SHOCKER: It’s not fighting for the little guy, it’s a public negotiation tactic.
肖克：不是在为小家伙而战，而是一种公开谈判的策略。
Apple and Google created quite a buzz this week when they kicked out the popular title by Epic Games, Fortnite, off their respective app stores for violating its guidelines. That’s right, Google kicked out Fortnite too. But 99% of the news coverage would’ve been focused on Apple alone because of the better SEO. That’s understandable. Apple has also given an ultimatum to Epic Games, graciously giving it a fortnight, to make it’s Fortnite comply with its guidelines or risk losing its developer account without which it can no longer distribute apps on the App Store. I also interviewed a couple of independent app developers who weighed in on this matter. Let’s find out what they have to say.
当 pple和Google本周因违反Epic Games的指导方针而从各自的应用商店中淘汰了Epic Games的热门游戏Fortnite时，引起了极大的轰动。 没错，Google也淘汰了Fortnite。 但是，由于SEO更好，因此99％的新闻报道本来只针对Apple。 这是可以理解的。 苹果还向Epic Games发出了最后通,，并慷慨地给了它两周的时间，以使Fortnite遵守其准则，否则就有失去其开发者帐户的风险，否则它将无法再在App Store上分发应用程序。 我还采访了几个独立的应用程序开发人员，他们对此事进行了评估。 让我们找出他们必须说的话。
Epic Games与Google和Apple的争执 (Epic Games’ feud with Google and Apple)
发生了什么？ (What Happened?)
Apple and Google kicked out Fortnite off their respective app stores.
苹果和谷歌从各自的应用商店中淘汰了Fortnite。
为什么会这样？ (Why this Happened?)
There exists a guideline regarding in-app payments that apply to every developer who sells digital goods or services on the App Store and the Google Play Store. It states that any commerce done within the app must use the default Apple In-App Purchases / Google In-App billing services as the method of payment. Apps cannot use or link to an alternate payment method within the app. Both Apple and Google charge a 30% cut on all transactions. This is the business model for both the App Store and the Google Play Store.
对于应用内付款，存在适用于在App Store和Google Play商店上销售数字商品或服务的每个开发人员的指南。 它指出，在应用程序内进行的任何交易都必须使用默认的Apple应用程序内购买/ Google应用内结算服务作为付款方式。 应用程式无法在应用程式内使用或连结至其他付款方式。 苹果和谷歌都对所有交易收取30％的折扣。 这是App Store和Google Play商店的商业模式。
Epic Games violated this guideline by offering the following within its app, Fortnite.
Epic Games在其应用程序Fortnite中提供了以下内容，从而违反了该准则。
This prompted both Apple and Google to remove Fortnite from its app stores.
这促使Apple和Google都从其应用商店中删除了Fortnite。
For a long time, Fortnite wasn’t made available on the Google Play Store to bypass this very 30% cut on revenue. But since Android is an open ecosystem, it allows apps to be sideloaded onto an Android device without relying on the Play Store. This implies that you can install any available app off of the internet onto Android devices. Google doesn’t vouch for these apps, and they may or may not contain potential malware. So when you install apps downloaded from the Internet Android issues a security warning making the user aware of potential threats.
很长一段时间以来，Fortnite一直没有在Google Play商店中提供，无法绕过这种30％的收入削减。 但是由于Android是开放的生态系统，因此它可以将应用程序侧面加载到Android设备上，而无需依赖Play商店。 这意味着您可以将互联网上所有可用的应用安装到Android设备上。 Google不担保这些应用程序，它们可能包含也可能不包含潜在的恶意软件。 因此，当您安装从Internet下载的应用程序时，Android会发出安全警告，使用户意识到潜在的威胁。
Epic Games intentionally chose to violate the guidelines of both the app stores.
Epic Games故意选择违反两家应用商店的指导方针。
Epic Games finally caved in and made Fortnite available on the Play store to avoid this, since a security warning while attempting to install the app isn’t ideal to a potential customer. However, Apple doesn’t allow apps to be sideloaded on to its iOS devices. Fornite had no choice but to make its app available on the App Store since it was the only place to install apps onto iOS devices. And it has been pretty vocal about the substantial revenue cuts it incurred in doing so. So to take a “stand” against Google and Apple, Epic Games intentionally chose to violate the guidelines of both the app stores.
Epic Games最终屈服了，并在Play商店中提供了Fortnite来避免这种情况，因为尝试安装该应用程序时出现安全警告对潜在客户而言并不理想。 但是，Apple不允许将应用程序侧面加载到其iOS设备上。 Fornite别无选择，只能在App Store上提供其应用程序，因为它是将应用程序安装到iOS设备上的唯一位置。 对于这样做造成的大量收入削减，人们一直很在意。 因此，为了与Google和Apple对抗，Epic Games故意选择违反这两个应用商店的指导方针。
Epic Games部署了特洛伊木马 (Epic Games deployed its trojan horse)
So Epic Games in response to Apple and Google removing Fortnite from their app stores (which they very well were expecting) is suing both the tech giants. Oh, they had the lawsuits ready to be filed as part of their pre-planned PR Stunt. Additionally, they had an ad ready to go, taking a cheap shot at Apple’s iconic “1984” ad.
因此，Epic Games回应苹果和谷歌将Fortnite从他们的应用程序商店中删除(他们非常期待)正在起诉这两家科技巨头。 哦，他们已经准备好提起诉讼，作为他们计划好的PR特技的一部分。 此外，他们还准备好投放广告，以低价拍摄了苹果标志性的“ 1984”广告。
演示地址
In the ad Epic Games claims,
在Epic Games的广告中，
Epic Games has defied the App Store Monopoly. In retaliation, Apple is blocking Fortnite from a billion devices. Join the fight to stop 2020 from becoming 1984.
Epic Games违反了App Store的垄断。 作为报复，苹果阻止了Fortnite进入10亿台设备。 参加阻止2020年成为1984年的斗争。
Here’s the problem with this ad. Apple didn’t block Fortnite from a billion devices. Epic Games forced Apple’s hand in doing so by violating the well-established guidelines. If anything, Epic games banned Fortnite themselves.
这是此广告的问题。 苹果并没有阻止Fortnite使用十亿台设备。 Epic Games违反了公认的准则，迫使苹果这样做。 如果有的话，史诗游戏会禁止Fortnite自己。
Epic Games chose the potential increase in revenue over its users.
Epic Games选择了潜在的收入增长点，超越了其用户。
They were well aware of the consequences (removal from the App Store). They decided against the best interests of its users. Many users who aren’t on the latest version of the app yet, can’t play the game because they are unable to update to the new version since it’s been kicked off from the App Store. It has asked its userbase to join the fight using the #freefotntire hashtag. They are simply leveraging its majority young audience against an issue most don’t even comprehend.
他们非常清楚后果(从App Store中删除)。 他们决定违背用户的最大利益。 许多尚未使用该应用程序最新版本的用户无法玩游戏，因为自从App Store启动以来，他们无法更新到该新版本。 它已经要求其用户群使用#freefotntire标签来参加这场战斗。 他们只是利用其大多数年轻观众针对大多数甚至都不了解的问题。
But this is not the first time a major corporation has spoken out against Apple’s unchallenged rule over it’s App kingdom. It has faced criticism over the years for its mandatory 30% cut from competing services like Spotify, who claim Apple runs its store like a “Monopoly”. Let’s dive in a little deeper on this “Monopolistic” control.
但是，这并不是大型公司第一次反对苹果对其应用王国的无懈可击的统治。 多年来，它因像Spotify这样的竞争性服务而被强制削减30％的做法而遭到批评，后者声称苹果公司像“垄断”那样经营其商店。 让我们更深入地研究这种“垄断”控制。
苹果在其App Store上的“垄断”： (Apple’s “Monopoly” on its App Store:)
Apple is facing increasing regulatory pressure over its operation of the App Store economy. It is one of the many “big-tech” companies on the watchlist of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, which is taking a closer look at whether Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google have too much power(monopoly) and wield it in anti-competitive ways. To understand it’s “monopoly” better, we need to understand the App Store better. Let’s dive in.
苹果在其App Store经济的运营中面临越来越大的监管压力。 它是美国司法部和联邦贸易委员会(Federal Trade Commission)监视名单中的众多“大技术”公司之一，该公司正在密切关注亚马逊，苹果，Facebook和Google是否拥有过多的权力(垄断)和使用权。它以反竞争的方式。 为了更好地理解它的“垄断”，我们需要更好地了解App Store。 让我们潜入。
In 2008 Apple launched the App Store on its iOS devices. It was the first of its kind, and it allowed 3rd party developers to write apps for its phone and make them available for purchase on the app store. Google’s Play Store also launched shortly after.
苹果于2008年在其iOS设备上推出了App Store。 这是同类产品中的第一个，它允许第三方开发人员为其手机编写应用程序，并使其可以在应用程序商店中购买。 Google的Play商店也在不久后推出。
Before the App Store most digital goods and services were sold in physical stores on a physical storage device /medium. So the goods sold had a significant markup because of the upkeep involved in physically storing the products. And the money that the developers were paid was significantly less. So with the launch of the App Store, Apple founded a revolutionary new marketplace where anyone with a developer account can sell apps and services digitally while paying Apple a cut of its revenue. It facilitated new digital businesses that would not exist without the platform. An entire industry has been built around app design and development. The App Store was a huge success, and this model of digital distribution became the new standard in the digital space.
在App Store之前，大多数数字商品和服务都是在物理存储设备/介质上的物理商店中出售的。 因此，由于实物存储所涉及的维护，所售商品具有明显的加价幅度。 而且开发商支付给他们的钱大大减少了。 因此，随着App Store的推出，苹果公司建立了一个革命性的新市场，拥有开发者帐户的任何人都可以以数字方式销售应用程序和服务，同时向苹果公司支付一定的收入。 它促进了没有该平台就不可能存在的新数字业务。 已经围绕应用程序设计和开发建立了整个行业。 App Store取得了巨大的成功，这种数字发行模式成为数字空间的新标准。
The App Store was responsible for $519 billion in billings
App Store带来了5,190亿美元的账单
Apple released a new study from economic consulting firm Analysis Group that says the App Store was responsible for $519 billion in estimated total billings and sales of both physical products and services and digital goods in 2019. Of that $519 billion Apple says, just $61 billion constitutes the digital items that it may receive a 30 % cut of (or it is a reduced 15 % in the case of longer-lasting subscriptions). Needless to say that from the sales generated, Apple’s App Store alone could secure a spot on the Fortune 100.
苹果发布了一项经济咨询公司Analysis Group的最新研究报告 ，该报告称，App Store预计在2019年为实体产品和服务以及数字商品的总账单和销售带来5190亿美元的收入。在5190亿美元的苹果公司中，只有610亿美元构成可能会削减30％的数字商品(如果订阅时间更长，则减少15％)。 不用说，仅凭苹果公司的App Store就可以在《财富》 100强中占据一席之地。
Apple’s App Store also continues to dominate the worldwide market in terms of revenue gained from premium apps and in-app purchases. The amount generated by Apple’s platform was approximately 80% greater than Google Play’s estimated gross revenue, despite the Play Store having 2.8 times more installs.
从高级应用程序和应用程序内购买获得的收入方面，苹果公司的App Store仍继续在全球市场上占据主导地位。 尽管Play商店的安装量是2.8倍 ，但苹果平台产生的收入大约比 Google Play的估算总收入高出80％ 。
A part of this reason may be credited to the higher average purchasing power of iOS userbase over the average Android userbase. Even Epic Games in its lawsuit against Apple claims that,
部分原因可能是由于iOS用户群的平均购买力高于平均Android用户群。 甚至Epic Games在针对Apple的诉讼中都声称，
“ The iOS userbase is also uniquely valuable in that its userbase spends twice as much money on apps as Android users. This is consistent with Epic’s experience, as the average iOS Fortnite user spends significantly more on in-app purchases than the average Android Fortnite user.”
“ iOS用户群也具有独特的价值，因为它的用户群在应用程序上的花费是Android用户的两倍。 这与Epic的经验是一致的，因为iOS Fortnite的平均用户在应用内购买上的支出要比Android Fortnite的平均用户多得多。”
But the App Store’s dramatically higher revenue in comparison to the Play store can also be owed to one of its rather unexplored sides, the “Walled Garden”.
但是，与Play商店相比，App Store的收入要高得多，这也可以归因于它的一个尚未开发的方面，即“围墙花园”。
苹果围墙花园 (Apple’s Walled Garden)
Apple’s ecosystem by design is a closed one. When you buy an iOS device, you essentially buy into its restrictions. You don’t have much control over your phone in the sense that, you can’t install apps from the internet, it doesn’t facilitate file sharing with devices outside of its ecosystem(iOS and macOS) and even the existing system has its limits. And the majority of the users can’t (aren’t aware) modify the underlying OS to run apps that are not approved by Apple.
苹果设计的生态系统是封闭的。 购买iOS设备时，实际上是要考虑其限制。 从某种意义上讲，您对手机没有太多控制权，因为您无法从互联网安装应用程序，无法促进与生态系统外部的设备(iOS和macOS)共享文件，甚至现有系统也拥有限制。 而且大多数用户无法(不知道)修改底层操作系统以运行未经Apple批准的应用程序。
This restrictive nature is designed with integrity and security in mind. Whether you like Apple or you’re on the other side of that argument, one thing you can’t deny is that Apple has had success. Apple’s tight control over both software and hardware is what arguably makes its products great. So you may be asking yourself, what does this have to do with App Store’s higher revenue?
设计这种限制性性质时要牢记完整性和安全性。 无论您是喜欢Apple还是站在另一边，您都不能否认的是Apple取得了成功。 苹果对软件和硬件的严格控制可以说使它的产品很棒。 因此，您可能会问自己，这与App Store的较高收入有什么关系？
Let’s talk about Android. The Android ecosystem is built on top of Linux, an open-source software. Meaning anybody can modify the underlying OS according to their needs. This means that Android users can possibly gain access to the code of any app on the Play Store. And you can modify the contents of the app to unlock premium features which are supported by the in-app payments.
让我们谈谈Android。 Android生态系统建立在Linux(开源软件)之上。 意味着任何人都可以根据自己的需求修改底层操作系统。 这意味着Android用户可能可以访问Play商店中任何应用的代码。 您可以修改应用程序的内容以解锁应用程序内付款支持的高级功能。
There are huge online markets for pirated Android apps on the internet
互联网上存在大量盗版Android应用的在线市场
And if the app does not support itself on a subscription-based model but rather a one-time fee, the app can be shared to other users easily because of the “open” file-sharing in the Android ecosystem. So there are huge online markets for pirated Android apps on the internet. You can get access to the premium version of Spotify free of charge on Android! And the pirated app catalogues are endless!
而且，如果该应用程序不支持基于订阅的模型，而是一次性付费，则由于Android生态系统中的“开放”文件共享，该应用程序可以轻松共享给其他用户。 因此，互联网上存在大量盗版Android应用的在线市场。 您可以在Android上免费访问Spotify的高级版！ 盗版应用目录无止境！
Pirating apps is absent for the most part on the iOS side of the spectrum. So the users are forced to do the morally right thing, purchase premium apps/features. So this anti-piracy is a huge plus for developers. So Apple’s “Walled Garden” in fact benefits its developers in a big way.
在频谱的iOS端，大部分都没有盗版应用程序。 因此，用户被迫做道德上正确的事情，购买高级应用程序/功能。 因此，这种反盗版对开发人员来说是一个巨大的优势。 因此，苹果的“围墙花园”实际上极大地有利于其开发人员。
Epic Games希望推倒苹果的围墙花园 (Epic Games wants to knock down Apple’s Walled Garden)
In the lawsuit against Apple, Epic Games also shows its interest in building its third-party store on iOS. It essentially wants to knock down Apple’s Walled Garden(The very Walled Garden that makes the App Sore so much more profitable). Of Course, it wants to! Who wouldn’t want to set up shop on a platform with a billion users who spend twice as much money on apps as Android users, and collect a cut of revenue for hosting apps on its store? If Epic Games is allowed to build a third party iOS store, another company might want to as well. And the question arises, “Who has the authority to decide on who gets to set up shop?”
在针对苹果的诉讼中，Epic Games还显示了其在iOS上建立第三方商店的兴趣。 它本质上是想推倒苹果的围墙花园(这个围墙花园使App Sore变得更加有利可图)。 当然，它想要！ 谁不想在拥有十亿用户的平台上开设商店，而该平台的用户花在应用程序上的钱是Android用户的两倍，并从其商店中托管应用程序中获得收益？ 如果允许Epic Games建立第三方iOS商店，那么另一家公司可能也希望这样做。 随之而来的问题是：“谁有权决定谁开设商店？”
It’s Apple Of Course! They get to decide what they want to do, with the software that they develop, that end up on devices they design, and manufacture. Apple has decided that App Store is the only way to put apps on iOS devices, just as Sony decided the PlayStation Store is the only way to download games onto their PlayStations and Microsoft with their Microsoft Store on Xbox. One can infer from the design choices Apple has made from the beginning, that it has been quite clear where they stand on this.
当然是苹果！ 他们可以使用自己开发的软件来决定要做什么，最终要在自己设计和制造的设备上使用。 苹果公司已经确定，App Store是在iOS设备上放置应用程序的唯一方法，就像索尼公司决定，PlayStation Store是将游戏通过Xbox上的Microsoft Store下载到PlayStation和Microsoft上的唯一方法。 从苹果从一开始就做出的设计选择就可以推断出，他们在这一点上的立场很明确。
Of Course, Epic Games wants the extra $360 million
当然，Epic Games希望额外获得3.6亿美元
Since it’s launch in 2017, Fortnite has used the App Store platform to gain 133.2 million users and made $1.2 billion in total sales. Of which Apple’s cut is $360 million. It has made also made an addition $10 million from the Play Store since it’s launch in the April of 2020. A report from SensorTower says, Fortnite has seen $43.4 million in total revenue and 2.4 million installs and $3.3 million and 2 million installs came within the past 30 days from the App Store and the Play Store respectively. Epic’s feud with Apple is more understandable now, because of how much money left its table. With this feud disguised as a “fight for all”, Epic Games is gambling with a high-risk stake.
自2017年推出以来，Fortnite使用App Store平台获得了1.332亿用户，总销售额达到12亿美元。 其中苹果削减了3.6亿美元。 自2020年4月推出以来，它还从Play商店获得了1000万美元的收入。SensorTower的一份报告称，Fortnite的总收入为4340万美元，安装了240万次，其中330万美元和200万次安装过去30天分别来自App Store和Play商店。 现在，史诗与苹果的争执更加容易理解，因为它剩下了多少钱。 由于这场仇恨被伪装成“所有人的战斗”，因此Epic Games正在赌博，赌注很高。
在默认付款处理系统上解码Epic的参数 (Decoding Epic’s argument on the default payment processing system)
Epic Games wants the ability to add 3rd party payment processing systems to exists alongside the default payment systems in the App Store and the Play Store so it can direct its users to choose its preferred payment processing service. This means that Epic Games will not have to pay either Google or Apple a single dime for existing on their platform. Even Epic Games in its store takes a 12% cut on revenue. Not quite the zero revenue cut they are pushing for with the in-app purchases on the App Store and the Play Store. So what payment processing method is trustworthy? Who decides it? Should Apple and Google accommodate any and all payment methods that want to exist on its app stores?
Epic Games希望能够与App Store和Play Store中的默认支付系统一起添加第三方支付处理系统，以便能够指导其用户选择其首选的支付处理服务。 这意味着Epic Games无需为平台上现有的一角钱向Google或Apple支付一毛钱。 甚至商店中的Epic Games收入也减少了12％。 他们在App Store和Play Store上购买应用内购买并没有实现零收入削减。 那么哪种付款处理方法值得信赖？ 谁来决定？ 苹果和谷歌是否应提供其应用商店中希望存在的所有付款方式？
With more and more apps supporting itself with a subscription-based model or free-to-use with paid premium features, adding a 3rd party payment processing feature will take a significant toll on the sustainability of the App Store and the Play Store ecosystem.
随着越来越多的应用程序通过基于订阅的模型来支持自身或具有付费高级功能的免费使用，添加第三方支付处理功能将对App Store和Play Store生态系统的可持续性造成重大损失。
Knocking down Apple’s and Google’s in-app payment monopoly and possible competing app stores might be good for corporate developers. But in a lot of ways, it can be bad for the consumers and small independent developers.
抵制苹果和谷歌的应用内支付垄断以及可能存在竞争的应用商店可能对企业开发者有利。 但是从很多方面来说，这对于消费者和小型独立开发商而言可能是不利的。
Benedict Evans brilliantly puts the consequences of changing this system.
本尼迪克特·埃文斯(Benedict Evans)巧妙地提出了改变这一制度的后果。
演示地址
Epic Games CEO, Tom Sweeny tweeted, “Another argument against supporting #FreeFortnite is “this is just a billion dollar company fighting a trillion dollar company about money”. But the fight isn’t over Epic wanting a special deal, it’s about the basic freedoms of all consumers and developers.” To which Benedict replies with a thread of tweets,
Epic Games首席执行官汤姆·斯威尼(Tom Sweeny)在推特上写道：“另一种反对支持#FreeFortnite的论点是“ 这只是一家市值10亿美元的公司，它在与一万亿美元的公司争夺资金 ”。 但是这场斗争并不是要Epic想要一份特别协议，而是所有消费者和开发商的基本自由。” 本尼迪克特回覆了一些推文，
“This is similar to the fallacy ‘it’s my computer so I should be free to do what I want. It’s bad for users for any random app to ask for a card. It’s easy for a big trusted brand to do that, but much less so for other developers Is removing that level playing field good for devs? Today, any developer on earth uses the same safe, trusted app store and payment system. The smallest developer you never heard of is on the same playing field as Epic. Apple’s intermediate layer means you don’t have to trust the dev. Epic wants to remove that.
“这类似于谬误，因为这是我的计算机，因此我应该有空做自己想做的事情。 对于用户来说，任何随机应用都要求提供卡是不利的。 一个大的可信赖品牌很容易做到这一点，但对其他开发者而言则难得多。消除这种公平竞争环境对开发人员有好处吗？ 如今，地球上的任何开发人员都使用相同的安全，可信赖的应用商店和支付系统。 您从未听说过的最小的开发人员与Epic处于同一领域。 苹果的中间层意味着您不必信任开发人员。 史诗想要删除它。
“This is, perhaps, a tragedy of the commons problem. it’s clear this would make Epic more money, and it would be good for some other developers. But it’s hard to see how it would be good for users at all, and it would be bad for lots of smaller developers as well. Apple is often capricious, arbitrary and inept in how it moderates the store, and rent-seeking in how it manages App Store payments. But the principle of a sandboxed store and a unified payment system are very good for users and, actually, developers.”
“这也许是公地问题的悲剧。 显然，这将使Epic赚更多的钱，这对其他一些开发人员也将是一件好事。 但是，很难看到它对用户完全有好处，对许多较小的开发人员也有坏处。 苹果公司通常在任性，任性和无能为力上如何管理商店以及在如何管理App Store付款方面寻求租金。 但是，沙盒商店和统一付款系统的原理对用户乃至开发人员都非常有用。 ”
“If you follow the logic of Epic’s argument, iOS wouldn’t just have Android’s security model — iOS & Android would have the Windows security model. Over 4bn people have a smartphone today. If you remove Apple and Google judgement from the process, and make those 4bn people solely responsible for deciding what software should be allowed to do what with those phones and their data… that would not be good.”
“如果遵循Epic的论证逻辑，iOS不仅会具有Android的安全模型-iOS和Android将具有Windows的安全模型。 如今，超过40亿人拥有智能手机。 如果您从程序中删除苹果和谷歌的判断，让这40亿人全权负责决定应该允许哪种软件对这些手机及其数据进行处理，那将是不好的。”
In-App purchases are one of the many conveniences provided by the App Store and the Play Store. The ability to pay for digital goods and services without leaving the app certainly helps boost the user’s decision on conversion to premium features.
应用内购买是App Store和Play商店提供的众多便利之一。 在不离开应用程序的情况下为数字商品和服务付款的能力无疑有助于提高用户决定转换为高级功能的决定。
There are apps like Spotify, Netflix, Amazon Kindle etc. that are under a category called “reader apps” on the App Store. These are apps where users exclusively purchase or subscribe to content outside the app, and the users can access its services on iOS. These apps have marginal costs on its content and can’t afford to pay a 30% cut to Apple while providing competitive prices for its products. So these companies opted out of the in-app purchases and chose the reader app model to distribute its services on the App Store. So Epic Games could possibly call for this distribution model for its “V-Bucks”, the in-game currency in Fortnite. However, it has no marginal costs. But of course, it doesn’t want to. Everything on the Fortnite store is an impulse buy which employs a ‘FOMO’ as its sales strategy.
有些应用程序(例如Spotify，Netflix，Amazon Kindle等)在App Store上属于“阅读器应用程序”类别。 在这些应用程序中，用户可以独家购买或订阅应用程序外部的内容，并且用户可以在iOS上访问其服务。 这些应用的内容具有边际成本，在为产品提供具有竞争力的价格时，无力向苹果支付30％的折扣。 因此，这些公司选择退出应用程序内购买，并选择阅读器应用程序模型在App Store上分发其服务。 因此Epic Games可能会为其Fortnite中的游戏币“ V-Bucks”呼吁采用这种分销模式。 但是，它没有边际成本。 但是，当然，它不想。 Fortnite商店中的所有商品都是冲动购买，采用“ FOMO”作为其销售策略。
Fortnite, like most free-to-play games, relies on users doped-up on its content, on a game frenzy, desperately wanting to level up in an ever so stimulating environment designed to disconnect the user from reality, one game at a time.
像大多数免费游戏一样，Fortnite依赖于用户对内容的狂热，疯狂的游戏，迫切希望在一个如此刺激的环境中升级，该环境旨在使用户脱离现实，一次只能玩一个游戏。
So Fortnite, cannot afford to not have in-app purchases within its app to facilitate the hunger of its doped up users which offers the least path of resistance. They don’t have to go outside the app, log-in, fill in the credit card details and then press pay and wait for the bill of sale, while they can rather do so with the click of a button(or Biometric authentication services). More time the user spends within the app, higher are the chances of a sale. Apple’s “It just works” setup, in this case, comes with a premium.
因此，Fortnite不能在其应用内没有应用内购买来缓解其掺杂用户的饥饿感，这提供了最小的阻力途径。 他们不必走出应用程序，登录，填写信用卡详细信息，然后按付款并等待销售单，而他们只需单击按钮(或生物特征认证服务)即可。 )。 用户在应用程序中花费的时间越长，销售机会就越高。 在这种情况下，Apple的“ It just works”设置具有很高的价值。
The App Store and Play Store are reputable platforms built with years of trust from its users on strict security implementations and it’s hassle-free use. The monopoly in its payment systems exist rather simply because of its competence and not because of some tyrannical greed. Changes to the system can't happen without fundamental changes to the very principles that made it successful in the first place. One cannot expect to set up shop rent-free on a platform of this scale, all while enjoying the conveniences of its establishment. Adding 3rd party payment services unnecessarily complicates things and comprises the integrity of the app stores. So the takeaway, is that a single trusted payment method is pretty good for users and many independent developers as a whole.
App Store和Play Store是信誉良好的平台，在其严格的安全性实施上赢得了用户多年的信任，并且无忧使用。 支付系统中的垄断之所以存在，仅仅是因为它的能力，而不是因为某些专横的贪婪。 如果不对首先使系统成功的原则进行根本性改变，就不可能对系统进行更改。 在享受建立便利的同时，人们不能指望在如此规模的平台上免费开设商店。 添加第三方支付服务不必要地使事情复杂化，并增加了应用商店的完整性。 因此，可以得出的结论是，一种受信任的付款方式对用户和整个独立开发人员都非常有用。
解码削减30％ (Decoding the 30% cut)
Apple (and Google) provides the tools necessary to build apps on their respective platform. It regularly updates the said tools with new technologies and hosts the apps globally, free of charge. Apple’s rigorous review process employs a combination of automated systems and people to review every app that developers submit. Even every update to an app is reviewed. (Although a lot of developers are complaining about reviewers being often misaligned in the way they handle the review process. And some reviewers reject apps for no apparent reason but simply because they aren't technical enough to have a clear conversation with developers and they don’t understand what they are reviewing.)
Apple(和Google)提供了在各自平台上构建应用程序所需的工具。 它会定期使用新技术更新上述工具，并在全球范围内免费托管应用程序。 苹果公司严格的审查流程结合了自动化系统和人员来审查开发人员提交的每个应用程序。 甚至对应用程序的每次更新都进行了审查。 (尽管许多开发人员抱怨审阅者在处理审阅过程中经常会错位。一些审稿人拒绝应用程序的原因没有明显原因，仅仅是因为他们的技术不足以与开发者进行清晰的对话，而他们却没有这样做。不明白他们在评论什么。)
Anyway, to support all these activities there exists a business model that takes a 30% revenue cut on every sale from the App Store. 84% of apps are free, and developers pay nothing to Apple. Only those apps that are paid or rely on a subscription model are taxed 30% (Renewal of subscriptions after year one are effectively dropped to 15%). I’m in no way implying that it is fair or it takes 30% of all sales to keep the lights on at the App Store.
无论如何，为了支持所有这些活动，存在一种商业模式，该模式在App Store的每次销售中都减少了30％的收入。 84％的应用程序是免费的，开发人员无需向Apple支付任何费用。 只有那些付费或依赖订阅模式的应用才需要缴纳30％的税(第一年之后的续订有效地降至15％)。 我绝不暗示这是公平的，或者占总销售额的30％才能在App Store保持亮灯状态。
Apple, Google, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo all support their platforms with a 30% revenue cut.
苹果，谷歌，索尼，微软，任天堂都将其平台收入削减了30％。
It is a pretty standard cut in the industry. Epic’s 12% cut can possibly sustain its rather significantly smaller library in comparison. But it can’t except the same on other platforms with millions of apps.
这是业界相当标准的做法。 与之相比，Epic的12％的裁员可能可以维持其相当小的图书馆。 但这不能与其他拥有数百万个应用程序的平台相同。
Apple’s 30% cut was the same when the App Store was established. And it is the same to date. They didn’t alter it just because its platform now has a billion users vs a million when it was established. I’m not going to comment on whether it’s fair. Could it be lower? Of Course. Who wouldn’t want free money? Could there a better taxing model based on revenue generated by apps, all while making it completely free for independent developers whose revenue fall below a certain cap? Sounds ideal right? I don’t know. Same rules for everyone is what Apple “preaches” at the moment. But what I’ll tell you is that just because a company is worth a trillion dollars doesn’t mean it can’t conduct its business the way it sees fit. Calling for a reduction in the revenue cut just because they can sustain it, is not fair or ideal in the capitalistic economy that we live in. At the end of the day, the App Store is a business, and Apple treats it like one. And they have all the right to.
苹果在App Store成立时的降幅是30％。 到目前为止，它是相同的。 他们并没有改变它，只是因为它的平台现在拥有十亿用户，而建立时只有一百万。 我不会评论这是否公平。 会更低吗？ 当然。 谁不想要免费的钱？ 是否可以有一个基于应用程序产生的收入的更好的征税模型，同时使收入低于特定上限的独立开发人员完全免费？ 听起来很理想吧？ 我不知道。 苹果目前所宣扬的原则是，每个人都遵循相同的规则。 但是我要告诉你的是，仅仅因为一家公司的市值达到一万亿美元，并不意味着它就无法按照自己认为合适的方式开展业务。 在我们所生活的资本主义经济中，仅仅因为收入维持下去就要求减少收入削减是不公平的或不理想的。归根结底，App Store是一家公司，Apple像对待苹果一样对待它。 他们拥有一切权利。
独立开发人员对此有何评论？ (What do independent developers have to say about it?)
Since I don’t personally don’t develop apps for either platform, I reached out to a few independent developers for their insights on this topic.
由于我个人不为这两个平台开发应用程序，因此我联系了一些独立开发人员，以获取他们对该主题的见解。
→ Byte-Sized Interviews
→字节大小的采访
Edouard Barbier is an indie iOS Developer from Belgium who quit his day job at Google to pursue the indie-dev dream. With over 9 apps on the App Store including his viral title, “YT Tracker” with thousands of downloads, he had this to say on the matter,
Edouard Barbier是来自比利时的独立iOS开发人员，他辞去了在Google的日常工作以追求独立开发的梦想。 他在App Store上拥有超过9种应用，其中包括病毒标题“ YT Tracker ”以及数千次下载，他对此事有这样的看法：
“I would say… that for me personally as a solo developer; the 30% cut is fine because the App Store is a massive “free marketing” machine for me. If you know how to rank in search, the user acquisition is pretty much free for small developers, and that has huge value (for me personally), so I’m ok to “pay” Apple for this. Without the App Store, I wouldn’t be able to live off my apps.”
“我会说……对于我个人而言，这是一个开发者； 减少30％的费用是可以的，因为App Store对我来说是一个巨大的“免费营销”机器 。 如果您知道如何在搜索中进行排名，那么对于小型开发人员而言，用户获取几乎是免费的，而且这对我个人而言具有巨大的价值， 因此我可以为此“向苹果支付”。 没有App Store，我将无法继续使用我的应用程序。 ”
“Now, for big companies that have huge costs of running servers and teams etc, I understand the appeal to find a workaround and try to reduce their costs by avoiding the IAP system provided by Apple. I don’t know if it’s always a good strategy to try to avoid it, the IAP system provided by Apple works well and is trusted by users. I would never pay for an app on the web with my credit card for instance. So they might lose some paying customers because their purchase flow is less smooth than what’s built-in and provided by Apple. It’s a calculation big corporations have to make”
“现在，对于那些在运行服务器和团队等方面拥有巨大成本的大公司来说，我理解寻找一种解决方法并通过避免使用Apple提供的IAP系统来降低成本的方法很有吸引力。 我不知道这是否始终是避免这种情况的好策略，Apple提供的IAP系统运行良好并且受到用户的信任。 例如，我永远不会使用信用卡在网上为某个应用程序付费。 因此，他们可能会失去一些付费客户，因为他们的购买流程不如Apple内置和提供的购买流程顺畅。 这是大公司必须进行的计算”
“On the argument that Apple created a monopoly with the App Store, it’s tricky. They have built incredible devices and a powerful brand around what the iPhone can do. I understand that they want to control what ends up on the App Store and ultimately what ends up running on people phones. I think I’d be completely ok with them maintaining this current system if developers could have a much better relationship with the App Review team. There are many issues that need work and improvements. But I don’t see Apple opening up to alternative App Stores anytime soon.”
“关于苹果在App Store创造了垄断的论点，这很棘手。 他们围绕iPhone所做的事情建立了令人难以置信的设备和强大的品牌。 我了解他们希望控制App Store上的内容以及最终在人机上运行的内容。 如果开发人员可以与App Review团队建立更好的关系，我认为他们完全可以维持当前的系统。 有许多问题需要改进。 但是我看不到苹果很快会向其他应用商店开放。”
Aivars Meijers, another indie iOS developer, from Lativa, who developed the Apnea Training App, says,
来自Lativa的另一位独立iOS开发人员Aivars Meijers开发了Apnea Training App ，他说：
“I will take Epic more serious if they will start the same fight with console platform owners as well. Now it is unclear why they are fine with the revenue cut on Xbox, Playstation & Nintendo.”
如果他们也将与控制台平台所有者展开同样的战斗，我将更加认真地对待Epic。 现在还不清楚为什么他们对Xbox，Playstation和Nintendo的收入减少感到满意。 ”
“30% is a lot, I would like to see less, but with subscriptions, it is 15% from the second year and that already sounds ok for me.”
“ 30％太多了，我希望看到的更少 ，但是有了订阅，第二年起就达到15％，这对我来说已经可以了。”
“App sideload could be a good feature to have. But I don’t see a need or benefits from one or few more App Stores. Why do I need another option if the ‘revenue cut’ part stays the same?”
“应用程序侧面负载可能是一个不错的功能。 但是我看不到一个或几个以上App Store的需求或收益。 如果“收入削减”部分保持不变，为什么还需要其他选择？ ”
Majid Jabrayilov from Baku, the developer behind the app, CardioBot says,
CardioBot的幕后开发者Baku的Majid Jabrayilov说，
“I’m ok with the revenue cut. But I believe that the same rules should be applicable for all apps on the App Store. All the platforms have the same revenue cut. I think it is ok because they provide us with great tools to build apps.”
“我同意削减收入。 但我认为，相同的规则应适用于App Store中的所有应用程序 。 所有平台都有相同的收入削减。 我认为可以，因为它们为我们提供了构建应用程序的出色工具。”
后果 (Consequences)
Apple is now putting the pressure back on Epic Games, by issuing an ultimatum. It’s giving Fortnite, a fortnight to comply with the App Store guidelines or risk losing it’s developer account, without which it can't exist in the App Store. Epic Games has filed against this motion saying that this would cause “irreparable harm”.
苹果现在通过发出最后通atum ，将压力重新施加在Epic Games上。 它给Fortnite一个两星期的时间来遵守App Store指南，否则就有失去其开发者帐户的风险，否则，Fortnite在App Store中将不存在。 Epic Games已针对这一动议提起诉讼，称这将造成“无法弥补的伤害”。
Here’s the statement Apple gave to The Verge,
这是苹果公司给The Verge的声明 ，
“The App Store is designed to be a safe and trusted place for users and a great business opportunity for all developers. Epic has been one of the most successful developers on the App Store, growing into a multibillion dollar business that reaches millions of iOS customers around the world. We very much want to keep the company as part of the Apple Developer Program and their apps on the Store. The problem Epic has created for itself is one that can easily be remedied if they submit an update of their app that reverts it to comply with the guidelines they agreed to and which apply to all developers. We won’t make an exception for Epic because we don’t think it’s right to put their business interests ahead of the guidelines that protect our customers.”
“ App Store旨在为用户提供安全可靠的场所，并为所有开发人员提供绝佳的商机。 Epic一直是App Store上最成功的开发人员之一，发展成为数十亿美元的业务，覆盖了全球数百万的iOS客户 。 我们非常希望将该公司保留为Apple Developer Program及其应用程序的一部分。 Epic为其本身带来的问题是， 如果他们提交了应用程序的更新(可以还原该应用程序，使其符合他们同意并适用于所有开发人员的指南) ，则可以轻松地解决该问题 。 对于Epic，我们不会例外，因为我们认为将他们的商业利益置于保护客户的准则之前是不正确的。 ”
It’ll be interesting to see how Apple and Google tackle increasing pressure on decreasing its slice of the pie from its app stores.
有趣的是，苹果和谷歌如何应对越来越大的压力，要求其减少来自应用商店的份额。
结论 (Conclusion)
As this tweet brilliantly puts it, Epic Games with its Fortnite squeezed user growth from Apple Store for more than 2 years, are financially secure, and diversified enough across platforms to spin their self-interest as a moral imperative. It also wants to run it’s own apps stores & take a cut on nearly a billion iOS devices.
就像这则推文所说的那样，Epic Games及其Fortnite从Apple Store压榨了两年多的用户增长，财务安全，并且在各个平台上的多元化程度足以使其自身利益成为道德上的当务之急。 它还想经营自己的应用商店，并削减近十亿台iOS设备。
Meeting epic’s demands would mean to abandon the smartphone software and security model almost entirely. The very model that arguably made the smartphone very successful. At the end of the day, this PR stunt is a result of corporate greed disguised as a fight for the little guys.
满足史诗般的需求将意味着几乎完全放弃智能手机软件和安全模型。 可以说使智能手机非常成功的机型。 归根结底，这场公关特技是由于公司贪婪而伪装成为小家伙而战。
Hello there! If you enjoyed this article or any part of this made you go “Hmmmmmm ”, follow me for more interesting takes right here on Medium or follow me on my socials to be notified when I post again .
你好，！ 如果您喜欢这篇文章或其中的任何内容使您成为“ Hmmmmmm”，请在“ Medium”上关注我，或者在我的社交圈中关注我，以便在我再次发布notified时得到通知。
https://twitter.com/gotham_devhttps://www.instagram.com/gotham.dev/
https://twitter.com/gotham_dev https://www.instagram.com/gotham.dev/
翻译自: https://medium.com/swlh/epic-games-is-pretending-to-be-the-poor-little-david-to-apples-goliath-2aaa2597cdb7