Hmm, sounds like Amazon's ecosystem, which has hardly been a competitive success.

We don't need more vertical silos, we need a horizontal playing field.

It's not a problem they're trying to solve. You can't just tell people "go buy a less restrictive phone". You want to make your app available for whatever hardware they already have. You want to provide your app, your users want to install your app on their phones that are capable of running it, but Apple forcibly inserts itself between you two, wants a say and acts as if you two couldn't have found each other without its "help".

Like a PSP that makes calls, texts and surfs the web? With HDMI out (2x?) it could be a console in your pocket. Bluetooth controllers? Now I want this. Epic are you listening!?

Relevant: https://imgix.gizmodo.com.au/content/uploads/sites/2/2020/09...

Too bad Sony's executives are spineless and out of touch.

A gaming phone doesn't really solve any of the issues at stake in this case, though. And if they want to reach people who want handhelds, they can just encourage them to buy a Switch and play Fortnite there. It would certainly be something they could do, but I think their mixed success with the Epic Games Store so far indicates that their huge cash reserves and technical expertise aren't sufficient to just nail any big challenge they take on.

Tim is on record as not being a fan of Linux, so I doubt it.

Agreed, it would definitely drive engagement to the Epic Games store.

They could even give it a name that symbolizes that, perhaps something like: N-Gage

It might be too outside Epic's wheelhouse. How about a Tesla phone?

That will solve none of the problems that they are suing Apple for.

> I really hope Epic will release a gaming phone.

Maybe think through what you're proposing. Do you believe most of Epic's customers will buy two phones, charge two phones and carry two phones just so they can play their games, while also having access to first-class OS services like Google and Apple offer?

No.

All the services that I rely upon on my Android phone are free 3rd party apps. Firefox, Banking, Authentication, Calendar

So if the "Epic Phone" had the ability to install and run APKs, that'd be good enough.

Those APKs will only work on devices with licensed Google Play services. And that platform changes so rapidly that it's effectively impossible for a competitor to build compatible APIs without infringing on Google's IP.

I have an android phone without google play enabled or installed. Not even a replacement framework such as MicroG or whatever. Works fine. Check how f-doid apps are running, or what it requires. No google license, api, nothing.

Many people recycle phones every couple of years. If the phone functions as a typical smartphone with a gaming bent, it could replace traditional smartphones for folks who want to game. Gamers also carry secondary hand-held devices (like the Nintendo Switch) for dedicated gameplay.

Do you realize how many failed devices fit that category. Those who don't know their history...

I only said it could work, not that it will. I am aware of the many failures in this category. I also wanted to point out that the original premise (nobody would buy an Epic phone because it must be their second phone) is flawed. Not only could it replace their primary phone, but gamers do indeed buy, charge, and carry secondary hand-held devices if the device suits their needs.

"Gamers" represent a tiny percent of the game-playing public. If Epic needs to rely on "gamers" they'd go bankrupt.

Also I like how all of those theories just sit in vacuum, as if we're not going through a major economic contraction due to a two year global pandemic, but sure, everyone has the money to get themselves a second phone, because they decided not to eat anymore.