Epic doesn't need to pursue Apple iPhone customers they same way Epic doesn't need to pursue Sony Bravia customers.

This is the same as Bungee not needing to pursue Playstation customers to make Halo what it is.

IPhone is a general computing platform so that argument doesn't hold water.

Why is it more of a "general computing platform" than an Xbox or a Playstation or a Bravia?

All of those platforms have stores, all of them allow digital downloads of software that executes, all of those have browsers.

What makes the iPhone "general purpose" where the others are not?

Probably the fact that no one made a fuss over consoles. I'd argue the same rules should start applying for them as well.

But there was nothing stopping Microsoft from releasing halo onto the playstation.

There is nothing stopping anyone from developing a game for these consoles.

Well the unfair part is what is being discussed. So ignoring that would be ignoring the whole point of this.

My conversation with you was entirely about "the iPhone being a general purpose computer".

It seems we have both settled that either an iPhone is not general purpose, or all consoles, TVs or IOT devices with downloadable content are general purpose devices.

If you'd like we can now start discussing if the price Apple charges is fair.

I've already stated, the market decides to buy iPhones understanding (even appreciating) that the user cannot side-load non-Apple approved apps (other than through a less trusted channel i.e. the browser). As such the market through demand, has decided there is a niche ecosystem where 30% fees for in app purchases are appropriate and fair.

What are your thoughts?

Sure make them general computers too. I would rather have all of these devices give more choices to users.

However the current focus is on Apple due to their size.

I'll reiterate:

I've already stated, the market decides to buy iPhones understanding (even appreciating) that the user cannot side-load non-Apple approved apps (other than through a less trusted channel i.e. the browser). As such the market through demand, has decided there is a niche ecosystem where 30% fees for in app purchases are appropriate and fair.

Why is this market dynamic an issue given there are so many games and tons of competition on and off iOS?

Just cause you both bridged from my comment, first thanks.

But I disagree that consumers agree to 30% because they continue to buy expecting sideloading to be relegated from relevancy.

If polled, I doubt consumers would guess the royalty is even that high. Someone should run a survey.

I am in general, very favorable toward Apple as a company. I’ve commented before that I believe in the company’s stance toward privacy. I see Apple as a benevolent dictator in its continued security restrictions on MacOS. With some exception to his deference to Trump, I admire Tim Cook as he presents himself as a person.

However, I have also sold apps through the App Store.

And there’s no real way around Apple’s massive financial success. It’s so big, if it were a person they would be burned at the stake.

There is an upper bound on reasonable net income.

This isn’t even about tax revenue, it is about any developer getting more than 70 cents on the dollar for their work.

Getting an app into the App Store barely means anything; you have to market it. Sure it is “safe” and incredibly easy to install. But good luck thinking that because you see a Ready For Sale message your app is going to be a hit.

In my experience, Apple is snobbish in interaction with developers.

At least historically, there is very little goodwill, even when Apple magically decides to “feature“ your work. Which is again self-serving because they take their cut regardless.

I am having a hard time defending Apple’s rate. Not because of Epic but because of someone like me who wants to sell software on the best (and only other serious) mobile platform.

> If polled, I doubt consumers would guess the royalty is even that high. Someone should run a survey.

This is definitely the right mental model. I am fully onboard for more data.

However, to clarify my previous point when I said "customers agree" I meant customers understand and are generally accepting of "priced in" convenience. For example, in some convenience stores they offer a discount for using cash or debit. Most big stores tho, "price in the cost of credit transactions". Customers understand this and are happy for the convenience and happy for the points.

With the Apple store, digital goods are 30% more expensive, and seemingly customers are ok with it because they are making purchases, while getting the conveniences of the AppStore vetting, refunds process, permissions model, advertising model, privacy, etc.

> Epic doesn't need to pursue Apple iPhone customers

Apple does not get to decide how the market operates. Only government gets to do that. Your statement makes it clear that they are committing anti-competitive practices.

Your statement seems inaccurate.

Doesn't the Sony Playstation, or Microsoft's Xbox get to control how they operate?

Don't movie theaters get to decide which movies are shown/not?

Don't service providers like a nail salon or grocery store get to deny service? Other than for "protected categories" like sex, race, religion. e.g. "No shirt, no shoes, no service".

When these behaviors are being used to stifle competition they should be stopped too.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "stifle"?

Fortnite is a clear example of a success story of competition on the iOS platform. Epic has been making tons of money (billions in profit) for years thanks for Fortnite and in some part to iOS and the AppStore.

This current battle between Epic and Apple is about profit sharing and that's all. Have you seen the number of successful games on the iOS platform? Competition is thriving! But I do agree both companies are greedy.