this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
349 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

69247 readers
3792 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Fuck the stupid morons who defend Apple.

Imagine if Microsoft banned Windows users from installing the software they want on their computer.

Imagine if Microsoft required all software developers to give them 30% of their earning or Microsoft will ban them from Windows

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jellygoose@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 hour ago

The EU seems to be the only entity left with a backbone when it comes protecting consumers.

[–] Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 hours ago

“reeeeeee”

[–] Katzelle3@lemmy.world 8 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

Yes, Windows does that. It's called S Mode.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Thanks, I almost forgot about my experience using S mode. It is fucking awful.

If it was my own I would have just installed Linux.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 hours ago

Isnt the mode dead? I thought they discontinued it

[–] NotProLemmy@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago

S mode in win10

SE mode in win11

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

They better start fining in Billions

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 33 points 13 hours ago (13 children)

Hating on Apple for their 30% cut is popular.

Hating on Google for their 30% cut is popular.

Hating on Microfot, Sony, and Nintendo for their cuts is popular.

But somehow hating on Steam for their 30% cut is going too far.

[–] rbits@lemm.ee 1 points 35 minutes ago* (last edited 35 minutes ago)

I agree that the 30% cut is too much. The only reason I give them a pass is because Steam is really good (at least, as a user). But I still want them to lower it.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

I'd like to see a game developer chiming in but as a user, 30% cut by Steam feels justified.

They have helped me discover and buy many games that I wouldn't have even heard of otherwise. Compare that to Google Play Store which is full of dogshit shovelware and Pay2Win games.

And sometimes I've even bought Steam keys via Fanatical bundles, where I chose which games to buy by looking at their Steam store pages. Steam got nothing from these transactions as far as I know.

This is without getting into other useful stuff like guides and forums hosted by Steam which I can look at whenever I get stuck. Or Steam workshop which allows users to easily mod the games.

Call me a fanboy but I'm tired of this 'what about Steam' comments.

Ask Sony, Microsoft, Google, and Nintendo to improve their stores instead.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Steam is not the only means of distribution anywhere, and you can often buy the same game both from Steam and directly.

It's too early to hate it.

(Well, I mean, I want a FreeBSD native Steam client with native Proton and all infrastructure, but I can understand that it's a small percentage, even if not that different from Linux support.)

It would be more comparable if Apple, Microsoft (Xbox), Nintendo, or Sony allowed anyone to make a third party game launcher but they just keep sucking.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

You get value from Steam for paying that.

What value do you get from Apple for paying the Apple tax? A higher peice for a phone that could cost 500€ less?

[–] ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml -4 points 3 hours ago

You get value from Steam for paying that

Are you crazy? You know how much money that is? And this isn't taken from the distributors cut we get higher 30% prices because of it.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 11 points 7 hours ago

I'm less mad at Steam and Google because there are clear, simple ways to avoid their cuts.

I have no basis to say whether they're providing a service worth the 30% charge. I'm also less mad at Steam than at Google because they're being less shady about trying to push people into their store too.

[–] death@infosec.pub 68 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (11 children)

Perhaps that's because Steam doesn't seem to be trying very hard to "lock in" developers to their platform. Devs are free to sell their PC games on Gog or Epic or whatever. Steam is popular because it's a good platform. This freedom for developers or customers mostly does not exist on mobile or on consoles, except for the EUs efforts here.

Even their "console" the Steam Deck can, relatively easily, run games from other stores. I'm not saying a 30% cut should be considered fair but they do seem to take a different approach to digital sales than the other large players.

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 36 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah it’s arguable that Steam is a monopoly but somehow billion dollar publishers can’t create a store to sell their own products without fucking it up with annoying bullshit. Pay the 30% to protect you from yourselves.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 13 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, Steam is pretty much a monopoly. But I haven't seen what I'd call monopolistic practices from them. It's just that everyone else appears to fall flat on their faces when trying to make a competing product.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

It's weird because steam isn't even that amazing at what it does and even some of the features I like can be tempremental or downright buggy at times.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] oxysis@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Steam gets a pass because they actually offer buyer protection, refunds if it doesn’t work, refunds under certain requirements which can be waved under certain circumstances, removal of day one season passes, refunds for dlc that gets delayed too long for example.

If an actual competitor gave a shit about things that matter to actual players than they have a shot. Epic Game Store is a joke because no one wants a store that only focuses on what corporations want. GOG is good but just doesn’t market itself well, seriously outside of launching CDPR games I don’t see it at all.

Getting companies to offer their games on platforms that offer a higher margin is easy. Getting players over to a platform that offers less protections and features is not going to happen.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 12 points 9 hours ago

GOG is good but just doesn’t market itself well

GOG's biggest problem is also their greatest asset: no DRM.

[–] Eggyhead@lemmings.world 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I was denied a refund for a broken game on Steam Deck just last winter. I had never played or even installed it, but I had purchased it and let it sit in my backlog too long before trying.

By comparison, I can’t recall a single time I’ve been denied a refund request from the iPhone App Store. They’ve also never sold me software that couldn’t run on the hardware they also sold me.

I understand how it’s my fault according to steam’s ToS, but it still doesn’t seem right to me.

[–] CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 hours ago

When you ask for a refund under Steam's 2h/14d policy, it's Steam offering the refund. Past that, the request is passed on the developer

At least that's how I've heard it described, idk for sure

[–] gray@pawb.social 25 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Steam isn’t a monopoly.

The PC is an open platform, you can use any game store or launcher you want - unlike the iPhone, Android (without sideloading), PlayStation, switch, or Xbox.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dwazou@lemm.ee 22 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Microsoft, Apple, Exxon, Meta, Amazon, JP Morgan or Saudi Aramco are the most powerful corporations in the world. They are empires more powerful than many nations. Their CEOs always travel with armed men. They have the personal phone number of Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.

It's healthy to scrutinize them. Steam is a problem, but Valve is nowhere near as powerful.

[–] Cossty@lemmy.world -5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Steam's 30% is the last of their problems, I would like them to finally start actually moderating Steam forums. Because devs of the particular game usually don't care. Visit some forums of newly released popular game and it's full of bigots, misogyny, trolls and hate. It's unbelievable.

Go check oblivion remastered

[–] MITM0@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Bigots, Misogyny, Trolls & Hate is translation for I want people censored because I am on a power-trip. These are vague & nebulous & why don't you & your buddies go counter them

& Good one mate, because I have been there.

[–] Cossty@lemmy.world -4 points 5 hours ago

Oh shit, one of those losers is here.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 0 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

"Eat the rich!"

"Including Gabe?"

"Woooow there cowboy!"

I hate the hypocrisy.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Gaben is a hardcore libertarian as well. And owns a billion dollar armada of yachts.

No he’s one of the good ones /s

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Valve's response to George Floyd was to give each employee a certain amount of money and let them choose which charity to give it to (if they did give it to charity), which means they could just as well give it to an anti BLM movement if they wanted to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.ml 23 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

except only loosing 568m is just "the price of doing business" for them and it's not much of a deterrent to make them stop. they made more than that by doing this so it's still a net profit

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

Right. And the fines will continue, lol.

[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 15 points 12 hours ago

While true, 568m is a significant cost of doing business. Also remember that a punitive action should not make the company go bankrupt, it should make them rethink.

And if they don't, the fines will go higher, until they do rethink.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I mean that would imply they stood to gain $568M by not allowing 3rd party app stores. Seems unlikely.

[–] knighthawk0811@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

one of the most profitable companies in the world, it seems very likely

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

How much money do you think Google loses to 3rd party app stores? Considering they've been allowed from the beginning and are also one of the most profitable companies in the world?

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Companies don't do shit that costs them money for no reason.

There are only two reasons a for profit company would do something, for profit or because the law is making them.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Well I think it's fair to assume that they not only didn't know for certain that they would be charged/fined but also how long it would take for that to happen or how much it would be. And they rolled the dice. They're definitely greedy but they're not omnipotent.

[–] whostosay@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Likely. I guess I should clear up what I'm trying to get at, companies that large and monopolistic spend immense amount of resources doing everything they can to stifle competition because it's profitable to do so. They made the move knowingly approaching if not downright crossing the line, because their analysis showed them it would turn out to be profitable. Will we be fined? Probably not. If we do, can we afford it and still turn a profit?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 16 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Imagine if Microsoft required all software developers to give them 30% of their earning

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/publish/publish-your-app/why-distribute-through-store

Flexible revenue sharing options that let developers choose their own commerce platform and keep 100% of the revenue for non-gaming apps, or use Microsoft’s commerce platform and pay a competitive fee of 15% for apps and 12% for games.

I guess their rates are lower. Currently.

EDIT: And as @Eggyhead@lemmings.world points out, that's for Windows, not the XBox. For the XBox, they do run an exclusive store and apparently do 30% there as well.

continues using Linux

[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 7 points 12 hours ago

$568m is a day Apple will never get back!

load more comments
view more: next ›