Epic argues it breached contract because Apple's terms are 'unlawful'

Xallisto

Posts: 118   +116
I posted about how I hate Apple? Where? When? Maybe if u had not been laboring under such a stupid misconception from the start ur posts would make for better reading.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,567   +2,468
I posted about how I hate Apple? Where? When? Maybe if u had not been laboring under such a stupid misconception from the start ur posts would make for better reading.
“I couldn't care 2 ****s how much money apple makes, so long as they do it without a closed OS.“

There... and then... now stop trolling and go away...
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,101   +914
Say MS puts out Windows 12 or whatever and now u can no longer install apps from the internet, u can only install apps through their new store...You would be absolutely happy with them doing that?
If Windows had always worked that way, I could hardly complain, now could I? In fact, even if it hadn't, as long as Microsoft fully disclosed that, by choosing to upgrade to Windows 12, I would join their walled garden and lose the ability to install non-certified software.

Contrast that to the infantile position you've taken: you agreed to a walled garden, and now you're stamping your foot in a tantrum, upset that you got it.

I posted about how I hate Apple? Where? When?
Post #60, above thread. In reference to Google vis-à-vis Apple, you said you "hate Google also".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squid Surprise

lostinlodos

Posts: 160   +36
...What Epic wants is for phone owners to be able to install it's software on thier phones without interference from whatever ******* happens to make the phones OS.
Maybe. But not in this case.
what epic is asking for here is to continue to have apple distribution AND have the ability to milk micro transactions outside of apple’s secured payment system.
Apple has enough trouble with well behaved apps and micro transactions, aka in-app-purchase(s).
adding a third party to the mix causes confusion and distrust in an established methodology.
who does the user call when something goes wrong? Apple, or Epic.

I understand what /you/ want. To download an app from Epic and install it on your iDevice.
the only way that should be acceptable is if doing so terminates 100% of the responsibilities Apple assumes in hardware and software support.
under current law apple can not cut support for a modified item. Which is EXACTLY why they make jail breaking so difficult. (And as a side note all jail breaks involve a bug; good on Apple to patch bugs).
apple’s closed system is the primary draw for the majority of its user base.
epic violated every bit of trust they had with Apple and its users with this violation.

All I can say now is it’s clearly impossible to trust Epic! they installed a payment system on phones with zero warning to users, called it a patch, and broke their developer agreement.

while an epic fan will side with epic; the question you should be asking is what ELSE will epic install as a “patch” later. On any platform? A DRM root kit that gets hacked, like CDs? How about a key logger to build macros that gets out of the game’s sandbox?

it will be a LONG time before I consider giving any financial information to epic after this stunt. Not that I had in the past... since, oh, the 90s. Back when they were a distributor skimming, wait for it, ...30-50% of sale price to distribute programs on disk and later CD!
now that the shoe is on the other foot they change their mind. They may have a shoe but I think they forgot their clothes!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Endymio

lostinlodos

Posts: 160   +36
“...so long as they do it without a closed OS.“
Your the outlier. Most iDevice users are drawn to the closed system for the security it offers!

you could always buy a somewhat hardware compatible phone and install Cydia

or us a secondary app installer!

iOS also isn’t as closed off as the haters makes it appear. Any developer can do what epic should have done. And created a secluded app for distribution under the industry program.
many font programs and crypto currency programs use enterprise apps distribution. Some companies even offer both enterprise and standard App Store apps.
In fact most of the alternative App Store apps in that link are enterprise app installs!
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,567   +2,468
Your the outlier. Most iDevice users are drawn to the closed system for the security it offers!

you could always buy a somewhat hardware compatible phone and install Cydia

or us a secondary app installer!

iOS also isn’t as closed off as the haters makes it appear. Any developer can do what epic should have done. And created a secluded app for distribution under the industry program.
many font programs and crypto currency programs use enterprise apps distribution. Some companies even offer both enterprise and standard App Store apps.
In fact most of the alternative App Store apps in that link are enterprise app installs!
I completely agree - you’re arguing against the wrong person though... I was arguing the same points as you ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostinlodos

FF222

Posts: 245   +184
You mean other than providing a storefront and ongoing access.and support through their platform?
They do not provide neither access nor support "through their platform" for Epic Games in-game purchase, they merely force the purchases to be made through them, and take a 30% cut off it.

That service that requires constant work to maintain availability and a modicum of security?
For one, Apple would be free to offer distribution and support services for any price they want, as long as developers would be free to choose any other such service. But Apple doesn't want that, Apple wants to maintain a monopoly, no competition and a 30% cut of every sale they didn't contribute not even a tiny bit to.

Also stop referring to Apple's purported, but in reality non-existing security measure and guarantees, because that's a self-defeating argument, that even Apple admits to, because that's actually what they used as an "argument" for why they should be allowed to also ban the Unreal Engine, despite that not being in violation of their terms at all. Ie. because Apple said that then Epic could use it as a trojan horse and circumvent their security measure.

So, if someone can do that any time just because they're in the App Store, then that obviously means App Store offers no security whatsoever. Which btw is confirmed also by history, because Apple has a very lengthy history with security vulnerabilities and the lack of effective antimalware protection, far worse than any competing platform, including Android and Windows.
 
Last edited:

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,567   +2,468
They do not provide neither access nor support "through their platform" for Epic Games in-game purchase, they merely force the purchases to be made through them, and take a 30% cut off it.
um... what do you call the iPhone, then? And the AppStore? Apple provides both - and support for both...

For one, Apple would be free to offer distribution and support services for any price they want, as long as developers would be free to choose any other such service. But Apple doesn't want that, Apple wants to maintain a monopoly, no competition and a 30% cut of every sale they didn't contribute not even a tiny bit to.
Developers ARE free to choose other services - because Apple doesn’t have a monopoly! They can launch via Steam, Android, Xbox, PlayStation.... and guess what - each charges just about the same service fee...

Also stop referring to Apple's purported, but in reality non-existing security measure and guarantees, because that's a self-defeating argument, that even Apple admits to, because that's actually what they used as an "argument" for why they should be allowed to also ban the Unreal Engine, despite that not being in violation of their terms at all. Ie. because Apple said that then Epic could use it as a trojan horse and circumvent their security measure.

So, if someone can do that any time just because they're in the App Store, then that obviously means App Store offers no security whatsoever. Which btw is confirmed also by history, because Apple has a very lengthy history with security vulnerabilities and the lack of effective antimalware protection, far worse than any competing platform, including Android and Windows.
A developer account gives extra privileges on an Apple device. That’s why Apple is far stricter with those accounts. Security is actually FAR superior on iOS than any other operating system. There is no 100% secure OS in existence. But if you know of a more secure one than iOS, please let us know.
 

FF222

Posts: 245   +184
um... what do you call the iPhone, then? And the AppStore? Apple provides both - and support for both...
No, neither iPhone, nor App Store provide support for Epic's apps, or for any other developers' for that matter. So, stop repeating this non-sense.

Developers ARE free to choose other services
No, they're not. Epic tried that with Fortnite, and that's the exact reason why it was booted from the App Store.

because Apple doesn’t have a monopoly!
Yes, they have. See above!

They can launch via Steam, Android, Xbox, PlayStation....
No, they can't launch on iPhones via those. What you're saying is akin to if Ford would force all petrol stations to only purchase gas from them and only accept payment for gas from drivers through them, and would charge 30% for that, on the basis, that it was them (ie. Ford) creating the cars and that they're the ones also distributing the fuel.... (which would obviously be both ridiculous and absurd in itself) and then you would come by, and would try to argue, that hey, but petrol stations can also just "launch via" Toyota, Volkswagen, etc., which btw would also purportedly all charge 30% for supplying fuel to their cars. You obviously recognize the absurdity of this model with cars and fuel, but yet somehow you really and seriously want to argue for the same absurd model when it comes to cell phones and apps.

and guess what - each charges just about the same service fee...
For one, that's not an argument for Apple being right, but if for anything, then for they all being in the wrong with that. Also, Xbox, PlayStation and Android are not app stores, and Steam is not an ecosystem. You're just obviously utterly confused about even such basic things. Comparing Apple to oranges, bananas and skyscrapers, you know.

A developer account gives extra privileges on an Apple device.
Apple doesn't charge 30% for that. Also an admin/root account gives extra privileges on a Windows or a Linux box. Should you then have to pay Microsoft 30% of all your income? So, then what's the point you're trying to make here? Confused, again, aren't you?

That’s why Apple is far stricter with those accounts.
Talk about making no sense, no relevance whatsoever.

Security is actually FAR superior on iOS than any other operating system.
No, the system is riddled with security holes, and just this year they have not even one, but two *unfixable* holes in iOS devices. Apple is known and "recognized" in the security community as having the worst security of all mainstream platforms in existence, and it's only Apple and clueless fanboys who advertise that otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,567   +2,468
No, neither iPhone, nor App Store provide support for Epic's apps, or for any other developers' for that matter. So, stop repeating this non-sense.
Apple provides support for every approved app in the appstore... which, up to a few months ago, included Fortnite. So if you paid XXX $ for something and didn't get it, you can contact Apple support... What nonsense are you talking about?

And Devs CAN choose other places to sell their products! If they want to sell their products on iOS though, they have to use the Appstore.

Apple DOES NOT have a monopoly - there are plenty of other smartphones that don't run on iOS - Devs are free to sell their Apps on those.

No, they can't launch on iPhones via those. What you're saying is akin to if Ford would force all petrol stations to only purchase gas from them and only accept payment for gas from drivers through them, and would charge 30% for that, on the basis, that it was them (ie. Ford) creating the cars and that they're the ones also distributing the fuel.... and then you would come by, and would try to argue, that hey, but petrol stations can also just "launch via" Toyota, Volkswagen, etc., which btw would also purportedly all charge 30% for supplying fuel to their cars.
No, what it's akin to is if Ford built a new type of car with a special type of fuel that only they use. If you then wanted to sell that type of fuel, you'd have to pay Ford a % since they invented the fuel and the car that uses it.
Drivers who didn't like this arrangement would be free to buy other cars though... just like fuel sellers would be free to simply not support this new Ford!

For one, that's not an argument for Apple being right, but if for anything, then for they all being in the wrong with that. Also, Xbox, PlayStation and Android are not app stores, and Steam is not an ecosystem. You're just obviously utterly confused about even such basic things. Comparing Apple to oranges, bananas and skyscrapers, you know.
Playstation, XBOX and Android HAVE app stores - try to at least pretend you have some brains here... If you want to sell an app (or game) on these systems, you have to use the proprietary appstore/gamestores that come with these devices. They all charge a % because providing these stores isn't easy or cheap! Do they profit from them - OF COURSE! Why else would they be providing these services to you in the first place?

Apple doesn't charge 30% for that. Also an admin/root account gives extra privileges on a Windows or a Linux box. Should you then have to pay Microsoft 30% of all your income? So, then what's the point you're trying to make here? Confused, again, aren't you?


Talk about making no sense, no relevance whatsoever.
Root in Windows / Linux / Android is given to you for free... thus making it rather easy to do "unauthorized stuff" on them.

A developer account with Apple costs $99 USD per year (Enterprise is $299 per year) and gives you elevated permissions (not root though). Apple charges for this and tracks developer accounts so that "unauthorized stuff" doesn't happen as often.


No, the system is riddled with security holes, and just this year they have not even one, but two *unfixable* holes in iOS devices. Apple is known and "recognized" in the security community as having the worst security of all mainstream platforms in existence, and it's only Apple and clueless fanboys who advertise that otherwise.
iOS is NOT riddled with security holes - and if you actually knew what you were talking about, you'd know that the "unfixable" holes you are talking about were HARDWARE based - and have been fixed on all devices going forward.

Please provide some evidence that Apple has the worst security in existence please.... I'd argue that Android's is FAR less secure - as is Windows and Linux... *nix fanboys, remember that open source doesn't make you more secure, it makes you LESS secure as it's easier to find the holes...
 

FF222

Posts: 245   +184
Apple provides support for every approved app in the appstore...
No, they don't. And even if they would, they'd provide that to their end users, not to the companies selling the apps, so they should charge the former.

So if you paid XXX $ for something and didn't get it, you can contact Apple support...
For one, that's not support for the app, which you claimed it was, but for the purchase, if anything. Apple provides no support for the apps it sells. It does not act as a merchant. It merely acts as a payment processor. But payment processors (Visa, MC, even PayPal) generally don't charge 30% for their services, but less than 1/10 of that. Of course they don't hold an illegal monopoly either, that's why they charge a fair slice, and that's why Apple, who does hold an illegal monopoly, can charge a lot more, which can not be substantiated by any cost analysis.

What nonsense are you talking about?
About your obvious lack of knowledge of even the most basic things about how the App Store works, and about your circular arguments.

And Devs CAN choose other places to sell their products! If they want to sell their products on iOS though, they have to use the Appstore.
And that's why Apple's stance is anti-competitive and illegal.

Apple DOES NOT have a monopoly
Yes, Apple DOES HAVE a monopoly (on access to iOS), which it uses as a leverage in other markets (like payment processing, but also other kinds of app and services, which it bans from the App Store if it has or develops a competitive product/service). That's illegal.

No, what it's akin to is if Ford built a new type of car with a special type of fuel that only they use.
No, because there's nothing special neither about the App Store, nor about app distribution, and especially nothing special about Apple's payment processing. These all are not only available from Apple for iOS users because Apple's technology is special and because Apple invented anything about them, but because Apple's anti-competitive and illegal control of iOS supplies.

If you then wanted to sell that type of fuel, you'd have to pay Ford a % since they invented the fuel and the car that uses it.
As already explained: Apple didn't invent anything - certainly not the app store model, not app distribution and not payment processing. Apple artificially prevents any competition, despite gazillions of competitors being able to provide the same services (payment, app distribution, etc.) also for iOS devices from the technical perspective. Actually, Epic proved with Fortnite this very fact, that it is very well capable of doing that.

Drivers who didn't like this arrangement would be free to buy other cars though... just like fuel sellers would be free to simply not support this new Ford!
Yeah, this doesn't change the fact that Ford would be doing something illegal, just as what Apple does is also illegal. Monopolies are not illegal, because consumers theoretically can't refrain from purchasing from monopolies, but because they make competition impossible in the affected markets.

Playstation, XBOX and Android HAVE app stores
Which is not what you said. You said stupid things, and that has been pointed out. The fact that now you want to shift goalpost and replace your original statements with somewhat less stupid statements does not refute, but actually proves that.

If you want to sell an app (or game) on these systems, you have to use the proprietary appstore/gamestores that come with these devices.
No you don't. Not on Android, not on Steam, which was another stupid thing you said, because Steam is not an app or device platform, but a distribution platform. If Apple's App Store would operate the very same way Steam does, Epic would have no problems and no case.

They all charge a % because providing these stores isn't easy or cheap!
Yes, providing these stores is very cheap, that's why they make billions in profit from what they charge. Ie. because it costs far less to provide those services than what they charge for providing them. Also, this is not what's illegal or discussed here about Apple's behavior, just a lame red herring.

Root in Windows / Linux / Android is given to you for free...
And yet you try to argue that giving "extra privileges", which don't even match up to the level of root/admin, is something Apple should charge for... because of? And Apple doesn't charge for that anyway, as already explained, and to which even you admitted. So, again, what are you trying to argue for, other than Apple being holy, just because?

thus making it rather easy to do "unauthorized stuff" on them.
No, running of "unauthorized stuff" is not made any easier by having elevated privileges. And has nothing to do with neither restricting competition, nor charging far more than a service is worth.

A developer account with Apple costs $99 USD per year (Enterprise is $299 per year) and gives you elevated permissions (not root though).
Exactly. So, then Apple doesn't charge the 30% for that, and you were wrong for bringing that up. As already pointed out.

Apple charges for this and tracks developer accounts so that "unauthorized stuff" doesn't happen as often.
Apple doesn't track anything, and charging $99 won't stop "unauthorized stuff" either. It's also no ground to restrict competition and limit consumer choices.

iOS is NOT riddled with security holes - and if you actually knew what you were talking about
I actually and obviously know far better than you what I'm talking about.

you'd know that the "unfixable" holes you are talking about were HARDWARE based
No, it's not hardware based. It's purely software based. It's in the bootloader. And you're just completely clueless about the issues at hand.

Please provide some evidence that Apple has the worst security in existence please....
I already did. Feel free to read back!
 
Last edited:

Squid Surprise

Posts: 3,567   +2,468
No, they don't. And even if they would, they'd provide that to their end users, not to the companies selling the apps, so they should charge the former.


For one, that's not support for the app, which you claimed it was, but for the purchase, if anything. Apple provides no support for the apps it sells. It does not act as a merchant. It merely acts as a payment processor. But payment processors (Visa, MC, even PayPal) generally don't charge 30% for their services, but less than 1/10 of that. Of course they don't hold an illegal monopoly either, that's why they charge a fair slice, and that's why Apple, who does hold an illegal monopoly, can charge a lot more, which can not be substantiated by any cost analysis.


About your obvious lack of knowledge of even the most basic things about how the App Store works, and about your circular arguments.


And that's why Apple's stance is anti-competitive and illegal.


Yes, Apple DOES HAVE a monopoly (on access to iOS), which it uses as a leverage in other markets (like payment processing, but also other kinds of app and services, which it bans from the App Store if it has or develops a competitive product/service). That's illegal.


No, because there's nothing special neither about the App Store, nor about app distribution, and especially nothing special about Apple's payment processing. These all are not only available from Apple for iOS users because Apple's technology is special and because Apple invented anything about them, but because Apple's anti-competitive and illegal control of iOS supplies.


As already explained: Apple didn't invent anything - certainly not the app store model, not app distribution and not payment processing. Apple artificially prevents any competition, despite gazillions of competitors being able to provide the same services (payment, app distribution, etc.) also for iOS devices from the technical perspective. Actually, Epic proved with Fortnite this very fact, that it is very well capable of doing that.


Yeah, this doesn't change the fact that Ford would be doing something illegal, just as what Apple does is also illegal. Monopolies are not illegal, because consumers theoretically can't refrain from purchasing from monopolies, but because they make competition impossible in the affected markets.


Which is not what you said. You said stupid things, and that has been pointed out. The fact that now you want to shift goalpost and replace your original statements with somewhat less stupid statements does not refute, but actually proves that.


No you don't. Not on Android, not on Steam, which was another stupid thing you said, because Steam is not an app or device platform, but a distribution platform. If Apple's App Store would operate the very same way Steam does, Epic would have no problems and no case.


Yes, providing these stores is very cheap, that's why they make billions in profit from what they charge. Ie. because it costs far less to provide those services than what they charge for providing them. Also, this is not what's illegal or discussed here about Apple's behavior, just a lame red herring.


And yet you try to argue that giving "extra privileges", which don't even match up to the level of root/admin, is something Apple should charge for... because of? And Apple doesn't charge for that anyway, as already explained, and to which even you admitted. So, again, what are you trying to argue for, other than Apple being holy, just because?


No, running of "unauthorized stuff" is not made any easier by having elevated privileges. And has nothing to do with neither restricting competition, nor charging far more than a service is worth.


Exactly. So, then Apple doesn't charge the 30% for that, and you were wrong for bringing that up. As already pointed out.


Apple doesn't track anything, and charging $99 won't stop "unauthorized stuff" either. It's also no ground to restrict competition and limit consumer choices.


I actually and obviously know far better than you what I'm talking about.


No, it's not hardware based. It's purely software based. It's in the bootloader. And you're just completely clueless about the issues at hand.


I already did. Feel free to read back!
I think you need to understand the meaning of "evidence"... just contradicting what someone says does NOT constitute evidence.

I asked you to provide some evidence of your nonsense.. you have yet to do so.

Here's the actual definition of "monopoly" from dictionary.com:
The exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

Apple does NOT have a monopoly.... no court has said they do. They don't even have a majority of the smartphone market - there are more Android phones than iPhones out there... Please feel free to link me to a court document that says that Apple has an illegal monopoly - that's what evidence is :)

And Apple supports all apps on the Appstore - obviously, the only support they can offer is with purchases! They didn't design the actual apps - why would they be able to help you with a different problem with them?

It's kind of like when you buy a game console from a store. If you want to return it, you can go back to the store you bought it from... but if you have an issue with the console (like you don't know how to install a game, etc), you contact the console company - or check out their website, etc...

And Apple DOES support both end users AND developers. If you purchase a developer account, you can get assistance on the Apple website - or contact an Apple "genius"...

Oh... and talk about shifting goalposts... you seem to be the king of this. I only brought up developer accounts because you brought up the security issue. Most jailbreakers (the actual exploiters, not end users) have purchased developer accounts because this allows them to "do more stuff" with Apple devices. It means there are far LESS people hacking Apple devices since having to fork money over deters the vast majority.

And a bootrom exploit is NOT a flaw in iOS - it's rooted in the hardware - so that's why they are "unfixable".

Checkm8 was fixed with the A12 processor... and unc0ver's iOS exploits were fixed with iOS 13.5.1...

You got any other vulnerabilities? You should email them to Apple and they'll pay you for them :)

https://www.theiphonewiki.com/wiki/Jailbreak_Exploits
(That's also what evidence is)

And you call the Appstore "cheap"??? I don't think you understand how companies work... developing the appstore took a large team of developers months... and they continuously maintain, fix and update it - not to mention host the numerous servers it runs on.

Yes, they profit from it - again, WHY WOULD THEY SPEND ALL THAT TIME AND MONEY ON IT IF THEY WEREN'T GOING TO PROFIT FROM IT!?!?!?

I understand you hate Apple... but understand that they're simply a corporation looking to profit from THEIR OWN PRODUCTS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostinlodos

lostinlodos

Posts: 160   +36
I completely agree - you’re arguing against the wrong person though... I was arguing the same points as you ?
Didn’t intend to pick on anyone; just pointing out facts.

at squid: you’re slightly incorrect. As a developer for both android and Apple OSs... I do have some basis for what I say in the following to @F222

seriously! You are such a clueless Epic fan it’s almost, almost, humorous!
Let me just make this super clear for everyone else reading. F2x is either not a developer or! You shouldn’t be because you can’t read!
The enterprise program exists for just such cases. JPMorgan has an enterprise app for non-Apple-pay direct transactions. Binance, Binance US, and Binance UK, all exist as enterprise apps.

PayPal has an enterprise app.
Most font software for iDevices is only available via enterprise app.
quark has an enterprise app (had).
steam has an enterprise app in beta.
Microsoft has an XBox enterprise app in alpha.

more than 20 independent app stores exist as enterprise apps! Most allow some sort of side loading via desktop interface.
There’s 7! calibre extenders available as enterprise apps with direct access to Books and iCloud!
The more you post of your anti-Apple rhetoric the more you show your ignorance.

I supplied a link just above to one of the most visited tertiary App Store sites on the web.

before you post further do some research.
iOS as a whole is closed source. But it’s not a monopoly. It’s the lesser of the dominant mobile OSs.
However 100% of non-ui code is available for free. The only blockade to a company building for iOS outside of the official tools is an inconsistent UI and lack of access to KXTs.

enterprise apps DO allow limited non-Apple-pay billing and transactions.
Those limitations are far more lenient than the opening limits set by the new App Store guidelines.

Epic had every chance to to do this correctly like every other enterprise app programmer. They chose instead to violate every restriction in financial security under the Apple banner.

But for those of us old enough, with a background in computing and software; tech as a whole?
we’re all laughing. This is the same Epic that took $7.50 for every $9.99 copy of CotW. The same epic that took $5 for every sampler disc that included one of 4 King’sQuest titles.
the same Epic who took, on average, 60% of sale price to pump out shareware disks.
The same Epic who paid developers $00.75 for every standalone $2 disk sold!
The same epic who added a custom BBS ordering program and in-app link to every disk sold for over a decade!

the last is my most blatant for comparison.
Sure, you could Fill out the included card and add a 32cent stamp to register. Often for less than $5! Or spend ten cents on a local call to the epic BBS line and get the unlock code instantly for just $9.99!
Do some legitimate research into software distribution history. Then if you still feel the same way come back and tell us why.
nobody on any site yet since the story broke has come back and told any of us knowledgeable people why we shouldn’t spit on epic over this disgraceful action!
I welcome you to change our minds.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Squid Surprise

Endymio

Posts: 1,101   +914
MI supplied a link just above to one of the most visited tertiary App Store sites on the web. Before you post further do some research...I welcome you to change our minds.
Don't hold your breath. There is a mindset that views all situations solely through the lens of self-interest. In their minds, they believe (wrongly) that an Epic victory would mean 30% lower prices for all their apps; so Apple must -- must! -- be in the wrong. It's not a sensible position, but anarcho-socialism never has had logic on its side.
 

lostinlodos

Posts: 160   +36
Don't hold your breath. There is a mindset that views all situations solely through the lens of self-interest. In their minds, they believe (wrongly) that an Epic victory would mean 30% lower prices for all their apps; so Apple must -- must! -- be in the wrong. It's not a sensible position, but anarcho-socialism never has had logic on its side.
Nope: I seriously 100% support the quest (not of the previously mentioned King’s) for any logical reason for epic to shoehorn an illegal hack into a patch.
Prior to this I had zero issue with epic. They’ve put out quit a few of my hobbyist utilities over the years...decades.
not once prior to this did I complain about my $0.75/disk payment. THAT Knowing that my programs were one of two or three included on EVERY disk post 1994 they sent out.
The most brazen of which is the previously mentioned CotW. My favourite of all RPGs. The registered version of which included my modified compression algorithm to fit both games on a 3.5” disk.
They used my “licensed “ n-zip mods on (nearly) every floppy disc and most CDs from 1994-1998. Am I mad about that? Not in the slightest, 99.9% of what I’ve done since 1996 is available under the IDGAF: I don’t give a ..., licence.
I don’t care that epic is looking for cash.
This anger...no...rage...!
This is about epic violating multiple laws... cyber security laws... for a few extra bucks.
this is about epic committing a blatant act of bait and switch fraud!

This is about epic forgetting who and how they began!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nestea