You must log in or register to comment.
Lmao. I’ve no love for Apple, and even less for Epic. It’s like two grotesquely unlovable toddlers are throwing a hissy fit in their little sandbox and I’m here for it.
Yes, it’s kind of funny with Epic complaining about fairness, when they arrange exclusivity agreements for their own game store. 🤪 And they actively sabotage it working on Linux.🤔
Regardless of the irony, someone needed to start this fight with Apple, so it might as well be them.
Between the two of them, I’m not willing to “support” either, but I’m slightly more inclined to hope Epic comes out on top because they’re not also in a hardware dominance position. Epic can be as shitty as it likes about certain platforms, but they at least can only affect their games. They aren’t gatekeepers to a massive audience of users, and by far one of the largest gates at that. The Epic store actually has competition.
Between an abusive developer and an abusive gatekeeper, the gatekeeper is the bigger issue.
Regardless of the irony, someone needed to start this fight with Apple,
Absolutely.
Ok, I really don’t get Epic hate. Sure, they’re using shitty practices to attempt to compete with the megolith Valve is, and it sucks. However, how are they sabotaging it working on Linux. They made Easy Anti-cheat work on Linux, which is huge, and also UE5 seems to run better on Linux than Windows by most accounts I’ve heard, including my own experience.
Make reasonable complaints all day, but sabotaging Linux compatability is not something they’re doing.
However, how are they sabotaging it working on Linux.
For example they discontinued support for Rocket League on Linux (and Mac) after buying Psyonix.
It’s got a platinum rating on ProtonDB. It looks like the native versions aren’t being supported anymore, but they still work. I don’t blame them. The game has gotten a lot smaller over the years and I’m certain there’s very few Linux players on it. Regardless, the Windows application seems to work perfectly fine for Linux users. Yeah, native is ideal but it costs extra money to maintain two (or three) versions.
Anyway, you can’t say they’re sabotaging Linux support when they also purchased EAC and had them add Linux support. They may not be perfect with Linux, but they aren’t sabotaging it.
Edit: Why is this being downvoted? If you want to downvote you should be able to articulate why. What is the expectation for them to do? The game has clearly been on the decline for a while, and I’m sure they’ve got the numbers for their player counts by system. They have limited money and need to support the game still. Why would they waste it on supporting a native Linux version if it isn’t being played and the windows version works perfectly on Linux? If they didn’t want Linux to exist, why would they make EAC work on Linux? Explain how you think they’re actively trying to harm Linux (sabotage) instead of merely maybe hurting it as a side effect passively.
Silly you, you should know that it is not allowed to say anything that could be construed as remotely positive about Epic (or anything negative about Valve/Steam, for that matter) on this site.
Ok, I really don’t get Epic hate. Sure, they’re using shitty practices to attempt to compete with the megolith Valve is, and it sucks.
Meanwhile GOG attempts to compete by offering features that other platforms don’t offer, like DRM-free installers and a multi-platform game launcher.
If Epic got to #1 place, what guarantees there are that they would stop using exclusivity deals to hinder their own competitors? It might just be that we end up with a more anti-competititve market leader, and then what would be the benefit of having overtaken Steam?
I like GoG. They don’t hold any control over the market though. I wish they did, but they aren’t competing.
I can agree that GoG doesn’t have a large share of the market, but I’m still unconvinced of the benefit of this call for competition for competition’s sake when it’s introducing anti-competitive practices. Usually we want competition to push back against anti-competitive practices.
Epic takes less revenue than Steam.
They both have anti-competitive practices. They’re just different practices. Epic tends to favor helping developers and Valve tends to favor appealing to users. Valve doesn’t need to force exclusivity because games have to take a loss to not use them, because they’re already the market leader. There’s no knowing what Valve would be doing if they were the underdog, but people need to stop assuming Valve is good. No company is ever good.
No company is good but that doesn’t mean they are all equally, identically bad.
We have seen what Valve did when it was not the market leader because it didn’t spawn in such a place. What they did is lock their own games to their own platform, which is something most other PC storefronts do or did at some point.
We did not yet see what Epic would do if it would got to the top. Is it even guaranteed that they would continue to take less revenue?
And really, if all companies are bad, what’s the point of rooting for Epic to overtake Steam?
Tim Sweeney is pretty openly against any Linux support for some reason so I think that soured Linux gamers against them.
I have been gaming on Linux for 15 years and it is so much better these days, but we are still not a 1st party target. I get why, but it sucks to be ignored and told to just deal with it forever. I spend as much or more on hardware and software than windows gamers (except for a Windows license I suppose) and I guess I have to vote with my wallet.Epic (the game engine and middleware developer) and Epic Store (the one that sells games) seems to have different priorities. Customers of Epic game engines and middlewares want linux supports, so they provide it. Meanwhile, Epic Store don’t want the burden of maintaining linux ports for their games, so they remove supports for linux in games they acquired.
The only sad thing about this is that only one of them can lose the lawsuit.
Ehhhh they could both throw endless millions at lawyers for no real result
🤣
fight fight fight fight fight fight
oh shit that one is eating a whole lotta sand
By their own quote of the law, there’s no wording that would stipulate that apple has to allow epic to have their third party app in apples app store. Just that they would have to essentially allow it to be side loaded, or installable in some way onto the phone.
But really, why should and app store have to foot the server bill for another company to get to install an app intended to make money while giving none to the company that owns and operates an app store?
I sure as hell wouldn’t.
Did you read the article?
- Epic is not trying to get their 3rd party app in apples app store.
- Epic can’t create a 3rd party app store because Apple revoked their developer license. This means any app epic creates can’t be sideloaded because it will never be signed by apple.
- Apples new rules require any 3rd party app store to pay apple $0.50 per install (there is no million app install requirement for 3rd party app stores). So apple would still make money off epics app store if they allowed it.
deleted by creator
But there is a satisfying FAFO aspect to this.
fabulous amphibian feeling its organ ? fat alluring fungiform obelisk ?
(I will look this up, it’s just a good opportunity to practice my English)
Fuck around and find out.
Basically a vulgar way to say that if you do something very stupid, don’t be surprised when something bad happens.
Very vulgar and tbh very beaten, redneck level childish expression mostly used overtly in bullshit reactions with almost zero regard to the context.
I mean yeah it’s mostly used by meatheads who get excited that somebody got punched, regardless of context…but I’m not exactly clutching my pearls at the use of a gasp bad word.
Dunno why that got down voted even though it agrees with and elaborates on the comment I replied to.
It is just a statement. I didn’t even urge, encourage or request anybody to stop using that, so not even pressing on the toes of anybody except really insecure people like the other commenter on your level.
Hell, it is used by those insecure people who can’t handle a criticism about their beliefs, usually in context where the subject is women, minorities, people living difficult lives, people enjoying crazy shit harming no one (else), rebellious populations that are directly or indirectly fucked by the colonialism.and fight back with whatever they have, even if it looks primitive in the face of their adversaries firepower.
And here I am making just one criticism about the use of a word that has almost become the Reddit’s “this” in Lemmy political environments, and I’m the one clutching pearls or being insecure.
LOL someone feels insecure about something lol.
No kidding. As “that guy” who is siding with Apple on this …… seems like they’re playing with fire
This might also be a LAMF moment.
deleted by creator
No company is your friend.
Probably none, but one can dislike some more than others.
It’s pretty silly to love a company: they’re not human and behave as a sociopath would.
To love a company (which is really just to love their brand) is just to be easilly influenced by marketing and having a tendency to simplify one’s view of the world down to labels to make it easier to mentally understand it - in consumer terms it means that when you’re making a purchase decision you can just take the mental shortcut in your decision of directly choosing the “loved” brand, rather than needing to evaluate products and their suitability for you to make an informed buying choice, which is cognitivelly more costly.
While “brand love” is understandable and not abnormal, it’s not a quality but rather it’s just a pretty flawed cognitive shortcut that goes against making informed choices, so expecting it from others is like expecting that everybody has a specific mild character flaw.
You do your thing - it’s your life and your money - just don’t think that others must share that same reductive way of making purchasing decisions.
deleted by creator
Your question as formulated has the expectation that people must love some company.
From that I assumed that you yourself “love” one or more companies and hence use “love” for companies in your purchasing decisions.
My “do your thing” applies to you making purchasing decisions following “love” for companies. A different stating of the idea I was trying to pass in that sentence is: “You do your purchases guided by love for companies if that’s your way, just don’t think that others must share that same reductive way of making purchasing decisions.”
deleted by creator
That expectation makes no logical sense.
“Having no love for Apple” does not imply that one “must love some other company” because “loving no company” implies “having no love for Apple”.
This is probably why you got the downvotes: there are plenty of people around whose relation to companies does not involve loving any of them and who don’t like it when others expect them to.
Personally I neither downvoted nor upvoted your original post as I don’t really mind if you expect that since it’s quite a common way people behave in this day and age of Marketing-heavy Consumer Society and you’re not harming anybody by asking even if your ask carries an erroneous assumption.
deleted by creator
Three’s
🎶 Come and knock on my door…🎶
A company? None. Black diamond’s products I own? I love their products like close friends
deleted by creator
I think that’s a fair question, but the answers you’ve gotten is accurate. I don’t really believe that there are any ”good” profit-driven companies.
Technically companies are just entities and don’t really have any morals assigned to them, good or bad, but they become bad when their increasing strive for profit ends up hurting people. These people could be their workers (like all AAA gaming companies), their customers, or some more or less unrelated third party (like soda companies ruining water sources).
Since the pandemic, landlord companies in my country have gotten incredibly greedy. They got a sudden massive cash infusion by increasing rents by an absurd amount, so each year since they’ve been asking for equally absurd amounts. Their CEOs are pocketing extreme sums, and then moan about how they don’t get enough money to keep the company afloat.
They’re trying to circumvent decades of precedence in how rent negotiations work, and it’s threatening the living situation for millions of people. It’s just evil.
deleted by creator
Wow, they do this just 2 days after being fined $2 billion by EU!
Unless you don’t know this “Tim Apple”, those fines have a tendency to increase with repeated violations.They better increase quickly. Apple’s bank account is large.
$2B on day one. Double that every instance. EU will own Apple in a week or two.
They’ll just stop selling their products in the EU before that bridge is even on the horizon.
What’s not to love? Then do the same with Suckerberg please, kthxbye.
I’m an American but even I know your in the minority with that opinion. You tell everyone in the EU to throw away their iPhone and delete their Facebook, I’m sure it’s gonna be really easy to convince your EU friends. I have a little respect for Apple, not a lot of companies will psudo stand up to the US government after the Boston Bomber on privacy grounds, even if it was just for show.
Bruh 2 days without Facebook in the states and people’s mental state drastically improves. There will be some that are really mad about it but the ones that aren’t will find an elated sense of catharsis
No, if you take way facebook those people will move to either reddit on the left or /pol/ on the right. At least /pol/ takes some critical thinking skills to get to so the trolls there have to do something half smart, reddit is just an echo chamber. I’ll take Facebook grannies over either though.
You would be surprised on how Europeans can adapt to that very quickly. If you take Apple out of the European market sure it will cause some fuss, with time we adapt.
Don’t tell him! Corporations being hit with massive fines is my kink!
$2 billion, that’s 4 whole days of profits for them.
$2B is actually 2% of their profit. That’s 7.3 days.
Ah yes but those people love money so much, they are probably devastated.🤪
So you wouldn’t mind if 2% of your yearly salary after tax would disappear, right?
Buff
That’s a false comparison. Salary after tax is not comparable to profit. Profit is after ALL expenses. So if I did something really really stupid, after being warned about it and repeatedly, and was fined 2% after ALL expenses, I’d say I got off easy.
Really, it’s just an asshole tax. Most restaurants these days have extra fees that exceed 2% just because. Hell, once upon a time, a 15% tip was given for great service. Now it seems like 20-22% is often the lowest in the recommended tip section. 2% of extra money is nothing, especially when the fine is less than what was earned from the infraction. It’s a lot easier to stomach a 2 billion dollar fine, when you earned 4 billion because of it.
Those tip rates are a US thing, because it’s a hidden way to increase prices without having to write it down anywhere.
No, it’s not false.
Think of some small family owned business, like a ma and pa shop. What they have after all expenses, the profit, is what they live off. That’s their “salary”.
What you have left after all expenses is your savings. In a business, savings would be an investment, which does not count as profit.
2% of nothing is still nothing 🤷
I’m glad you will sacrifice your salary for the greater good!
There’s no wording in that law that says apple has to allow third party apps for alternate app stores or anything to be made available within apples app store. More like apple just has to allow sideloading. Why would Apple want to pay for the server expense of another company by-passing giving apple a share of the profits?
I hate both companies, but if I owned Apple, I’d be after doing the same thing. Epic can get people to sodeload that crap.
You need an Apple developer account to even make software for iOS. Alternate app stores are distributed on the web, not Apple’s App Store. Since an alternative app store is an iOS app, Apple banning Epic’s developer account means they’re banned from making one.
Sucks to be an iOS developer. Apple will never give up it’s 30% of your money. EVER.
And the flat $100 fee, which disproportionately iffects small devs
I took an app development course in college. Everything was android and I tested on my own device, except one project had to be on apple. I managed to snag an ancient iPhone off a friend to test, but no, turns out you need a dev account to even be able to load your own code on your phone. Fuck apple forever.
Dev accounts are free. It’s only when you want to post stuff to the store that you start paying.
You mean when you want to make it available to download in the only way Apple makes possible? It’s not like you can just send the apk to someone to run on their iPhone, if you want to share the app with others on an iPhone, you have to use the Apple App Store, you have to pay them $100 + the cost of an Apple computer. Just to share your FOSS app with your friends.
on iOS its called ipa
If dev accounts are free your friends can get their own accounts and load the app.
It just works™️
Sideloading on android is also more complex than the play store
Did this change? It was about a decade ago. I could develop and test on an emulated device, but testing on hardware was 100% locked behind a $100 paywall.
I could be reading this wrong, but it looks like TestFlight allows you to distribute internally without going through the App Store.
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/distributing-your-app-for-beta-testing-and-releases
It mentions the apple developer program which is what I assume the 100 dollar subscription is. I keep seeing people say dev accounts are free but any tools beyond the dev environment are paywalled.
I wasn’t even talking about app stores; I never published anything to Google play, just loaded through usb from android studio. The apple program didn’t allow even that.
Before TestFlight was a thing, you could self-sign your own apps (.ipa) and install them to local devices through iTunes over a USB cable connected to the device. The developer signing certificate for this was/is free, included when you sign up for the free version of Apple Developer account.
Nowadays it looks like you can still do this directly from Xcode. See section: “Connect real devices to your Mac”
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/running-your-app-in-simulator-or-on-a-device
*The mention of Apple Developer Program in the bullet points of this section is an “if” and is optional. It’s not required for testing apps on local devices.
Everything disproportionately effects the little guy. Just look at laws that have fines instead of jail time. Or just getting a lawyer. Or eating out or buying groceries.
Are you claiming those are good?
How is the $100 a obstacle to any legitimate developer? The only one it hurts is those who would otherwise flood the app store with crap submitted from throw away developer accounts.
Say you you’re maintaining a FOSS app on your own time. How interested would you be to pay Apple $100 annually for the privilege of giving their users free stuff?
Say you you’re maintaining a FOSS app on your own time. How interested would you be to pay Apple $100 annually for the privilege of giving their users free stuff?
Depends on the reason you’re maintaining that app to begin with. If it’s a hobby, then $100/year is a pretty cheap hobby.
As an open source developer, you’re right IMO.
It’s a shame you’re being downvoted based on feels.
Who said anything about legitimacy? I said small, synonyms hobby, FOSS. It is an obstacle to be forced to pay money to Apple for the ‘privelidge’ of being able to install it on their devices. And they are Apple’s devices, you do not own anything you buy from Apple.
I said small, synonyms hobby, FOSS. It is an obstacle to be forced to pay money to Apple for the ‘privelidge’ of being able to install it on their devices.
It’s $100, basically a symbolic amount.
Ah fantastic, can you give me $100? It’s basically nothing, a symbolic amount.
Signed, a disabled and unable to work guy who enjoys IT and programing
Signed, a disabled and unable to work guy who enjoys IT and programing
You don’t need to pay to develop an app, you only need to pay to put it in the store.
So develop your app. If it’s any good, pay the $100, sell it in the store and it’ll pay for itself. It may even make you a little profit. If it’s not good enough for that, why does it need to be in the store?
Some capabilities actually need a paid developer account even if you don’t plan to put the app on the store.
The Capability library shows only the capabilities available to the target type and your program membership. If you are not a member of the Apple Developer Program, the capabilities you can add are limited.
Good for you you have so much disposable income. Many hobby devs such as myself aren’t so lucky, which is one reason why I don’t make Apple apps.
Good for you you have so much disposable income. Many hobby devs such as myself aren’t so lucky
Go talk to some random people and ask them how much they spend on their hobbies, I bet you won’t find many people who have a hobby that costs less than $100/year. It’s a damn cheap hobby.
which is one reason why I don’t make Apple apps.
That’s probably a good thing. I don’t think we need more apps made by amateurs in the app store.
What the hell is this condescending, elitist, gatekeeping nonsense? $100 is a lot of money for some people. Hell, in some countries, that’s a sizeable chunk of someone’s monthly salary. We should be encouraging and supporting developers from all backgrounds, not just ones that are middle/upper class from developed countries.
Do people really write apps and maintain them as a hobby?
Maintenance is the hassle, especially when your app needs to adapt to 3rd party changes.
I’ve found a way to make a thousand people’s life’s a tiny bit easier, and it only costs me a couple of days per year, so I keep the apps running out of a sense of civic duty.
Having to pay one off the most profitable companies in the world before I can provide that service seems weird.
Like charging charity workers for the privilege of helping.
I’ve just checked the apple app store. They is an lack of apps in my niche, the nearest available is significantly more basic, costs $3 and has only one review.
And having said all that, Android’s Play Store has been getting increasingly annoying with policy changes in recent years, and if it wasn’t for the positive reviews I’d have abandoned the apps.
Naw.
When I was a student or freshly qualified, $100/year would’ve been a lot.
But it’s more than just the money.
I’ve coded hobby / small android apps. I was charged a one off fee of $25, and I can use my nice gaming PC with my lovely high end mouse and keyboard, and over the years I’ve used Windows and Linux to write the apps, both from a shared hdd.
My apps aren’t useful to the general public, but I’ve got a couple of decades experience in my field, and those apps are genuinely helpful to the people that use them.
For apple, the last time I looked into it, I’d have needed a specific type of apple computer (one with an intel chip, couldn’t compile on the cheaper non-intel chips).
That automatically makes it a pain in the ass, I couldn’t just use my normal PC for coding. I’d need to transfer assets to a network share or use a convoluted way of keeping the same assets updated on two computers, and look into ways I could use the same mouse/keyboard on both machines. Would using a splitter or KVM cause problems? Input lag when gaming? Would it need a power brick? Just finding the desk space for another PC case would mess up my speaker layout.
It just adds unnecessary complexity, and to slap a $100 yearly fee on top is just insulting.
Absolutely not worth my time for apps that would never make $100/year in sales (which after apples 30% cut, would need to be $142/year. Plus extra for taxes and occasional iMac upgrades).
Maybe things have changed since then, but every time I use a small, niche app or find a wonderful free app, I wonder if it’ll exist on apple.
You’re looking at this the wrong way. Why would you want a KVM? What you want is a genuine Apple ™ Mighty ™ Magic ™ Mouse ™ with a single button.
When I was in college, I was pulling in just enough money from work to pay for rent, food, essentials, and over drafts from the previous week, that $100 was more than I had available for a good 3-5 years of my life. A college student looking to develop and publish apps is the very type of person most hurt by this.
Thanks for the block request
Every other store charges 30% including Steam, PlayStation, Xbox, Google Play, etc. Epic doesn’t and they aren’t profitable, so I don’t know why people pile on Apple.
Edit: the downvotes are funny. Why? You don’t like someone pointing out the truth?
At least with Google Play and Steam you are not locked into it due to your device of choice.
This is just a list of shit service providers leeching profits from developers and making the gaming industry worse.
deleted by creator
It is. But gamers are dumb as shit so it doesn’t matter.
You seem like a fun and positive individual.
Sucks to be a Steam dev then
Does it? Steam does not monopolize a platform, or demand exclusivity. With Steam you are 100% free to sell through other channels, and even be able to still use Steam. Also there are actual services on Steam, and there are possibilities for lower rates.
IIRC there are still rules regarding pricing in other platforms if you want to be on steam.
AFAIK that’s only if the games purchased on that platform have Steam keys. Otherwise you are free to have sales or cheaper prices on other platforms.
Earlier you could sell cheaper on other platforms and still have Steam keys, for instance Humble Indie Bundle had that.
If you go to GOG, you can see they often have games that are also available on Steam, but at lower prices.https://www.gog.com/en/game/tomb_raider_underworld
Sold here (Denmark) for DKK 8,70 = $1.30 USD.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/8140/Tomb_Raider_Underworld/
Sold here for €8.99 = $9.80 USD
This example is 7.8 times more expensive on Steam at this moment.
Well, they’ve become ubiquitous, but I get your point.
Well not really, AFAIK they sell only about 20-50% of games sold for PC, depending on source. Not at all comparable to Apple that has maintained 100% for iPhone.
Also Steam is an independent alternative to Microsoft store on Windows now. So again quite the opposite of the Apple monopoly control of their platform.I don’t know where you got that 20% statistic, but everything I’ve read and can find on short notice has it up around 70%.
I just checked up on it, because it’s a number I remember reading earlier. What I have noticed is that when the 75% market share is mentioned, it’s downloads, that’s a pretty meaningless number. The only number I could find was 18% SALES from 2013. No doubt that has increased in 11 years. I corrected the number to 20-50% since there is no way it can be 75% with several of the biggest game developers like Microsoft, EA, Epyc and others almost completely avoiding Steam. Together with independent sales, and Epic and Microsoft store, and smaller outlets like GOG and Humble Bundle.
Yeah, percent downloads is particularly difficult to extrapolate for steam: they host a number of extremely popular “free” games, and are notorious for their sale pricing. In addition, they have (IMO) very generous policy for providing devs keys for use on their platform.
Steam and AppStore are not equivalent in many important ways, though
I don’t need steam to install your app on my pc, unless you choose it to be that way.
Replace steam with console and your statement has a fighting chance
Maybe, but on the other hand, fuck console WiFi subscriptions, so I think the fighting chance is 100% and thus that conclusion is assumed.
Thought it was just going to be one of those nothing burger cases where they only lost the license because someone forgot to renew something and was surprised that it actually isn’t that.
Fuck Epic but they have a point.
Apple said one of the reasons they terminated our developer account only a few weeks after approving it was because we publicly criticized their proposed DMA compliance plan. Apple cited this X post from this thread written by Tim Sweeney. Apple is retaliating against Epic for speaking out against Apple’s unfair and illegal practices, just as they’ve done to other developers time and time again.
Epic breached the terms of its agreements with Apple and Google to kick off its lawsuits against them in 2020, and now that Sweeney is openly complaining about Apple’s terms for third-party app stores Apple doesn’t trust Epic not to breach those too. Seems reasonable.
Seems reasonable.
Careful. There are quite a few terms of service that you’ve agreed to over the years that if certain aspects of them were enforced, you wouldn’t think they were very reasonable.
I honestly don’t know why there are so many people around here willing to back apple on this kind of shit. Who cares if they had the right to do it? The inherent problem here is that they had that right, when they really shouldn’t.
Careful. There are quite a few terms of service that you’ve agreed to over the years that if certain aspects of them were enforced, you wouldn’t think they were very reasonable.
Epic has an entire legal department to read over agreements like that, and yet they deliberately breached the terms. That’s hugely different from someone unknowingly breaching a TOS that they didn’t read.
We really need all TOS to be enforced fully so we can start pushing back on onerous TOS.
Please clarify it to me because I read this debacle as Apple blackmailing developers HARD into not talking bad things about the company. I get they’re evil and petty but I’m having a hard time to believe they’re this childish and stupid, specially with the DMA knocking at their doors.
This isn’t some random developer, it’s a developer that has already breached a contract with Apple. It’s reasonable for Apple to be wary of entering into another contract with them when the CEO is publicly complaining about the terms.
There’s definitely a case to be made that Epic shouldn’t need an Apple developer account to make their own app store, but Apple is well within its rights to deny them an account based on their history.
I can just see them responding to the EU like, “Yeah, we’ll allow other people to build app stores for iOS. They just need a dev account that we won’t approve. That’s not us specifically blocking alternate app stores though.”
“You did this just to start pushing for what’s basically DMA so we think you’ll violate us for the DMA again which is already under effect so we ban”?
How did they breach the contract?
Epic changed the mobile versions of Fortnite to add an option to pay for V-Bucks through their own system, which is against the terms of both Apple’s app store and Google’s. That got them kicked off of both app stores and then they sued Apple and Google.
Ahh, I didn’t quite understand from goggling what exactly the problem was. What else would Epic do, though? I don’t think they could have just sued for damages.
Slurping that knob eh
I hope this come to bite them hard.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
