Here's a question on expected value. Do you think Epic makes more money if:
(a) they agree to Apple's demands and have Fortnite on the App Store during its peak of popularity for years and eat the junk fees on mtx or
(b) they fight an extremely costly lawsuit, which they have no guarantee of winning, for years, during which time Fortnite could leave the cultural zeitgeist (which it to some extent has) and maybe eventually one day get closer to 95% of mtx money?
If you think it's not (a), I would love to know why. Sweeney seems not that motivated by money, he's already filthy rich.
I think he wants to be Steam. He wants to grow to be a foundational pillar of the market. He is to a certain degree with Unreal Engine, but that's split with Unity. He wants Epic to be the top player. Might be ego/power more than cash, but it's still coming from a place of greed.
So maybe he wants to use mobile as the lever to make the Epic Store relevant, and suing the first party markets is the path to do that.
Or maybe he's just used to being the richest guy in the room and doesn't like to be pushed around.
Either way, I think it's misplaced to herald him as a folk hero. I don't think he actually cares about individual freedom. He cares about whatever is good for Tim/Epic.
Epic's got its own anticompetitive bullshit. They don't let you play their games on Linux. They make excuses about Linux being a haven of cheaters, but really, they're just trying to add friction to keep people from moving to SteamOS.
Ambition and high mindedness are not necessarily disjoint.
He sees the potential for his company to be a bigger platform, and Apple has put itself in the way of him attempting to do so on the merits. That must feel as wrong to him as it would to any individual whose potential is being blocked.
Most principles that get upheld in society, are fought for by people who benefit from them.
Banning apps like Kindle and Patreon from linking to their own payments should never have happened. Especially Patreon - Apple wrote a rule commandeering 30% of a then-five-year old app's revenue and coerced them into using IAP to get it, nobody should be supportive of this whatever Sweeney's shortcomings or motivations.
No I disagree that we need a "better" person to disrupt what Apple is doing, that's just shifting the goal posts to favor Apple doing it longer. The best person to do it is the one who did it.
Once again, not the proposition that was being offered. It's not that he's better. It was claimed he has a spine and it was pointed out that he doesn't. It's not a comment on if Apple is good or not. It's not a comment on whether or not there is someone better. It is a comment on Tim's motivations.
