Apple's block of Xcloud & Stadia game streaming apps is at best consumer-hostile

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 197
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    red oak said:
    Playing games is completely different than watching a one-way streamed video.    How is that not obvious to you? 

    If this is allowed,  developers in all categories will try to create "streamed" versions of their apps to circumvent Apple.  Will be become a shit show 


    From a technical and Apple-visible content review perspective regarding Stadia and Xcloud, it isn't different at all. It's a H.265 stream coming down from a cloud server. What's the difference between Shadow or other over-the-web streaming PCs?

    And, using a controller with Netflix, I can skip around in two dimensions on that content as I see fit.

    I think Apple's view is from the historic record of games being filled with bugs and even game-breaking ones. Games can also be hacked and manipulated.

    I've never heard of someone's DVD player crashing because they paused Titanic at a certain frame.
    tmay
  • Reply 82 of 197
    aderutter said:
    One more point, Apple want to protect the app-store from ultra-violent or pornographic material as much as possible.
    If they allow game-store apps then they will end up with filth ridden games like on Steam. Not cool.
    There’s a place for that, it’s outside the app-store, it’s called the web / web-apps.
    We are talking about a game streaming services, not game stores like Steam.  Even so, Apple would certainly have ESRB content rating requirements for streaming.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 83 of 197
    9secondkox29secondkox2 Posts: 2,663member
    As much as Apple has their reasons, this is not a good look. 

    A consumer buys a device, has an internet connection, so they should be able to do what they want. 

    This is kind of shocking. 

    If those services were full of horrible code, that’s one thing. 

    But blocking them based on business model? 

    It’s really kind of difficult to take Apples side here. 

    I owe MS an apology for a post I made a few days ago. Really surprised here. 
    InspiredCodeBeats
  • Reply 84 of 197
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    How much data is involved in steaming games?
  • Reply 85 of 197
    mdriftmeyer said:

    Game streaming performance is piss poor, unless you have Fiber 1Gb Up/1Gb Down, and on top of that an extra layer of latency due to decompression on the fly frame by frame, with them pushing up  to 30 seconds of pre-streamed, decompressed framing at you to attempt a smooth experience. All of this taxes the system resources. Sorry, but it's a shit show and Google knows it.

    Microsoft failed at its own Mobile OS. It now wants to circumvent iOS and would Android but for the fact Android is a shit show and it already allows circumvention as a substitute for exploiting to hundreds of billions in information adverts and third party targeted ad selling which compromises all personal privacy--ala Facebook and Google. Microsoft is happy to capitalize on that and ignore the privacy concerns. Its sole focus is to exploit anywhere it can because it is seeing its peak in potential new revenues streams severely limited by its own decisions over the past decade.

    Apple with it's well thought out ecosystem adds new markets when it feels the cross pollination is well tested, extends the vertical services and keeps expanding and offering quality products/services without selling out their user base personal information to the Government or third parties. The vast majority of profits in the entire computing industry for mobile goes through Apple.

    Microsoft and Google want that to end. They cry foul and play bedfellows while they continue to syphon information from their customers in exchange for a perceived short-term `freedom' that for the life of me is nothing more than a slow dependency on all information going through them both.

    Apple has no interest in monetizing on your personal shopping needs, your addictions, your habits, your rituals, etc. They provide you with an ecosystem of platforms that let you decide how you want to work, be entertained and invest your life's energy. If their approach is not your cup of tea there is always Microsoft through Google, Samsung through Google, Google, or other Android vendors through Google. Their platform is familiar to Microsoft as it is as filled with the similar types of Malware that Microsoft made billions off of providing `security services' while keeping the fundamental designs of its OS broken and available for exploit. Android does the same under Google. 

    Apple pays bounties for improved security testing [exploits] and people fall silent. Before, they were inundated with whining that not all security is flawless and all their services are bug free. By comparison it's just assumed Android is a maze of hacks and broken services, but open for you to tinker on--thus perceived freedom.

    You want your games streamed then use the Web interface, Microsoft/Google and stop whining that you aren't the creator of Apple's Ecosystem you so enviously wish you owned.

    Steve Jobs won. Check mate.
    1. Game streaming is bad unless you have good Internet? Well genius ... CONSOLE AND RIG GAMERS HAVE GIGABIT INTERNET. And they plan to heavily take advantage of 5G on mobile. So you flat out don't know what you are talking about.

    2. Microsoft doesn't want to "circumvent iOS." They want to be on iOS but Apple won't let them. What is wrong with you people? Seriously, what gives? Are you blaming Microsoft for creating a product that Apple won't approve? What other companies need Apple's permission first? Again, what is wrong with you folks?

    3. Microsoft may have failed with their own mobile OS but they succeeded massively with their own gaming platform while lots of other more established gaming companies have fallen by the wayside. They are levering the 100+ million people that have bought XBoxes and the 65 million people who currently subscribe to XBox Live by giving them a cloud gaming service. Which A) they have been planning and testing for at least 5 years - seriously I first heard about this service 5 years ago - and B) Sony was considering a similar service but abandoned it and C) Google, Amazon, Steam and Nvidia have entered this space or will so soon within the next 2 years which forces them to even if they didn't really want to. 

    4. Since 2013, Apple's "well thought out ecosystem" has been primarily lifting innovations first implemented on Android, Windows 10 and Linux. It is real easy to hang back, see what works, adopt it yourself and then act like you invented it.

    5. Microsoft and Google want that to end ... when they both applied to be on iOS and were rejected? And when Stadia will still work on macOS? Again, what reality are you living in? And as I asked earlier ... should Microsoft and Google not offer products unless they are going to be supported on iOS? That is an absolutely insane notion to take when you consider that Apple makes virtually none of their products and services available apart from Apple hardware. Talk about thinking the world revolves around you ...

    6. Steve Jobs won? Great. But Google won too. They went from being the #5 search company to at Fortune 25 company in fifteen years. They have launched two successful operating systems since 2008, one of them the most widely used and successful ones in history as well as two widely used programming languages (Dart and Golang) and a ton of frameworks like node.js. And Microsoft? They won PC computing. Apple has 7% market share and at times it was as low as 3%. 

    7. Another person who trashes Android without ever having used it. It is funny ... the Android and Microsoft users that you hate use Apple products all the time. We don't hate MacBooks (in fact I use them heavily), iPads (which I have used in the past) or iPhones. We just like other platforms as good or better. Somehow your brain can't comprehend that. Because something is wrong with it. 

    8. Microsoft and Google aren't whining. Google hasn't said squat about xCloud not being on iOS. Ever. Meanwhile, Microsoft only responded to Apple's distorted claims! Apple customers were angry at Microsoft for canceling the beta testing and pulling the product. Apple responds by claiming that xCloud "didn't meet their standards." Microsoft - in order to keep their XBox fans who own iPhones from targeting them - pointed out A) that Apple rejects all video game streaming platforms on a blanket level so it was not their fault that Apple rejected their app as there was nothing that they could have done to get it approved and B) that Apple is the only general purpose platform that rejects such apps. Both are 100% true. And Microsoft was 100% correct in telling it. So what, you wanted Microsoft to take the hit on this from their paying customers just to save Apple a little heat? Why?

    Personally, I could care less who supports what. When I want a product that isn't available on one platform, I buy something that it is available on. When a family member wanted to stream iTunes content to a TV, I bought an Apple TV. That I already had an Android TV didn't matter ... my TV has multiple HDMI ports so I just used another one. So it is folks like you who claim that Microsoft shouldn't create a service that Apple wouldn't approve of in the first place that are the ones with the real problems in their thinking. It isn't Microsoft's job to tend to Apple's business philosophy or market position or reputation. Microsoft has business needs of their own, and using xCloud to promote A) their XBox division and B) their Azure division absolutely meets them. And look, there are 3 billion Android users and like 2.5 billion Windows users. Microsoft doesn't need iOS for xCloud to succeed. Most XBox Live subscribers have an Android device already - XBox apps have lots of installs on Android - and those who don't will simply buy one.
    ctt_zhcflcardsfan80muthuk_vanalingamelijahg
  • Reply 86 of 197
    Honest question because I haven’t been keeping up.

    Is Stadia available on Xbox or PlayStation? Is PlayStation Now or xCloud available on each other’s platforms?
    Ugh. Not this again.

    1. Microsoft stated that iOS was the only general purpose operating system where video game streaming apps like this are not supported. XBox is not a general purpose operating system or platform. It is an appliance that runs video games. It is more similar to the original iPod or the first generation Apple TV appliances - designed for playing music in the former and streaming from a few preloaded apps in the latter - than iOS, iPadOS, Android, ChromeOS, Windows Desktop, Windows Server or desktop/server Linux. (Facepalm)

    2. That being said, Microsoft does allow EA Access, a competing video game subscription streaming app on XBox.

    3. That also being said, Microsoft would absolutely 100 love a subscription service for Playstation games on XBox. They would approve it in a heartbeat. The only issue is that Sony doesn't want to do it for their own competitive purposes.

    Your trolling is truly pathetic.
    All right. My trolling is pathetic. That is given. With that said ... can you actually rebut anything that I said with facts? No. You can't.

    1. Is actually true. 
    2. Is actually true.
    3. Is actually true.

    And you know it. That is why rather than opposing my facts with facts of your own, you resort to personal attacks. My goodness, you are as bad as the fellow who claimed "No one would buy Office 365 if it were a cloud/web only app!" when I reminded him of the likes of Salesforce (the original SaaS which was in business 8 years before the iPhone was ever invented) and Google Suite (another massive SaaS success that predated the iPhone). 

    I might be a troll but at least I am a troll with facts. So what does that make you? Seriously, Apple fans need to learn a lot more about the wider technology world that exists beyond their own platform. Linux, Windows and Android device buyers have to be by definition because our devices come from any number of manufacturers - Samsung, Google, Microsoft, Dell, HP, Amazon, Lenovo, LG, Acer, Asus to name a very few - so that forces us to take a wider view of what is out there in order to find the products that are best for us. Apple fans should do the same. Even if you still buy Apple products at the end of the day - which you will - it would prevent the sort of ridiculous, flat out "I have no idea what is going on out there" comments that dominate Apple sites like this one.
    cflcardsfan80muthuk_vanalingamelijahg
  • Reply 87 of 197
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 2,112member
    Why would Apple leave that game streaming thing to Google or Microsoft while they can do it better than both? Thanks to Apple Silicon Apple is already years ahead on that. Besides, they can offer that streaming to all game developers who sell in the AppStore without alienating them and maintaining the rich content already on sale.
  • Reply 88 of 197
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    tmay said:
    This article is extremely one sided. Who is to say that big game publishers wouldn't absorb significant numbers of mobile game developers to their own streaming platforms and practically deprive Apple iOS and Mac game stores over night. This is a standalone business model so you bet your ass that big game publishers or even new venture capital wouldn't try this. Not all gaming should work this way, mobile games should run locally so Apple is right and they cant open the flood gates by letting MS or Google do it.
    I'm glad you agree that Apple is trying to preserve its revenue stream. That's the whole point of the article. If developers choose to throw in with streaming services and get paid by them, instead of Apple paying them, so be it. Maybe Apple will be forced to change things as a result of that competition, which is the whole point of capitalism, is it not?

    In regards to other comments discussing "monopoly." A monopoly isn't by itself illegal, nor is it required for anti-trust arguments. All anti-trust needs is illegal and unnecessary blocking or interference with other businesses. That's it.
    How, exactly, is Apple interfering in other businesses? MS, et al, aren't entitled to run Apple's business.

    You imply that Apple has no corporate sovereignty, and in fact, if Apple is aware of how little gaming will affect their business, streaming or otherwise, shouldn't they have the ability to test their business model in the market against competing business models?

    Unless of course, you have some sort of Minority Report operation that can predetermine success of a particular business model.

    I like Apple's curated approach, and I like that Apple doesn't rush into whatever the fad of the market is. Do you really think that streaming games, affected by latency issues, will be a wonderful experience from the get go?

    Perhaps you can provide a detailed, first person experience with specific hardware and services, to all of us.


    I really have no idea what you're asking for in this bolded section, here. If you're asking if we've used Xcloud, we have, and the video is embedded in the post.

    In regards to the "run Apple's business" - I have no idea where you got that from what I said. The monopoly bit in that comment was referring to other people's false assertions that Apple is not a monopoly, so therefore, it is not engaging in anti-trust behavior.
    I think the problem with your definition of a monopoly is that it means any component in any company  could be seen as a monopoly even if the company  itself is not. 

    McDonalds is a company. One of the components of McDonalds is its chain of outlets. Now I can get stuff in McDonalds that isn’t made by McDonalds: Coke, Fanta, a flake in my McFlurry, one of those little squeezed orange drinks … But one thing I can’t get is a Burger King Whopper meal. In fact, I’ve yet to see any other convenience food set up shop inside McDs. I suspect this is partly because McDonalds has complete control of what is sold in its shop and in what conditions. And I’d be surprised if anyone can point to a law that says McDonalds has to even give a reason why they’re not allowing you to sell stuff in their stores. 

    And though I’m not an expert, I don’t think there’s a law that says Apple has to allow Microsoft to set up a stall in their store because Redmond’s own mobile platform crashed and burned.  


    edited August 2020 tmayjdb8167
  • Reply 89 of 197
    Xed said:
    Honest question because I haven’t been keeping up.

    Is Stadia available on Xbox or PlayStation? Is PlayStation Now or xCloud available on each other’s platforms?
    Ugh. Not this again.

    1. Microsoft stated that iOS was the only general purpose operating system where video game streaming apps like this are not supported. XBox is not a general purpose operating system or platform. It is an appliance that runs video games. It is more similar to the original iPod or the first generation Apple TV appliances - designed for playing music in the former and streaming from a few preloaded apps in the latter - than iOS, iPadOS, Android, ChromeOS, Windows Desktop, Windows Server or desktop/server Linux. (Facepalm)

    2. That being said, Microsoft does allow EA Access, a competing video game subscription streaming app on XBox.

    3. That also being said, Microsoft would absolutely 100 love a subscription service for Playstation games on XBox. They would approve it in a heartbeat. The only issue is that Sony doesn't want to do it for their own competitive purposes.
    While I don't agree with Apple's position, that's a really pathetic argument.
    Pathetic how?
    I explained Microsoft's argument, which is true.

    I pointed out that Microsoft allows services similar to xCloud on XBox like EA's, which is true.

    And I pointed out that since Japanese game developers avoid XBox like the plague and as a result XBox sales are horrible in Asia, Microsoft would LOVE for a PlayStation streaming service to get the JRPG (for example) games that they lack and actually be able to move more than a couple million XBoxes a year in Asia as a result but the only reason why it doesn't happen is that Sony being a hardware company like Apple would much prefer you buy their PlayStation hardware than buy XBox hardware and subscribe to their streaming service, which is also true.

    And I did so in response to a direct "question" that was framed to defend Apple's position. (Made by someone wanting to expose Microsoft as this hateful duplicitious hypocrite, had no idea that Microsoft actually does allow a similar service on XBox even though it is not even a general purpose operating system, and got mad and bashed me as a troll when I called him on it.)

    So again, what was pathetic about it?
    cflcardsfan80muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 90 of 197
    danvmdanvm Posts: 1,400member
    Why would Apple leave that game streaming thing to Google or Microsoft while they can do it better than both? 
    Because, as today, Google and MS are doing better than Apple in gaming.
    Thanks to Apple Silicon Apple is already years ahead on that. Besides, they can offer that streaming to all game developers who sell in the AppStore without alienating them and maintaining the rich content already on sale.
    I don't think that Apple Silicon is the magic cure to the issue Apple has with the gaming business.  
    ctt_zhmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 91 of 197
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    red oak said:
    Playing games is completely different than watching a one-way streamed video.    How is that not obvious to you? 

    If this is allowed,  developers in all categories will try to create "streamed" versions of their apps to circumvent Apple.  Will be become a shit show 


    Funny you should say that, because Apple has suggested that if you don’t to submit to the App Store then you can write a PWA. 
    tmay
  • Reply 92 of 197
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    sflocal said:
    sflocal said:
    First remotely playing games, next it will be apps.  What’s to stop companies from creating remote (I.e. “steamed”) app stores disconnecting Apple’s control and user privacy?

    This is a very slippery slope.  I can understand Apple taking this approach.

    Like others are saying, if you don’t like it move to Android. 


    Office already exists as a web-based version. So do many, many other apps.

    From a technical and latency perspective, an app makes more sense for gameplay. This can be circumvented with Xcloud or Stadia with some kind of controller API for Safari in iOS, but I'm not expecting it.
    The web-based version is dependent on having an internet connection for it to work, whereas an app will work with or without one.  If Microsoft provided an Internet-only Office365 option, no one would use it.
    They do, don’t they?
    And iWorks is available in the web too. 
    cflcardsfan80elijahg
  • Reply 93 of 197
    ctt_zhctt_zh Posts: 64member
    Why would Apple leave that game streaming thing to Google or Microsoft while they can do it better than both? Thanks to Apple Silicon Apple is already years ahead on that. Besides, they can offer that streaming to all game developers who sell in the AppStore without alienating them and maintaining the rich content already on sale.
    Why do you assume that Apple can do game streaming better than Microsoft and Google? How does Apple Silicon make their streaming / game software better than Microsoft or Googles? Or are you saying Apple should build out Data Centers using Apple Silicon to handle the server side?
    edited August 2020 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 94 of 197
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    As much as Apple has their reasons, this is not a good look. 

    A consumer buys a device, has an internet connection, so they should be able to do what they want. 

    This is kind of shocking. 

    If those services were full of horrible code, that’s one thing. 

    But blocking them based on business model? 

    It’s really kind of difficult to take Apples side here. 

    I owe MS an apology for a post I made a few days ago. Really surprised here. 
    Let me know when Microsoft xCloud publishes their APIs for review and their architecture and its necessary communication and security privileges open to share across its Azure Cloud back end with iOS security protocols and privileges. Same goes for Google. If folks insist this is a sandboxed dumb terminal ala VT3270 emulation just leveraging iOS drawing services aka a video stream then you’ll believe in anything.


    tmaywonkothesane
  • Reply 95 of 197
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    In regards to other comments discussing "monopoly," and related to Velasarius' comment as well, a monopoly isn't by itself illegal, nor is it required for anti-trust arguments. All anti-trust needs is illegal and unnecessary blocking or interference with other businesses. That's it.

    Right, so what you’re saying is that if Dell came to Apple and said they wanted to sell their kit in Apple locations, it would be illegal for Apple to refuse. I mean Dell doesn’t have any retail outlets so Apple is blocking or interfering with their business, right?

    And what does a necessary blocking or interference with another business look like anyway?
    edited August 2020 tmayjdb8167
  • Reply 96 of 197
    Why would Apple leave that game streaming thing to Google or Microsoft while they can do it better than both? Thanks to Apple Silicon Apple is already years ahead on that. Besides, they can offer that streaming to all game developers who sell in the AppStore without alienating them and maintaining the rich content already on sale.
    Facepalm. Apple Silicon has absolutely positively nothing to do with streaming. Apple Silicon is hardware. Streaming is software as a service which is designed by nature to be inherently hardware agnostic.

    Being able to offer video game streaming requires the very best cloud infrastructure, architecture and development. Apple has none of those. Instead, for years after Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Google Play Movies and TV etc. existed, Apple only offered limited video streaming ability through iTunes. Apple Music was their first legit streaming app and they didn't even develop it ... they bought Beats and repurposed it

    To give you an idea of how far behind Apple is on this, Google is offering Stadia and Microsoft is offering xCloud using their own cloud platforms - Azure and Google Cloud Platform - that have existed for ages (GCP since 2008, Azure since 2010). Nvidia is partnering with AWS to offer GeForce Now, sure, but it features their own cloud data center and virtualization hardware platform - Nvidia Grid - that they sell to Google and others. You should really check it out ... Nvidia GRID offers virtualized PCs, GPUs and applications. Where xCloud and Stadia are examples of software-as-a-service, Nvidia GRID is infrastructure as a service.

    By contrast ... Apple doesn't even host or manage their own iCloud. Instead, iCloud is a product that relies on cloud services provided by Amazon (AWS) and Google (Google Cloud Platform). So does Apple Music and Apple TV+ by the way. If Apple had to rely on their own expertise or resources to pull off either, they would have no chance. And no, they aren't in the cloud hardware game with infrastructure as a service products - or even generic data center computing, storage or networking resources - either. There are some Apple advocates in the tech media - including a couple of articles I read a few months ago - that if Apple Silicon outperforms Intel hardware by a large enough margin, that would allow them to enter the cloud/data center hardware market. But what the writer doesn't realize is that the cloud's needs and Apple's offerings are the opposite. The cloud needs cheap, general purpose hardware and Apple only supplies expensive, specialized hardware. So given the choice between a faster option that costs $500,000 and you can only deploy on it what Apple allows, a data center will buy two alternatives that are slower but cost $350,000 and allows them to put whatever they want on it whenever they need it, and do so without giving it half a second's thought. 

    And that is presuming that Apple is capable of building server-class ARM chips that are capable of outperforming Ampere and other ARM server vendors. That is, er, presuming a lot. Beating the Qualcomm Snapdragon/Samsung Exynos mobile chips and beating the ARM chips that already power the fastest supercomputer in the world are two very different things.
    cflcardsfan80muthuk_vanalingamgatorguy
  • Reply 97 of 197
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 2,112member
    danvm said:
    Why would Apple leave that game streaming thing to Google or Microsoft while they can do it better than both? 
    Because, as today, Google and MS are doing better than Apple in gaming.
    Thanks to Apple Silicon Apple is already years ahead on that. Besides, they can offer that streaming to all game developers who sell in the AppStore without alienating them and maintaining the rich content already on sale.
    I don't think that Apple Silicon is the magic cure to the issue Apple has with the gaming business.  
    How so? MS couldn’t even maintain three Halo games on iOS !.. As they failed on mobile computing, they spectacularly failed on mobile gaming too. 

    The point is not the issue Apple you claim has with the gaming business, the point is Apple Silicon IS the cure to the game streaming issue on mobile by bringing in low bandwidth low latency high quality Metal rendering and high FPS.
  • Reply 98 of 197
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    This article is extremely one sided. Who is to say that big game publishers wouldn't absorb significant numbers of mobile game developers to their own streaming platforms and practically deprive Apple iOS and Mac game stores over night. This is a standalone business model so you bet your ass that big game publishers or even new venture capital wouldn't try this. Not all gaming should work this way, mobile games should run locally so Apple is right and they cant open the flood gates by letting MS or Google do it.
    I'm glad you agree that Apple is trying to preserve its revenue stream. That's the whole point of the article. If developers choose to throw in with streaming services and get paid by them, instead of Apple paying them, so be it. Maybe Apple will be forced to change things as a result of that competition, which is the whole point of capitalism, is it not?

    In regards to other comments discussing "monopoly." A monopoly isn't by itself illegal, nor is it required for anti-trust arguments. All anti-trust needs is illegal and unnecessary blocking or interference with other businesses. That's it.
    How, exactly, is Apple interfering in other businesses? MS, et al, aren't entitled to run Apple's business.

    You imply that Apple has no corporate sovereignty, and in fact, if Apple is aware of how little gaming will affect their business, streaming or otherwise, shouldn't they have the ability to test their business model in the market against competing business models?

    Unless of course, you have some sort of Minority Report operation that can predetermine success of a particular business model.

    I like Apple's curated approach, and I like that Apple doesn't rush into whatever the fad of the market is. Do you really think that streaming games, affected by latency issues, will be a wonderful experience from the get go?

    Perhaps you can provide a detailed, first person experience with specific hardware and services, to all of us.


    I really have no idea what you're asking for, here.

    In regards to the "run Apple's business" - I have no idea where you got that from what I said.
    Are you currently using a game streaming service on other hardware, ie, an Android device, and what is your experience with latency?
    Game streaming performance is piss poor, unless you have Fiber 1Gb Up/1Gb Down, and on top of that an extra layer of latency due to decompression on the fly frame by frame, with them pushing up  to 30 seconds of pre-streamed, decompressed framing at you to attempt a smooth experience. All of this taxes the system resources. Sorry, but it's a shit show and Google knows it.

    Microsoft failed at its own Mobile OS. It now wants to circumvent iOS and would Android but for the fact Android is a shit show and it already allows circumvention as a substitute for exploiting to hundreds of billions in information adverts and third party targeted ad selling which compromises all personal privacy--ala Facebook and Google. Microsoft is happy to capitalize on that and ignore the privacy concerns. Its sole focus is to exploit anywhere it can because it is seeing its peak in potential new revenues streams severely limited by its own decisions over the past decade.

    Apple with it's well thought out ecosystem adds new markets when it feels the cross pollination is well tested, extends the vertical services and keeps expanding and offering quality products/services without selling out their user base personal information to the Government or third parties. The vast majority of profits in the entire computing industry for mobile goes through Apple.

    Microsoft and Google want that to end. They cry foul and play bedfellows while they continue to syphon information from their customers in exchange for a perceived short-term `freedom' that for the life of me is nothing more than a slow dependency on all information going through them both.

    Apple has no interest in monetizing on your personal shopping needs, your addictions, your habits, your rituals, etc. They provide you with an ecosystem of platforms that let you decide how you want to work, be entertained and invest your life's energy. If their approach is not your cup of tea there is always Microsoft through Google, Samsung through Google, Google, or other Android vendors through Google. Their platform is familiar to Microsoft as it is as filled with the similar types of Malware that Microsoft made billions off of providing `security services' while keeping the fundamental designs of its OS broken and available for exploit. Android does the same under Google. 

    Apple pays bounties for improved security testing [exploits] and people fall silent. Before, they were inundated with whining that not all security is flawless and all their services are bug free. By comparison it's just assumed Android is a maze of hacks and broken services, but open for you to tinker on--thus perceived freedom.

    You want your games streamed then use the Web interface, Microsoft/Google and stop whining that you aren't the creator of Apple's Ecosystem you so enviously wish you owned.

    Steve Jobs won. Check mate.
    Mic drop.  Exit stage left. 
    edited August 2020 tmayericthehalfbee
  • Reply 99 of 197
    As much as Apple has their reasons, this is not a good look. 

    A consumer buys a device, has an internet connection, so they should be able to do what they want. 

    This is kind of shocking. 

    If those services were full of horrible code, that’s one thing. 

    But blocking them based on business model? 

    It’s really kind of difficult to take Apples side here. 

    I owe MS an apology for a post I made a few days ago. Really surprised here. 
    Let me know when Microsoft xCloud publishes their APIs for review and their architecture and its necessary communication and security privileges open to share across its Azure Cloud back end with iOS security protocols and privileges. Same goes for Google. If folks insist this is a sandboxed dumb terminal ala VT3270 emulation just leveraging iOS drawing services aka a video stream then you’ll believe in anything.


    Sure. I can tell you already ... they use the same APIs and architectures that their other streaming apps that are already on iOS use. That is because the apps that Stadia and xCloud use are no different from other apps. The only difference is the content being streamed. We know this because Apple said precisely this in their statement explaining why they rejected the app.

    Hey, you are perfectly free to accept, defend and promote Apple's position. (I myself have no problem with it because my position is that if you want Stadia and xCloud, just buy a device that supports them. It is easy and cheap to do so ... much less than buying a gaming rig, a gaming console ... or an iPad or iPhone for that matter. If Apple doesn't want to support a particular product or service, fine. It is their choice in the democratic free market capitalist system that we have and forcing Apple to support a product or service that they don't want me smacks of socialism - democratic socialism or some other form - and as a right winger I adamantly oppose such measures. ) But please, just stick to the factual stuff when you do.
    muthuk_vanalingamgatorguy
  • Reply 100 of 197
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,858administrator
    jungmark said:
    How much data is involved in steaming games?
    No more than Netflix.
    InspiredCodemuthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.