SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Scouse]

When some person deletes stuff that they have access to is not the fault of the Government. Micro management is not a thing.

You don't have to micro-manage. But if someone deletes important data at work, it's the CIO of that region who gets a balling (or gets sacked) because the controls that are setup and managed by that CIO are clearly failing.

It shoud be impossible to delete important data because the control environment that's setup - and driven from the top of any competent organisation - should prevent an employee from doing that, at least unrecoverably.


Yes, mistakes are made and controls are improved in response to those mistakes. But ultimate responsibility doesn't lie with the employee who made a mistake - it lies with the senior management who failed to ensure that the controls - the hoops that employees have to jump through, if you like - aren't fit for purpose.

As long as things aren't being conducted in a fraudulent or criminal manner (and if they are, that is also a failure of the control environment) - the buck, always, stops at the very top.

 

[Scouse]

Epic should fuck off.

If Apple and Google want to charge X% to sell in their shop then they can do, or Epic can sell elsewhere. If they don't like it then they certainly shouldn't try and go around the terms that they agreed to, they should renegotiate.

Can Epic sell on Apple without going through the iOS app store?

 

[Raven]

No idea, I don't allow apple products in the house!

 

[Zarjazz]

Epic should fuck off.

If Apple and Google want to charge X% to sell in their shop then they can do, or Epic can sell elsewhere. If they don't like it then they certainly shouldn't try and go around the terms that they agreed to, they should renegotiate.

That's not what the argument is about. Epic aren't complaining about Apple taking a cut for the cost of the game/app. It is the fact Apple are forcing devs to give them a cut off all in-app purchases (i.e. all the Fortnite cosmetics people buy that earn Epic billions).

 

[Jupitus]

No idea, I don't allow apple products in the house!

Agreed - unless my laydee visits, bless her old iPhone, she likes it.... wish it hadn't been almost 10 months since I saw her face to face

EDIT: Rare outpouring of emotion, I apologise

 

[DaGaffer]

So then:

Fortnite-maker Epic Games sues Apple and Google in UK

Epic Games escalates a row over the fees Apple and Google charge app developers.

www.bbc.co.uk

Do Epic have a point - that they're getting raped (30%) having to use iOS or Google app stores (their argument will be that apple and google dominate the user base so you really *have* to use their stores).

Or should Epic fuck off - they don't have to use those stores (well, I think you do for apple, no?)

Epic completely have a point. App store is basically "abuse of a dominant position" and Google play store is even worse because they don't even quality control.

 

[DaGaffer]

Epic should fuck off.

If Apple and Google want to charge X% to sell in their shop then they can do, or Epic can sell elsewhere. If they don't like it then they certainly shouldn't try and go around the terms that they agreed to, they should renegotiate.

You can't negotiate. Thats the problem. Its take it or leave it.

 

[Scouse]

You can't negotiate. Thats the problem. Its take it or leave it.

It's take it or don't have access to a lucrative platform because they know the vast majority of their users won't know how to get software any other way.

Steam is different - if your'e a PC user then you're tech savvy. Phones are designed for non technical people - people who don't understand what software really is. They just want to click pretty buttons and play games - not have to go to browsers and side load applications.

 

[Moriath]

Epic should fuck off.

If Apple and Google want to charge X% to sell in their shop then they can do, or Epic can sell elsewhere. If they don't like it then they certainly shouldn't try and go around the terms that they agreed to, they should renegotiate.

This.

they wouldnt have a product if it wasnt for the platform. So they need to pay for using the platform. If they dont want to pay those terms the should fuck off. Not as if they really miss the 30%. Paying that to have access to millions of devices a no brainer. They just being greedy

 

[Moriath]

Can Epic sell on Apple without going through the iOS app store?

Thats what got them introuble in the first place. They side stepped ios for payments and apple banned them.

 

[Moriath]

That's not what the argument is about. Epic aren't complaining about Apple taking a cut for the cost of the game/app. It is the fact Apple are forcing devs to give them a cut off all in-app purchases (i.e. all the Fortnite cosmetics people buy that earn Epic billions).

But the games free. So apple would get nothing.

 

[Moriath]

Agreed - unless my laydee visits, bless her old iPhone, she likes it.... wish it hadn't been almost 10 months since I saw her face to face

EDIT: Rare outpouring of emotion, I apologise

 

[Moriath]

It's take it or don't have access to a lucrative platform because they know the vast majority of their users won't know how to get software any other way.

Steam is different - if your'e a PC user then you're tech savvy. Phones are designed for non technical people - people who don't understand what software really is. They just want to click pretty buttons and play games - not have to go to browsers and side load applications.

Cant really sideload on ios. Without using fake company ids that have been granted that ability. Then they wipe them every now and then.

 

[Moriath]

Advocating for proven unhealthy and nutritionally defunct corporate profitmaking "foodstuffs" that are making the human population sick to be made a bit more expensive is what passes for tyranny nowadays is it?

If you mean you have a tyrannical rant over the subject every time yes

 

[Gwadien]

But the games free. So apple would get nothing.

I don't think you understand.

Apple takes a cut of *all* sales made on their app.

Didn't this all kick off when Epic put advertisement in Fortnite telling their customers that it was cheaper to buy stuff directly from their store? (which you can do via a browser IIRC?)

 

[Moriath]

I don't think you understand.

Apple takes a cut of *all* sales made on their app.

Didn't this all kick off when Epic put advertisement in Fortnite telling their customers that it was cheaper to buy stuff directly from their store? (which you can do via a browser IIRC?)

Yes allsales.

but @Zarjazz said that it would be ok if the makers only paid 30% on the game price. But fort ite and others the game is free. So apple get nothing and the makers coin all the fluff spending.

so only on the game price wouldnt work anyway. Many app store games are free

the whole argument for apple was that epic were circumventing them by allowing people to buy fluff from the website. Therefore denying them any money for having it on the app store and access to their client base. So before epic decided to allow people toin app purchase from a browser all in app purchases were just that and taxed by apple.

 

[Ormorof]

Main difference for me is that on Android you can get the apps from somewhere else (Samsung, Amazon, even Orange have their own stores)

On iOS you cannot unless you jailbreak which voids warranties and disables a bunch of other features

Thats abuse of market position imo but i am not a lawyer (and its fun for Epic to make this argument, with Fortnite, when they are regularly accused of same thing when it comes to unreal engine and other battle royale games using the engine)

 

[Embattle]

To me this is almost the perfect example of a monopoly, with Android you do have other options so it is less so with them compared to Apple.

 

[Raven]

I don't think your typical apple user is that bothered about choice

 

[MYstIC G]

So then:

Fortnite-maker Epic Games sues Apple and Google in UK

Epic Games escalates a row over the fees Apple and Google charge app developers.

www.bbc.co.uk

Do Epic have a point - that they're getting raped (30%) having to use iOS or Google app stores (their argument will be that apple and google dominate the user base so you really *have* to use their stores).

Or should Epic fuck off - they don't have to use those stores (well, I think you do for apple, no?)

Apple built the market, now epic think they're entitled to more.

The problem is that iOS / Android have a monopoly position which should have been prevented sooner.

The real problems are when Apple decide an existing app becomes their next feature imho

 

[Moriath]

I don't think your typical apple user is that bothered about choice

I am happy with my ipad and such knowing that all the apps have been vetted and they wont do any damage or stuff they are not supposed to. Theres no malware pr viruses really on ios for that very reason.

 

[DaGaffer]

Yes allsales.

but @Zarjazz said that it would be ok if the makers only paid 30% on the game price. But fort ite and others the game is free. So apple get nothing and the makers coin all the fluff spending.

so only on the game price wouldnt work anyway. Many app store games are free

the whole argument for apple was that epic were circumventing them by allowing people to buy fluff from the website. Therefore denying them any money for having it on the app store and access to their client base. So before epic decided to allow people toin app purchase from a browser all in app purchases were just that and taxed by apple.

This is called choice. Use Apple as a frictionless and convenient billing method, or pay Epic direct in a less convenient manner. The problem with Apple's terms and conditions is they won't let content providers price differentiate, so even if Epic offer customers an alternative, by design, Apple prevent them from using price as a marketing tool. This is anti-competetive, and it has long boggled my mind that they get away with it. Imagine a retailer who said "if you sell a game via another retailer it has to be at the same price we sell it at". No retailer would get away with it because a. They would never have the market share to make such a demand stick (and would be prevented by law from having such a dominant position) and b. The publisher shouldn't be in control of the end price to the consumer anyway.

Apple's argument is they quality control the App store and can't do that if people can add content via other routes, but that could easily be dealt with by SLAs for other app stores to be allowed on iOS and they have no argument to justify a flat 30% fee other than the simple fact that they can. The only reason they get away with it is because they've defined "the market" as the whole digital content ecosystem, rather than the iOS ecosystem, and because America is the land of corporate lobbying they've gotten away with it, but it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Even if you looked at it as purely mobile phone content, the App Store model should be broken up (45% market share is the trigger for a monopolies investigation in the UK and EU, and Apple has that, so 100% App store of 45% mobile is enough).

Apple's model was great for them and for publishers when it came to building the market, but it is NOT in long-term consumer interests once the market has been established.

The EU agrees, which is why they've opened an Anti-trust investigation into the App Store in the last couple of months.

Press corner

Highlights, press releases and speeches

ec.europa.eu

 

[Moriath]

This is called choice. Use Apple as a frictionless and convenient billing method, or pay Epic direct in a less convenient manner. The problem with Apple's terms and conditions is they won't let content providers price differentiate, so even if Epic offer customers an alternative, by design, Apple prevent them from using price as a marketing tool. This is anti-competetive, and it has long boggled my mind that they get away with it. Imagine a retailer who said "if you sell a game via another retailer it has to be at the same price we sell it at". No retailer would get away with it because a. They would never have the market share to make such a demand stick (and would be prevented by law from having such a dominant position) and b. The publisher shouldn't be in control of the end price to the consumer anyway.

Apple's argument is they quality control the App store and can't do that if people can add content via other routes, but that could easily be dealt with by SLAs for other app stores to be allowed on iOS and they have no argument to justify a flat 30% fee other than the simple fact that they can. The only reason they get away with it is because they've defined "the market" as the whole digital content ecosystem, rather than the iOS ecosystem, and because America is the land of corporate lobbying they've gotten away with it, but it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny. Even if you looked at it as purely mobile phone content, the App Store model should be broken up (45% market share is the trigger for a monopolies investigation in the UK and EU, and Apple has that, so 100% App store of 45% mobile is enough).

Apple's model was great for them and for publishers when it came to building the market, but it is NOT in long-term consumer interests once the market has been established.

The EU agrees, which is why they've opened an Anti-trust investigation into the App Store in the last couple of months.

Press corner

Highlights, press releases and speeches

ec.europa.eu

I can choose android, apple or microsoft. I have choice no?

 

[DaGaffer]

I can choose android, apple or microsoft. I have choice no?

No. Because you don't have two phones. Within the distribution channel you are in, you have little or no choice, and your opportunity to change that distribution channel is usually once every 2-3 years. If you owned a car that only let you drive to Tescos but a different brand of car only let you drive to Sainsburys, would you consider that a choice? Especially if you didn't actually know that before you bought the car?

In reality most mobile phone owners don't even know that the technical ability to even have a choice exists; they take the existence of the App Store at face value and have no idea that there could be better options for them, because Apple has closed down the opportunity to innovate, and worse, the opportunity to offer differing service or price levels.

And all this is before get into the supply side issues; like in music where they can take 30% off Spotify but simply keep that as profit on their own streaming service, or worse, offer better terms to rights holders because they have not only their own increased margin to play with, but the 30% they're getting from their rivals!

 

[Scouse]

In reality most mobile phone owners don't even know that the technical ability to even have a choice exists

Canaries in a cage.

 

[Moriath]

View: https://twitter.com/JanNWolfe/status/1350186134815580168


gotta be good news ? Guess they dont have the money to buy votes

 

[Moriath]

View: https://youtu.be/khkKfMotNoI


fook me toyah‘s nipples. Not bad for an old bird. Mental chick lol

 

[Gwadien]

That won't last long on Youtube, lmao.

 

[Gwadien]

I just witnessed a young eastern european kid get ran over (nothing bad) the worst thing was how *shit* scared the kids (2 of them) and the Mum who came out later was of ringing an ambulance and the Police for their benefit.

Something is drastically wrong with society when people feel this way.

 

[Embattle]

View: https://twitter.com/JanNWolfe/status/1350186134815580168


gotta be good news ? Guess they dont have the money to buy votes

It isn't going to stop the NRA, they are just seeking protection and ultimately moving to Texas.