Hacker News Reader

Comment by zyang | Hacker News Reader

Doesn't Unreal charge a "core technology fee"?

Different but yes:

Under the standard EULA, Unreal Engine is free to use for learning, and for developing internal projects; it also enables you to distribute many commercial projects without paying any fees to Epic Games, including custom projects delivered to clients, linear content (such as films and television shows) and any product that earns no revenue or whose revenue falls below the royalty threshold. A 5% royalty is due only if you are distributing an off-the-shelf product that incorporates Unreal Engine code (such as a game) and the lifetime gross revenue from that product exceeds $1 million USD; in this case, the first $1 million remains royalty-exempt.

https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/license

They charge royalties, not a per-install fee. If your app is free you wouldn't owe anything, unlike Apple's new system.

You do not owe royalties to Apple unless your app is either A: non-free or B: on another store.

The install fee applies to free applications.

No it doesn't. Not unless you opt into the new agreement, which a free app would have zero reason to do so, as the whole reason would be to pay reduced commission, which is irrelevant.

> ... the whole reason would be to pay reduced commission

Citation needed. I use F-Droid not because I want the devs of the apps I install from there to be free of the Google Play Tax. I use it so I can be free of Google Play.

What does that have to do with the iOS ecosystem?

An app that wants to be free fro the Google play ecosystem can do so without paying Google. An app that wants to be free from the App Store needs to pay Apple, or set up a company as a non-profit.

You see the parallels and why "I-Droid" won't be a sustainable store?

Epic/Unreal doesn't also own 50% of the PC hardware market making tens of billions at high margins where only Unreal made Games are allowed and other game engines are banned.

They're probably over 50% of AAA games. Freakin' everything is Unreal Engine these days.

Because it's really good, not because it's the only option.

Wait, did Android suddenly disappear?

I'm guessing they mean the app store on the iPhone, that being the only option.

The iPhone itself has been consistently superior to its competition across its history (although obviously not always best at everything). And I say that as an Android fan.

I meant the PC hardware market, edited it.

In the EU, iOS sits ~33% marketshare, ~60% in the US, and ~28% worldwide.

Yes, but you choose to use Unreal because it's actually good. Meanwhile Apple gives you no choice.

You do have the choice to not target an Apple platform. There's lots of apps that're exclusive to Android out there.

I don't like this fee model, but let's not pretend Android doesn't exist.

I think the context of iOS is safely implied here. To say you have the option of going Android is as relevant as giving the option of doing a mobile app; Sure it is an option but out of the context of the discussion.

The choice is in the technology you use when you build an application for a user. You don't get a choice what platform you build your apps for, you already have your customers, and they already have their phones. If you're a business for which the technology provided by Apple is not a key part of the product, then you're being forced to pay for technology you're trying your hardest not to use but are obligated to by policy.

If I build a Flutter app for checking bus times, what am I paying Apple for? I'm already deliberately avoiding their badly documented frameworks. Apple don't own the buses, they don't own the internet, they should not be claiming ownership of the users phones.

And web apps. Even as an iOS dev myself, I can see there's a lot of apps out there that should've been websites.

> Yes, but you choose to use Unreal because its actually good. Meanwhile Apple gives you no choice.

How did you have no choice, did Apple threaten you or something?

Android is a competent competitor you could choose instead.

You have no choice if you want to serve IOS users, even if you do not need the app store to sell your product. The #1 questino for any IOS/Android exclusive app is "are you making an Andoid/IOS version"? And saying no because Google/Apple won't let you isn't a resolution that satisfies any party.

This comparison makes no sense. Unreal is a game engine. Apple is a platform. Are you expecting Apple to open an Android app store or something?

So should we expect Epic to give ME, the user a choice of how I want to install Fortnite?

Because they clearly are not. So why do developers get the choice but not the consumer?

Sounds to me the power is still in the wrong hands and consumers loose.

>So why do developers get the choice but not the consumer?

because you can't just push a button and port Fortnite to Linux. Or maybe you can, but expect a lot of bugs that will ultiamtely be negative PR for Fortnite instead of a boon for consumers. What benefit does this give consumers?

Besides, this metaphor doesn't work. You do not have to play, pay, nor install fortnite to do anything except play fortnite. With this ruling, you need IOS to do anything involving making an IOS app, even if you do not need the app store. I don't see the use in being charged for hardware and dev licenses and ALSO be charged per install because your free app chose not to be on the app store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com