[Dylan16807]

So the small apps, where Apple has to spend more hours of work for every dollar of revenue, get a discount. And the big apps, where all they have to do is transmit more copies off their servers, don't get a discount.

I have no idea what Apple's plan is between this and the Epic fight, but it's fun to watch!

[holstvoogd]

Seems reasonable, lower the barriers to entry to expand your reach & tax the rich to generate the revenue basically. Plenty of business have models like this, where start-ups and small companies get a much lower price then 'enterprises'.

And it's not like Epic isn't making enough money of their apps I'm going to assume.

[adventured]

> I have no idea what Apple's plan is between this and the Epic fight, but it's fun to watch!

Their plan is to turn down the political heat/volume coming from the underdog stories (David vs Apple), which are potentially endless in numbers. Apple risks a PR death by a thousand cuts from all the negative stories, a never ending bad PR run. Few have sympathy for the giant companies and conflicts between giant companies, so Apple isn't too worried about big apps not getting further discounts. The media loves to write underdog vs big bad giant corporation stories, they sell (and draw a lot of unnecessary anti-trust attention); Apple wants to throw water on that first and foremost.

[andrewjl]

Revenue across the App Store has a power law distribution. This discount has minimal financial impact on services revenue and results in a massive boost of goodwill for the platform.

[villgax]

I guess the volume of smaller apps is way more than bigger ones, maybe bigger ones are able to take advantage of easy to CDNs than storing lots of unique apps globally?

[dbbk]

The Epic fight is just Epic making PR for themselves, it's not a real case.

[Dylan16807]

It doesn't have to be a real court case to be a real fight.

And they're also making PR against Apple's cut which is a very good thing.