[magicloop]

What has happened here is all about the personalities involved, not a business strategy, not a legal strategy.

It is "Forming, Storming, Norming, ... " (Tuckman's stages of group development)

Forming = setting up the technical and business solution for DMA

Storming = arguing due to the newly experienced dynamics of power/control

Norming = CEO stepping in the get a resolved balance in what to do next

Phil Schiller would have been the point man on the business solution (you can hear his tone of voice in the News communications and now see his private messaging as released by Sweeney).

The regulator involvement would have gone via the CEO route, who would have had to resolve the conflict with his deputised point man (Phil).

Companies are just collections of people. Maybe they share world view or a values system, but they are still just people. So human psychology is a relevant (and I argue the most significant) factor coming into play here.

If there was a market logic, I think it would be that they'd prefer the alternative marketplace provider be someone like Amazon, and then have Fortnite be an app in that store. So the commercial disputes then are deflected away from Apple/Epic animosity.

The original business case for 3G wireless networking was "Girls-Games-Gambling". The business case for alternative app marketplaces is a similar content argument "Games-Gambling&Crypto-Porn". Maybe this is part of what is keeping Meta/Amazon/Google away. Those folks can swallow a Core Tech Fee (although would be a significant friction point for sure).

I think the fundamental root problem here is EC are trying to lower prices to businesses by attempting to foster competition which might lower prices. But the actual solution is to directly mandate lower prices, and keep the gatekeepers with their current control points and systems. In other words, consider App Store commissions as actual Taxes. And we know from history that "taxes without representation" lead to revolution.

[stefanlindbohm]

There might be parallells with group development research or terms used, but neither Tuckman’s stages, the research it’s based on, or later research in the area apply outside of the internal dynamics of individual working groups.