey]

That argument is pretty rich coming from epic considering that they sign exclusive deals for games pretty aggressively for their Epic games store.

[AnthonyMouse]

When has a developer ever been forced into an exclusive deal? They get paid extra for that. It's pro-competitive, because it's what allows new stores to get off the ground, meanwhile nothing stops you from using Epic's store and Steam and five others at the same time. The biggest problem with Apple's store isn't what they allow into it, it's that people can't use it and any other store at the same time.

[tssva]

Android allows installation of apps outside of the Google Play store but Epic is pursuing the same path against Google.

[Kuinox]

Yes, for a different reason. Epics wanted a deal with oneplus for to have epic store preinstalled on their device, and google pressured oneplus to cancel the deal.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/13/21368395/fortnite-epic-ga...

[tssva]

Although brought up in the lawsuit it is not a basis for any of the counts in the lawsuit. The counts in the lawsuit all go to the same conduct they are accusing Apple of.

[colejohnson66]

Didn’t Epic initially go around the Play Store and require you to download an installer from their website? And then it turned out that it was a good malware vector? That’s what I fear will happen if we get alternate stores: lax security leading to malware.

[ac29]

Yes, it had a bug that could lead to a different malicious application being able to install its own APKs: https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/112630336

[Kuinox]

Make it that you must sign the binaries. Google distribute/manage the keys, but are not allowed to veto legal things.

[colejohnson66]

That serves no purpose. If Google can’t veto any signature requests, it’s no different than having no signature at all; You’ll just have signed malware.

[Kuinox]

They must have a valid reason, not "they don't use our payment processing"

[gigatexal]

I see this argument everywhere and it makes no sense. The ToS is up to the owner of the platform. It's the same reason I don't use Facebook: I think the company and what they do with my data is diametrically opposed to my way of thinking so I voted to leave by deleting my account.

Developer's do have a choice: abide by the ToS and enjoy the trappings of a user base that tends to spend more on applications be they subscriptions or one-offs than Android or vote with your wallets and don't abide by it but to cry foul and try to usurp one's will on the company that built the platform makes no sense.

Some counter arguments:

If the ToS of the app store are likened to the tax laws in the USA then failing to abide the law that requires taxes to be paid is the same thing here as Epic using their own payments system to subvert the iOS tax of 30%.

The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit).

After years of investment in the iPhone and building the ecosystem around it the AppStore is just one way to monetize that. A 30% cut might sound high but they did spend tens(hundreds?) of billions in R&D and this is just one way, among many, that the iPhone is being monetized, this is just a return on investment on top of the sales price of the phone.

All of the arguments I have heard from those in the Epic camp strike me as temper tantrums thrown by children.

[realusername]

> The ToS is up to the owner of the platform

When there's only two companies fully controlling the next era of computing platforms, there's some argument that they have way too much power in their hand.

> The game is like a car that drives on a road. The car is Epic's Fortnite. The road is a toll road. The road was built by Apple. Many cars can drive on this road but must pay a fee. (The analogy isn't 1:1 but work with me a bit).

Except the phone isn't owned by Apple, and that's why every analogy similar to this one fails.

[danbolt]

We better start launching apps for Pinephones and asking MNT Research to make a phone, then.

[canofbars]

The simple solution to this is a law requiring that all general purpose computing devices (Lets define this as something that the user can install and run programs on) must provide a feature to run unauthenticated 3rd party software. Android, Windows and Linux already allow this and macOS used to.

IMO this should extend to game consoles too. You should be able to run homebrew games and tools on a console.

[wrsh07]

I agree with this completely. (And also don't think the current laws support Epic)

However, I am curious about what happens when you force xbox to run unauthenticated 3rd party software. The reason why consoles can be priced the way they are (very low, usually taking losses) is because the company makes it back on game sales.

So what happens? Microsoft is in a solid position with its "stream to system" upcoming hardware, but I think this will force console prices to go up.

As soon as you can run anything on a console, the creators of the console no longer have the same LTV per customer (gamers will buy from cheaper app stores). Additionally, you'll have new demand for consoles for eg deep learning applications on xbox (this increases the value of a console)

I think this is fundamentally bad for the console ecosystem, although I think Microsoft (and its console division) will be fine because of their investments in "x cloud"

[lawtalkinghuman]

BonziBuddy for iOS is what the world is crying out for.

[danbolt]

I feel like this would be an easier sell for me if there didn't exist any competitor devices wherein you could run unauthenticated 3rd party software. As a consumer you have the option to purchase those devices instead or even consider reverse-engineering the locked-down product.

> IMO this should extend to game consoles too. You should be able to run homebrew games and tools on a console.

That argument there appeals to me emotionally a lot more though, I will admit! It's easy to admire Commodore 64 programmers before my time, or when I wrote Xbox 360 games using XNA in university.

[realusername]

That's exactly what I will do myself, in a few weeks I will receive my Pinephone and will port my existing personal finance app onto it.

But legal changes also need to come from above as well to ensure a fair computing market. I'm doing it more as a symbolic protest than any hope I will contribute towards that.

[gigatexal]

It is owned by Apple in that they own the OS. If I wanted full autonomy I’d root my phone. The whole appeal of the phone is the secure cohesive experience not the hodge-podge setup of the PC for example. It’s much more of a console in that sense.

[realusername]

> The whole appeal of the phone is the secure cohesive experience not the hodge-podge setup of the PC for example

I doubt non-tech people even know about the walled-garden or the anti-competitive practices of both companies, they just buy their device based on features, screen and camera and that's it. Just have a look at a mainstream phone review video on YouTube, only those points will be detailed.

To consumers it's clearly the next area of computing. Smartphones are even fully replacing computers in developing markets. To developers however, it's an unhealthy market owned by two uncountable companies where they could be banned from at any point very easily.

There's multiple angles where the current situation is an issue, there's the anti competitive nature of the market where an increasing chunk of the economy is based on but there's also the limited propriety rights of the owners of the phone.

[gigatexal]

I’m no iOS dev but I work in the tech field and am well into the ecosystem of Apple but also follow the company both in podcasts and online and am fully aware of the walled garden and it’s a feature for me it a bug.

Also, I get the sense that people are trying to impose OSS-isms on Apple when they both have no power to and also Apple has no reason to abide.

[realusername]

But non-developers have no idea about that, let's be honest. Just open-up a mainstream Youtube video about the latest iphone and check whenever they talk about the app review process (hint: never).

> Also, I get the sense that people are trying to impose OSS-isms on Apple when they both have no power to and also Apple has no reason to abide.

That's why we need anti-trust investigations to both Google and Apple, having a good chunk of the modern economy relying on just two companies which don't even appear to have any competition pressure is just unacceptable.

[tasssko]

A better analogy is the game is like a ride at a theme park. The theme park was built by Apple. Many companies can make games/rides for the theme park but must pay a share of revenue from each customer going on rides. You can go on a ride at the theme park but you pay an entrance fee for the theme park and you pay to go on the rides.

[krtkush]

But what if there are only 2 theme parks in the world and ride makers have no option but to comply with whatever rules these 2 theme parks come up with?

[gigatexal]

In this world, yes. There are only two that have risen to the top because the market (you and me and everyone else) voted with our wallets to create them.

[arvinsim]

Are theme parks essential to your daily life?

Because that what smartphones has become.

[gigatexal]

Bruv, it's an analogy... people are so pedantic smh

[tasssko]

Fortnite essential to daily life?

Actually nothing on my phone is essential to daily life.

[realusername]

That's the same issue with this analogy, unlike the theme park, the phone owner isn't Apple, there is no way around it.

Additionally, maybe we should have higher standards for technology which a good chunk of the world economy is relying on rather than applying some entertainment standards.

[harpratap]

You absolutely cannot live without Whatsapp/wechat in certain countries, you have no option. It's the same for developers, there's no way you can thrive without catering to iOS.

And you examples for taxes and roads are socialist services. The rates on tolls and taxes are decided by people elected representatives. Apple decided the rates on their own, not by Government mandate.