Epic Games Accounts Won't Be Able To Use Apple's Sign-in System as Soon as September 11th (theverge.com) 36
Apple's "Sign In with Apple" login system will no longer work with Epic Games accounts as soon as September 11th, Epic said today. The new restriction is another casualty of Apple and Epic's ongoing spat. From a report: If you currently use "Sign In with Apple" for your Epic account, Epic says you'll need to update your account with new login credentials before September 11th to retain access. Epic has put together a guide on how to make that update if you need to do so. Epic also says that it may be able to recover your account manually after the "Sign in with Apple" option goes away, but you'll have to contact the studio directly. Apple requires developers to use its single sign-on system if they offer any other third-party options and want their apps in the App Store -- presumably a driving factor behind Epic offering the service as a sign-in factor in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you care so much?
I can see two outcomes from this.
1. Customers love/reliance to Apple products will just hurt Epic
2. Customers love/reliance to Epic Products will just hurt Apple
Either case
Whatever happens the customer is going to to have the consequences.
It really is a shame that both companies have just been doubling down on each other. vs some actual good faith partnership.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you care so much?
I can see two outcomes from this. 1. Customers love/reliance to Apple products will just hurt Epic 2. Customers love/reliance to Epic Products will just hurt Apple
Depends on your definition of 'hurt'. The customers reliant/loyal to Apple and those reliant/loyal to Epic have only a small overlap. Apple is a hardware manufacturer (phones/laptops) and Epic is a game software publisher, the fact that to a minor degree they rely on each other (Apple's devices are platforms for Epic's games) is mostly irrelevant. There are plenty of Apple customers who do no gaming whatsoever and will not care about any of this. There are plenty of Epic customers who do not own Apple d
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you care so much?
I can see two outcomes from this.
1. Customers love/reliance to Apple products will just hurt Epic
2. Customers love/reliance to Epic Products will just hurt Apple
Either way: Apple is screwing over people who've already paid money. Go, Apple!
Re: (Score:2)
Parents listening to the squeals of the kids because they're blocked from Fortnite? Yeah, that'll go down well.
Apple Auth only offered because it is required (Score:5, Informative)
It's a massive pain in the butt to integrate Apple Sign-In, and as a developer that maintains a library to make it slightly easier (https://github.com/invertase/react-native-apple-authentication/) I can say no one would offer it if Apple did not strictly require it.
The API is not great, they did not backport it to their older operating systems, and in my experience not even apple users prefer it over google or facebook auth. And Apple has shown that while they won't decrypt your phone they are more than happy to share your cloud data, which would include these auth trails.
It is one of the most obvious examples of how they use their monopolistic gatekeeper power
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does not stop them from trying, and I guess if they want to pursue anti-competitive practices resulting in their own eventual demise, good on them
Re: Apple Auth only offered because it is required (Score:2)
They do have a majority of the hardware market in the US for phones. Note that I said hardware, not operating system. They also hold a large enough portion of the market that mobile web developers have to stick with whatever safari supports, and Apple has let it safari lag behind just like Microsoft did with IE6. My guess is they'd rather you publish an iOS app, just the same as Microsoft preferred you write a windows app. This, of course, wouldn't be a big deal if Apple allowed third party web browsers wit
Re: (Score:2)
A quick search says they have less than a 50% US market share, which is not the common understanding for a "majority." But why limit it to the US market? Apple is a global company, and both Samsung and Huawei have more global market share.
Re: (Score:2)
Majority can mean either "more than half the total" or mean the "the greater part". Both are valid in general use, although in specific fields it can have a narrower meaning (legal, elections, statistical, etc)
And a quick search of mobile operating system market share shows otherwise. In May 2020 [statista.com], iOS has captured the largest portion (>50%) of the US smartphone market share.
Comparing vendors rather than operating systems (Apple vs. Samsung, LG, etc), you can see that Apple has long had an the greater por [counterpointresearch.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You're cherry-picking. From your own source [statista.com]. And, no valid reason for limiting it to US market share. Look at global.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh it's valid to limit it to a single country, depending on what we want to discuss. Especially when legislation to stop monopolies and consumer protection laws are not international but limited and specific to each nation.
And I specifically linked to news on the May 2020 announcement for people that forgot that Apple went over 50% in terms of market. Finding annual averages rather than monthly averages will of course smooth out the peaks, because math.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Everyone has a monopoly with... (Score:2)
With some cars you have to use certain brands of oil or you void your warranty. With Husqvarna power tools you have to use their premixed two cycle gas or you void the warranty.
Re: (Score:2)
Neither of those examples are legal (at least in the US).
If you use something other than Husqvarna's recommended solution and something goes wrong requiring warranty service, Husqvarna must prove that it was not using their solution that caused the damage. Every other warranty service claim must be honoured.
BMW got in enormous trouble a few years back for disclaiming warranty service on vehicles when unrelated aftermarket modifications were installed. (E.g., 'You use non-BMW headlamps and your under-warra
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
in my experience not even apple users prefer it over google or Facebook auth
I prefer it since I have more control over who has my email. It may take a while but I think over time a lot of people will grow to prefer it...
Re: (Score:2)
I enjoy privacy and I agree with you personally, but the numbers indicate you and I are rarities.
Most people trade away their privacy happily. The more important point is that Apple does only lip service on the privacy front, and for email control you can use '+' suffix addressing yes?
Re: Apple Auth only offered because it is required (Score:2)
For iCloud you can make e-mail aliases. I have not checked if they allow the plus character but I have aliases that I use for this same functional purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
in my experience not even apple users prefer it over google or Facebook auth
I prefer it since I have more control over who has my email. It may take a while but I think over time a lot of people will grow to prefer it...
Same. I use it when it is offered. I would never use a Google or Facebook auth. First choice is Apple sign in, second choice is not using the app at all, third choice is using traditional email and password when the first 2 choices won't work.
It's a new feature. It will get more popular.
Re: (Score:1)
That would be great if this whole lawsuit could force Apple to stop requiring Apple Sign-In. I build apps for a living, and I've been steering clients away from using social login because 1) it forces you to incorporate Apple Sign-In, and 2) Facebook login on multiple occasions has caused apps to crash on startup due to remote configuration changes.
News For... (Score:2)
Slashdot. News for people obsessed with Apple/Epic.
Re: (Score:1)
as soon as September 11th (Score:1)
So, this is how they celebrate?
Years ago ... (Score:3)
Cool story bro. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple products over the past 5 years have been nothing more than higher priced items offering the same old, same old.
I agree with your comment, but mediocre hardware (yet aesthetically superior I admit) at inflated prices has been the foundation of Apple's product line for nearly two decades.
Absued how? (Score:1)
I praised Apple's walled garden as a model of how to keep an ecosystem safe. However, over the years I have seen this power being abused more and more.
In what way?
I would say the opposite is true, Apples ecosystem is the ONLY one that has not abused people using it.
It's been more and more clear, I need to stay clear of Gogole and Facebook as much as possible, while Apple has been really great about user privacy issues and not building everything around an advertising model.
Re: (Score:2)
However, over the years I have seen this power being abused more and more.
What abuse? Apple charges for a service. They have charged the same for this service for the past 10+ years. A customer is abusing the terms of services and getting booted as a result.
I never purchased Apple products in the first place. I'm what most people call a "hater" yet the absurd reactions such as yours here are simply driving me to defend a company I don't like. If you shit in someone else's pool, expect to get kicked out. That isn't abuse.
I like iOS, but... (Score:1)
Sideloading is absolutely needed.
Going from real computers (whats a computer? one that is not locked down tighter than a nuns..) to this walled garden hell is beyond frustrating.
My iPad Pro is a great device, but usability is close to a toy, given the stupid restrictions.
Thats one thing that Android has done incredibly well.
If only Google would release a real iPad Pro competitor, I would sell this damned thing.
Re: I like iOS, but... (Score:2)
I expect iOS to open up slightly but I doubt it will happen with iPhones. I think that would be the ideal compromise. I think iPads could benefit from being more open, being more like computers, but I was my phone to remain an appliance.
9/11? (Score:2)
Is this supposed to be a joke?