Microsoft backs Epic in court filing
bbc.com
bbc.com
> In an escalation, Apple then said it would pull Epic's access to developer tools on iOS and Mac.
> But Microsoft said this would damage a "critical technology" for many third-party game creators.
> That is because Epic also owns the Unreal Engine - a tool widely used by developers from other studios to build games, virtual-reality VR experiences and special effects in major television shows and films.
> Microsoft uses the technology itself.
YIKES, how much longer is this going to go on?
I note that Epic continues to provide a version of Fortnite that violates the rules and provides the ability to buy in-game currency at a lower price through their own store, and has filed legal papers requesting that Apple be forced to support this while the court case proceeds.
This seems like an abusive move by Epic.
Two wrong don't make a right, but it's tough to see how this isn't a direct result of Epic's actions, and more to the point, something Epic could fix in less than an hour by turning off their violating store.
Turn it back when/if you win the court case, Epic. Right now it seems like you bet that Apple wouldn't call your bluff, and you lost. They did.
Fortunately for Epic, last night the court agreed that is likely a step too far.
This is nothing but defensive "don't sue us next" posturing by Microsoft. Consoles are just as general purpose as a phone. The only difference is the software veneer running on top.
Can I sell my iPhone apps?
So yes you can sell your iPhone apps the same way you sell your PS4 games i.e. by selling your entire account.
But in both cases this is against the terms and conditions and so it's likely this account will be terminated.
"If you want to play on another PS4 that isn't your primary console, you can download any game you've bought on the PS Store as long as you sign into PSN. Only you'll be able to start the games you've downloaded, and you can only be logged into two consoles at any one time: your primary PS4 and one other secondary one (like a friend's). The good news is there's no limit on the number of systems you can download your games to. You have to be logged in in order to play, but from the sounds of things this means you can share digital games with as many mates as you like, though only one of these secondary consoles will be able to play a title at any given time and you'll have to tell them your password so they can log in.
As has been mentioned before, the situation with discs remains the same as ever. Sony has reiterated that, "You can share disc games with your friends and play used disc games on your PS4 system just like you can on a PlayStation 3 system. You do not have to connect to the Internet or pay any usage fees to play used games."
It doesn't matter that you got your Microsoft-store approved copy of Gears of War from Gamestop instead of the Microsoft app store. MS still gets their cut, and that application still had to be approved by them.
The core similarity to iOS and Apple's app store is: Third party applications cannot run on the Xbox without Microsoft review, approval, and fee. It doesn't matter that it's a physical copy or not. You, an independent developer, can't just create an Xbox game and get it running without MS approval, no matter whether you wanted to sell it on the app store or as a physical copy.
I would put Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo in the same bucket of "makes hardware that can run software, but only software they approve." Whether this is something we as a society should allow, I won't comment on, but I will say that Epic should either have a grievance with all of them or none of them. Microsoft and Epic are strange bedfellows and I can't see this headline as anything other than a nervous preemption on Microsoft's part.
It's not like 80s and 90s consoles which were much more limited and more clearly streamlined to just play games (limited or no internal memory, limited input device support, though some of them supported keyboards and could even be hooked up to modems). The lock down on gaming consoles today is mostly artificial.
So if PS5 ships with a browser again does it magically shift to being a computer ?
The point is that folks expect to use their smartphones for a vast array of tasks, and they are _expected_ to use their smartphones for these tasks (by family, employers, friends, merchants, etc.) This is a social problem much more than a technical one, as I see it.
So by your definition it isn't a computer then ?
Without my phone I could not use my bank's or GitHub's account
A locked console is not much of a problem like a locked smartphone
Even a locked computer is less problematic
Apple sold 2.2 billion iPhones in ~10 years
Sony only sold 440 million consoles in ~30 years
One could argue that any console pre-CD days were specialized computing devices that required additional circuitry to run (cartridges.) But in my mind, any console that downloads contents of a storage medium to RAM and executes it is general purpose. You could make Spreadsheets for the Xbox or PlayStation or Switch, if you so chose.
In a way, I really do think the term "general purpose computer" should denote a standard for hardware that anyone can write software for. Both Microsoft and Apple are rather notorious for trying to kill this. https://www.pcworld.com/article/248342/windows_8_secure_boot...
The question of "where to draw the line" is an interesting one. People don't complain about it with consoles because you can just buy the game disks anywhere (including some list of retailers, and used from ebay/craigslist/wherever). Even though making a game for a console requires licensing and specific developer tools that - like iOS, access can be granted and revoked.
With iOS, Apple sells the idea that the iPad is a computer pretty hard. Yet it's not. It's an Apple Terminal. Just like the iPhone is.
Apple does not allow for this model.
EDIT: Apparently during the Xbox 360 days, that was ~20%. Couldn't find any newer numbers.
It's how consoles are sold at a loss, but make it up through game sales.
Microsoft receives a fee from developers that participate in their licensing program, which is generally a royalty on each sale ranging from 1% to 30% depending on the negotiating leverage of the publisher.
Developers are not required to participate in that program to sell games/software for the xBox, and some don't, but MS doesn't guarantee that any unlicensed software will work with the current version of the system or any (software) updates to the system.
The same is true of Sony as well.
They may not be required to take part in the standard distribution licensing program, but instead have the option of participating in ID@XBOX, where the games still have to be certified by MS to be allowed on the platform. This program also seems to be exclusive to digital distribution and smaller indie studios.
In the end MS is still always in a position to take revenue cuts for access to their platform, and mostly exercises it.
They also prevent other digital retailers from selling on the XBox which is very relevant for in game purchases.
It's no different to the iPhone at all. It's just less controversial because people think of their phone like a mini computer but always expected consoles to be closed.
Whether it's bought in a store or not is irrelevant.
The whole thing is slippery mass of corporate worms trying to fuck each other over for market control and the only losers are the end users. I want nothing to do with any of them any more.
Microsoft takes 30% of IAP.
Epic doesn't make Epic HW that only runs Epic software or the software you can buy on Epic store, chosen by Epic that also takes 30% on any sell
iOS devices (especially iPads) are marketed as general purpose computers and as such should be compared with Windows and Linux where software authors can:
- Distribute their app without approval of the platform owner.
- Can freely communicate about pricing and availability of their software.
Apple forbids even talking about lower prices or other platforms, essentially forcing us developers to mislead and misinform customers of their platforms. It's deeply against the principles of a free market competition.
I don't know where the "especially iPads" comes from - they are the only ones that could come even close to not being called a watch or a phone. What else apart from iPads are you talking about?
Nothing about this situation is unique to Apple.
Do you actually think they would tolerate this sort of behaviour ? Because they absolutely do not.
This censorship of in-software messaging is something Apple has normalized and is new at this scale.
In which case no distribution channel today, Apple or otherwise, allows you to use your product to advertise to buy the product cheaper elsewhere.
And using the term censorship is ridiculous. It's simply the rules of using the channel. And every channel has their own unique rules.
Tell that to the billions of people without one.
And interestingly with us in Australia being under a mandatory COVID-19 stay at home order I have not used my phone in over a week. I can do everything it does on my laptop just fine e.g. messaging, banking etc.
Food, shelter etc are necessities. Phone is just a nice to have.
Or develop iOS apps with it?
Or test them?
For many people being able to do it makes the difference between a salary and not being able to pay the rent
As much as "a nice have" it looks, and I agree it somewhat is, that's not the full story.
And there are online services that provide real-world phones if you do need to test it. Or I can just use Testflight and have beta test users do it.
> with your __non__ Apple pc?
With Apple phones that's not possible
If you develop Apple apps you need Apple HW, another hidden tax to be paid to be part of the ecosystem
I think a company shouldn't be allowed to sell billions of devices that people rely on for daily activities, but that owners cannot control
Even if life can go on without smartphones
Life can also go on without refrigerators or washing machines, but if you buy one vendors don't lock customers in
This isn’t super surprising. Microsoft is desperate to get people to develop for the Windows platform and this obviously an incentive that developers will find attractive.
As I understand it, though, there's little motivation to sell software on Android versus iOS right now due to the relative lack of sales (that is, iOS users consistently spend more an applications than Android users). I doubt there'd be much incentive to invest in an app store infrastructure on Android right now given the poor expected return (going off of my recollection, Amazon's app store has not done particularly well, what would differentiate MS's from Amazon's right now?). But if you could have the same app store on both iOS and Android, you'd place yourself in a much more compelling position (for users and developers).
And since iOS users have demonstrated a willingness to part with their money for software, it's a better target for companies like MS, Steam, Epic, and others than Android (or Android alone).
Smaller the player, smaller the market, less they have restrictions.
They have completely different ToS.
They've rebranded the Xbox Store and Windows Store to both just be the Microsoft Store and content you purchase them (e.g. Movies, Music, TV) is shared between the two. Some Games are "Xbox Play Anywhere" which means you can play them on Windows 10 or Xbox (e.g. Forza Horizon 4) but others are exclusive to either platform (e.g. Flight Simulator). Some games can be purchased for either platform individually (e.g. Halo).
Then you have the weirdness that Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 is published by Xbox Game Studios but only available on Windows 10.
Oddly enough, part of the unpopularity of the windows store comes from frequent reports of instability in the performance of the windows store software. You would think the world's biggest software company could figure out how to create a digital store that's as stable as their competition, but apparently they cannot.
Steam has longetivity. MS stores mean that you rent the product for maybe 5 years or bit more.
On Linux we just have the WorksOnMyMachine certification, which is accordingly crowdsourced.
(italics added for emphasis)
Note that Microsoft is not backing Epic in their court case against Apple, because that would be quite the glass house given the xbox (which is a 70/30 split, with virtually identical restrictions as the App Store). Instead they are merely backing them for the injunction to prevent Epic from losing immediate access to development tools.
This actually aligns incentives really well. If the user came to you because of the marketing you directly did, you don't pay much more than if you had organised the sale directly on your website.
But Microsoft is incentivised to attract people to buying apps through their shop experience directly, and if they do, they get rewarded for it. These are customers that you might not otherwise have attracted yourself, so it's not unreasonable to pay a higher amount for them.
I think it's a really great model and I wish that other stores would adopt it.
[1]https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-is-apparently-cancelin...
[2]if your app is 1) not a "game", 2) not on xbox or win8, and 3) not purchased in the "for business" or "for education" store
That being said, this isn't the underdogs vis big players. These are big players, taken on other bigger players, and just kinda incidentally helping a lot of the smaller players ... for now .. but this could just as easily turn again if one of them gets back on top.
What is the relation of the SCO lawsuit to Microsoft?
There's a giant gulf between Apple's tyrannical platform and the rest of the world.
Not really
https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/unsigned.html
It's time to stop being Apple apologists. We're engineers and these are our devices.
Apple has no right to fence in our entire industry as a walled garden. It wasn't like this until their grubby behavior with the iPhone. They're clearly taking Mac in that direction.
We have to band together to stop them.
And no, no one finds the Windows store attractive.
In my state and I think in much of the US, we're not allowed to buy directly from the car manufacturer. I never liked that law because I don't like car dealerships, but now I'm beginning to see why those laws that keep car dealerships in business might have passed.
Tesla manages to get around selling parts to consumers ... because they don't have any dealerships.
Huh, what, in what way is that law a good thing?
This is why you cannot buy a Tesla in TX.
1. Game streaming, which opens the doors to app streaming
2. Progressive Web Apps, teaming with google to create a tool to publish them directly to the Android Play Store
3. At one point, they created tools to port iOS and Android apps to windows mobile
4. Investing in React Native and Xamarin
Personally, I am not a fan since today, the quality of these apps are really bad and give developers too much power. But seems Microsoft is trying to get a foothold to relaunch Windows Mobile again once more apps switch over
And while I'm not sure if you can side load on Apple products, if you can't, don't offer your services on Apple products. Customers will move as they wakeup to their horrible business practices.
- Apple forbids developers from mentioning that the content might be cheaper elsewhere.
So that won't work.
Not quite. Apple forbids directing users to a web site from within your app to sidestep in-app purchases. If you offer any digital purchases through your app, they must use IAP.
I for one wouldn't mind if this case ended up forcing Apple to loosen their restrictions in regards to sideloading and other app stores on the device.
A pipe dream, but one can hope.
What % do they take from game sales?
Independent developers don't have used game sales and still dependent on xbox, PS Store, Steam, Humble, GoG, etc.
If Epic wins in court (and I hope they do), then the consoles are next in line to be forced open.
You say I should just move to a country with a lower VAT? Yeah not that easy.
I dont condone apple on what they are doing with their platform but you need to understand that Apple sets a standard and that standard costs money.