Microsoft will 'absolutely' bring xCloud to iOS and iPadOS, targeting 2021 launch
Microsoft plans to deliver a web version of its xCloud game streaming service to iOS and iPadOS devices, effectively using Safari and other browsers as a workaround to Apple's App Store guidelines.
Citing sources familiar with the matter, Business Insider on Thursday reported Microsoft gaming chief Phil Spencer informed employees that the company has a "direct browser-based solution" in the works for Apple's mobile platforms.
"We absolutely will end up on iOS," Spencer told employees on Wednesday, according to the report. A follow-up report from The Verge claims Spencer went on to say, "We'll end up on iPhones, and iPads with Game Pass."
Microsoft last month launched a new feature for its Game Pass subscription streaming service that allows users to play titles on mobile devices. Currently, compatibility is limited to Android handsets and tablets, as Apple prohibits gaming apps from streaming cloud-based content.
Apple's restrictions were relaxed somewhat with the adoption of new rules in September. According to App Store guidelines, cloud gaming services like xCloud, Google's Stadia and Amazon's Luna can create catalog apps as long as each game listed includes a link to individual App Store pages.
Alternatively, Apple says "there is always the open Internet and web browser apps to reach all users outside of the App Store." Amazon took that route with Luna, a browser-based solution that relies on web apps to stream gaming content to iPhone, iPad and Mac. In an interview with Engadget last month Luna engineering chief George Tsipolitis said Amazon worked with Apple on the web-based delivery system.
Apple's reluctance to allow game streaming services on the App Store has rankled both the gaming industry and consumers. App Store guidelines restricting access to said services were the target of a class action lawsuit filed today, while former App Store head Phil Shoemaker in congressional testimony said the tech titan disallows products like xCloud from the online marketplace in part because it competes with Apple Arcade.
For its part, Apple says its prohibition of cloud gaming services is all about customer safety and the user experience.
"The App Store was created to be a safe and trusted place for customers to discover and download apps, and a great business opportunity for all developers," a spokesperson said in August. "Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers."
Citing sources familiar with the matter, Business Insider on Thursday reported Microsoft gaming chief Phil Spencer informed employees that the company has a "direct browser-based solution" in the works for Apple's mobile platforms.
"We absolutely will end up on iOS," Spencer told employees on Wednesday, according to the report. A follow-up report from The Verge claims Spencer went on to say, "We'll end up on iPhones, and iPads with Game Pass."
Microsoft last month launched a new feature for its Game Pass subscription streaming service that allows users to play titles on mobile devices. Currently, compatibility is limited to Android handsets and tablets, as Apple prohibits gaming apps from streaming cloud-based content.
Apple's restrictions were relaxed somewhat with the adoption of new rules in September. According to App Store guidelines, cloud gaming services like xCloud, Google's Stadia and Amazon's Luna can create catalog apps as long as each game listed includes a link to individual App Store pages.
Alternatively, Apple says "there is always the open Internet and web browser apps to reach all users outside of the App Store." Amazon took that route with Luna, a browser-based solution that relies on web apps to stream gaming content to iPhone, iPad and Mac. In an interview with Engadget last month Luna engineering chief George Tsipolitis said Amazon worked with Apple on the web-based delivery system.
Apple's reluctance to allow game streaming services on the App Store has rankled both the gaming industry and consumers. App Store guidelines restricting access to said services were the target of a class action lawsuit filed today, while former App Store head Phil Shoemaker in congressional testimony said the tech titan disallows products like xCloud from the online marketplace in part because it competes with Apple Arcade.
For its part, Apple says its prohibition of cloud gaming services is all about customer safety and the user experience.
"The App Store was created to be a safe and trusted place for customers to discover and download apps, and a great business opportunity for all developers," a spokesperson said in August. "Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers."
Comments
There's nothing inherently unsafe or untrusted about the games being streamed on XCloud. They are literally the exact same games being played on consolea, PC, and Mac from developers like EA, Ubisoft, Bethesda, and other known game developers both large and small. All apps on the store get reviewed... so review the app. Pretty sure XCloud is going to come up clean. The streamed games are downloaded. They reside on MS servers. Pretty sure they're clean as well. The content rating is governed by ESRB. There is no safety issue with XCloud.
It's a revenue issue. That's totally okay for it to be a revenue issue. Apple wants to figure out how to get paid for iOS access. I don't see a problem with that desire. Trying to couch the issue as a safety issue is simply FUD.
Here's the part where I go, "game over". and you mosey on over to some other vital thread to occupy and entertain yourself.
Well, you're speaking from a technical point of view. Apple's apps are not only reviewed to ensure they don't misbehave once they arrive on the iPhone, they're also reviewed for suitability for their intended audience and for the platform in general. What Microsoft thinks is suitable for the platform.
You forgot to bring up the 'streaming movies' argument, so I'll do it for you. Streaming movies is not the same as streaming games. To begin with, streaming a movie service is a nice clear separation between what part Apple plays in the transaction and what part Netflix plays. This is why no one is busting Apple's chops about having the movie 'Cuties' on their platform, because people know that it's not Apple, it's Netflix (though I bet Apple wishes they could block it). If a game includes questionable content, then folk will instantly blame Apple because they're playing it on an iPhone. Apple allowed it through because it came through an app on Apple's service. Forcing them to go through the browser gives Apple a nice layer of "hands-off".
The other difference is that movies are far less interactive than games. It would be quite unusual for a movie to start offering to sell you bitcoins and then take your credit card details before allowing you to continue playing.
How? The app is streamed. There is no guarantee that what the developers would stream the same app that they submitted for review, and Apple would have no way to check. Look how easy it was for Epic to sneak a payment module into a game that Apple had actually checked. Checking a streaming app would be next to impossible.
Oh, and of course, if you allow one company to add a streaming app then Apple would have to allow all of them, even the ones we've never heard of and who could be potential fraudsters. If they only allowed the big companies it then you'd start complaining about that wouldn't you?
It is a safety issue. Even if every game is safe if Apple allows Microsoft to break the rules then they will have to allow others also who may be malicious.
2. You're 100% wrong about the differences between stream a game vs a movie. They're both H.265 streams. One being more interactive than the other isn't a difference of function, it's a difference of degree. They both do the same thing at different rates.
3. Your logic: If Netflix has questionable content, Netflix gets blamed. If MS has questionable content, Apple gets blamed. But if it goes through a browser Apple gets no blame. That makes absolutely no sense and it's silly to think anyone would be making that distinction. No one would because the entire premise is laughable. The MPA governs content ratings on Netflix. The ESRB governs ratings on video games. The content of the entire catalogue of games is a known entity. So instead of referencing vague non-existent boogie-men hiding in the game catalog, bring up a specific objection. I'll save you some time. You can't.
4. There is only one app. XCloud. The XCloud app is not streamed. Reading over your response, I started to get the impression you really don't know what XCloud is.
5. This gem solidified my impression: "There is no guarantee that what the developers would stream the same app that they submitted for review, and Apple would have no way to check." You don't know what XCloud is or how it works. What developers? There are no developers streaming anything. You're simply forming arguments to defend Apple's position without knowing anything about the actual subject matter. You're using vague (unrelated) examples because you can't speak to the specifics.
6. That last one is complete BS. Apple wouldn't have to let anyone have a streaming app. Apple rejects all types of apps on a daily basis. That's reductive FUD. More vague boogie-men.
Microsoft has over 60 apps on the App Store. Of course there's value in that, but I don't understand the "doesn't want to admit it". The fact that they have so many apps on the App Store kinda sorta indicates they know the value of the App Store. Certainly they know there's a higher value on the App Store versus having to run via a browser app.
That Apple isn't interested in providing game streaming as an App is obvious, and they likely have good reasons that you do not accept, but it isn't FUD.
More to the point, this has now been decided, and Web Apps will be the preferred interface to the iOS user, not Apps. Game streaming comes to iOS at no cost to the service, and Apple generates no revenue, but Apple also has little to no risk to its brand with Web Apps as the game streaming interface.
You're right, it is obvious they aren't interested in game streaming as an app. You're also right that their actual reasoning may be good. However, the reason that keeps being presented is FUD as it relates to XCloud. It's a boilerplate innocuous statement that says nothing, means nothing in relation to XCloud, and is intentionally open to speculation about safety and security concerns that are non-existent in this instance.
The fact that MS decided to go the web app route doesn't shut down discussion of the topic. Apple had little to no risk to it's brand anyway so I'm not really sure what you're referencing here .
Amazon is a different beast. They would prefer keeping Google users off their service for as long as possible. That is why they are not doing an app right now for anything but Fire TV. Web access will be available but only for Apple and Microsoft devices. They will block Android and Chromebook browser users. Of course, they will need to enable it on their own Kindle Fire devices at some point because enabling it for iPads and iPhones but not their own hardware is a raw deal for the people who bought their hardware. When that happens, folks on Google Android will be able to run Luna using the Amazon App Store.
Funny story: did you know that Apple tried to stop using Amazon from using the "App Store" name via lawsuit? They dropped it only after a judge told them "yeah, you can't trademark that ... and even if you could you didn't invent that term in the first place anyway." Hilarious ...
Wouldn’t it be great if Microsoft built a web-app-store for web-app developers to submit their web-apps to with no review process, no rules and no revenue to Apple. That should prove and show loudly that the native-app-store is not the only route to getting software on an iOS device.
"App Store" was shut down because it was too generic, wasn't first use, even though at the time, it was generally in reference to Apple's specific App store.
So, no, not a funny story. Just Trademark business as usual.
Given how many people have been stating that game streaming is equivalent of Netflix, including yourself, why would extensive PWA functionality be needed anyway?