Mostly a roundup of whats coming in the trial but I find Ars one of the best sites for tech news without bias.
Did not see that coming. What a revelation!
You can see some of the exhibits from today at: Box
Although this wont be very relevant for the case, the below document highlights the sneaking epic would attempt to get around the fact that without being on the play store they were missing out on users because funnily enough the stores work well and even when epic could do what they wanted on android it didnt help and they wanted to sneak around the problem.
They planned to launch a “fortnite authenticator” that would be on the play store which would advertise how to direct download fornite on the device so they could get the benefits of a play store listing while paying nothing.
Read bottom to top: Box
So even when they have full access and can launch their own app store (which is on the cards it appears) they still couldnt get around the fact that they were not on the primary app store most would use and rather than pay for the sales it would generate they would try to bypass it and get both the promotion and the gain for free.
This is what would happen on iOS. I can see epic telling devs using unreal engine on iOS to add linkbacks to their store etc if they put it on the apple app store to drive their own agenda.
Following on from yesterday’s revelations, I think at this point if there was any reasonable doubt left to their motives here, that’s out the window now. I think it’s very clear that greed is the driving force here, however they’ve tried to dress it up in the public, Epic never really cared.
Their argument that the App Store is a monopoly is just too tainted now IMO, and I don’t see them winning this at all. Apple’s defence seems sound in logic too.
I don’t think the App Store is a monopoly, nor do I think it’s anti consumer. There may be an argument that certain aspects could perhaps be construed as anti-competitive, but that’s Spotify’s and Tile’s battle. The EU seem to be standing behind Spotify on that front, and if it comes to it, I’d rather Apple make changes before we have politicians redesigning the software we use, because that will be a disaster for all of us.
And this bit made me LOL:
Is this the guy that was at one of our rehearsals?
I love all these trials, if only for the amount of behind the scenes info that we’d never otherwise have access to.
I think there’s very little chance that Epic wins this. But at the same time I also doubt that Apple is going to come out of it looking great either.
Not so sure on this. Epic’s credibility was in tatters from before the trial started. Nothing really came to light that painted Apple negatively to me, so I don’t see that changing in the trial.
If anything, the emails have improved my perception of them. They’re so unexpectedly informal and succinct. There’s a lot of Steve Jobs in the way they communicate with each other and I love that. The culture is very startup like.
This is brilliant.
Absolutely brilliant! Signal are on fire lately!
Epic defintiely isn’t the poster child of App Store oppression and the discovery doesn’t seem to have done them any favours.
But it is super interesting that only they’re being painted as greedy when the whole trial is essentially about two Tech giants fighting over money.
I think that portrayal comes down to two things
- It’s Epic Games, we know their history.
- This lawsuit is purely out of intent to increase their own profit margins.
Apple make a lot of money, granted, but they’re not proactively trying to increase that through litigation. Neither are they acting like this is about money for them. To Epic, it’s about money, to Apple, their angle is protecting their users. Yes they earn money from doing that. But none of their actions are contradicting their argument which is in contrast to Epic.
I’m thinking bigger picture.
There are plenty of other witnesses testifying, presumably at least some of which have better credibility than Epic.
And even if Apple wins, you can bet that they’re hating having their dirty laundry washed in public.
This is all just more ammo for politicians / governments worldwide to help builds their antitrust cases and move for a legislative remedy.
More interesting disclosure.
This one is interesting too. Curiosity gets me thinking here. If Xbox were to, say, reposition xCloud as a service that grants the user access to an xbox in the cloud, rather than a cloud gaming library, is that perhaps a loophole that could allow them access onto the App Store?
I think there’s a fine line in there somewhere which somehow fits into what Apple allows.
Obviously the main Xbox app has had streaming access to your own Xbox for a few months now.
And I believe there’s an app still live which grants you PC streaming because it’s literally giving you control of a whole computer, as opposed to just games?
So possibly? But equally I think if it was gonna be a vaguely good user experience and work, they probably would have taken it?
Lmao sorry. Didn’t even open the article to see that was the one being talked about
Well I never!
Good move Google!