Apple to reportedly remove app that enabled Google Stadia on iPhone [u]

AppleInsider

Apple is removing an app that allowed iPhone users to play Google Stadia streaming games in a specially designed web browser, according to the software's developer.

Zachary Knox in September launched Stadium, an iOS web browser that effectively bypasses App Store restrictions on cloud-based gaming services to provide support for Stadia on iPhone. He was able to create the workaround, complete with controller integration, with a bit of clever WebKit engineering.

On Monday, Knox said Stadium is being pulled from the App Store because Apple "didn't like" the results.

"I was extending WebKit' by hooking it into the native GameController framework and thus Bluetooth controllers, which they didn't like," Knox said in a tweet.

The app was downloaded nearly 15,000 times over the past three weeks.

Stadium is still available on the App Store as of this writing. After downloading the app, users can set the user agent to a Mac device, log into a Stadia account and play on iOS with almost any controller save for the official Stadia hardware. The software supports MFi, Xbox One S, and DualShock 4 controllers.

Apple in a statement said that while it respects the creativity of developers, breaching App Store guidelines could lead to security risks. In the case of Stadium, the app applies Bluetooth privacy settings -- designed to be limited to single app authorization -- to the entire web. Further, the app is in violation of App Store rules that require developers to use public APIs and frameworks for their intended purposes, as well as leverage documented APIs only as authorized by Apple.

Basically, Apple argues that Stadium's use of Bluetooth permissions could leave user devices open to attack.

Apple currently restricts cloud-based streaming services from operating on its mobile platform. The company in September loosened those limitations, allowing cloud gaming companies like Microsoft, Google and Amazon to market so-called "catalog" apps on the App Store so long as each game has its own listing.

Alternatively, Apple's guidelines note "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. Microsoft will reportedly follow suit and deliver xCloud to iOS and iPadOS users in 2021.

Updated with statement from Apple.

elijahg

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

roake

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

You've missed the point.  This free app allows Google to bypass the app store rules.  Google is the major benefactor here, not the browser developer.  Since the app is free, it hardly puts food on the table unless perhaps he has a commissioned deal with Google, which would make this highly suspect.  Perhaps the app is ad-supported, allowing Google to collect bits of your privacy and intrude on your personal life.  Even if he does only "make a couple of dollars outside the App Store," he should know to adhere to the contract he signed in order to become a developer with the option to publish apps in the app store; he should know that if he does not adhere, his app is in violation of the rules and will be rejected or removed.

flydog

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

Maybe you should wait until all the facts come out before getting all worked up like someone raped your cat. 

coolfactor

I normally defend most decisions that Apple makes, but this feels like a dick move to me. Unless users are somehow put at risk, I can't think of a single reason for the removal of this app. And I'm not a gamer.

If this app is putting users are risk, then I support its removal, with the condition that the issues be addressed. But I'm learning towards Apple just not liking that something is competing with Arcade and their "service" revenues.

roake

coolfactor said:

I normally defend most decisions that Apple makes, but this feels like a dick move to me. Unless users are somehow put at risk, I can't think of a single reason for the removal of this app. And I'm not a gamer.

If this app is putting users are risk, then I support its removal, with the condition that the issues be addressed. But I'm learning towards Apple just not liking that something is competing with Arcade and their "service" revenues.

Even if that is the case, the Developers have agreed to Apple’s Terms prior to even getting the development kit.  With apps like this, they are in violation of that agreement.  Apple IS a business; they did not spend tens of billions of dollars building the infrastructure just because of their altruistic nature.  I don’t understand the argument that it’s a “dick move” not to allow Google to utilize that infrastructure for free (or at all for apps in violation of the Agreement).  This app was 100% written to get Google Stadia on iOS devices in violation of the Agreement.  If I were this developer, I would have been shocked if Apple DID NOT remove the app.

Someone better at it than me should check to see if this guy had any professional ties to Google.

Beats

Removed for spyware.

nasserae

There are many other browser apps that can run stadia but without controller support (Stadia Controller works though). The kid said Apple didn’t want him to link their native API to WebKit (game controller API).  I hope this means iOS browser will offer controller support natively.

Rayz2016

roake said:

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

You've missed the point.  This free app allows Google to bypass the app store rules.  Google is the major benefactor here, not the browser developer.  Since the app is free, it hardly puts food on the table unless perhaps he has a commissioned deal with Google, which would make this highly suspect.  Perhaps the app is ad-supported, allowing Google to collect bits of your privacy and intrude on your personal life.  Even if he does only "make a couple of dollars outside the App Store," he should know to adhere to the contract he signed in order to become a developer with the option to publish apps in the app store; he should know that if he does not adhere, his app is in violation of the rules and will be rejected or removed.

Yup. 

Neat trick though. 

foregoneconclusion

15,000 downloads doesn't really seem that significant considering all the heavy breathing game streaming on iOS is getting in the tech press. 

crowley

I don't subscribe to Stadia, but I'm downloading this on principle.  Apple are way out of line with their current App Store stances.

gatorguy

Notice how quiet Google has been, not complaining about Apple policies? 

https://developer.apple.com/safari/technology-preview/release-notes/

Gamepad API

• Added a special HID mapping for the Google Stadia controller

williamlondon

crowley said:

I don't subscribe to Stadia, but I'm downloading this on principle.  Apple are way out of line with their current App Store stances.

You go, Norma Rae. [rolls eyes]

gatorguy

foregoneconclusion said:

15,000 downloads doesn't really seem that significant considering all the heavy breathing game streaming on iOS is getting in the tech press. 

Essentially no one knew that app even existed until yesterday.

darkvader

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

It's time for Apple to be forced to allow installation of software from any source of the user's choosing.  It's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  Once I've paid for it, Apple shouldn't be allowed to control what I do with it.

mjtomlin

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

Apple's fear is not that someone makes a few dollars outside the App Store. If all Apple cared about was money, they wouldn't have a thriving 3rd party accessory/peripheral ecosystem.

Two things Apple cares about...

1. Making sure their users are treated fairly and have a decent experience. This is from years of Mac users being kicked to the side by Microsoft. With half-rate ports of their software and being left behind by de facto industry standards that Microsoft only supported on Windows.

2. Making sure they can maintain control of the platform and not have it co-opted by 3rd party developers who are too lazy. It used to be difficult for Mac users to move onto the latest version of the OS, because some MAJOR 3rd party developers took forever to support them. This was especially true with the switch to Mac OS X and then the switch to Intel.

darkvader said:

elijahg said:

Would like to hear what the people who say "just play the games in a browser if they're rejected by Apple" have to say about this, which is just a browser using WebKit, but with controller integration. Again Apple's response to a fear that someone might make a couple of dollars outside the App Store is to close them down.  The more Apple tightens its control, the more belligerent they appear, and the more likely they are to end up on the sharp end of the antitrust stick. It's really disheartening to see Apple's response to the antitrust investigations expose a total lack of awareness for their customers and the developer base, when it's always championed the mantra of equality. There's nothing equal about a $2tn company rejecting an app from a developer who is probably part time, trying to put food on the table.

It's time for Apple to be forced to allow installation of software from any source of the user's choosing.  It's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone.  Once I've paid for it, Apple shouldn't be allowed to control what I do with it.

Wrong! Your iPhone contains software... Software is licensed and comes with a user license agreement. You don't own it, you pay for the right to use to it whenever you want. You do not have the right to modify it other than what is stated in the license. Any "computer" will always limit what can be done based on what the hardware and operating system will allow. And every platform has limits. It's up to the user to choose which platform works for best for them. If you want to install any app from any place you want - don't buy an iPhone.

However, I do agree, at some point Apple will probably open up iOS just a bit and allow developers to sell their apps directly to users, but... those apps would still need to be approved and signed by Apple before being sold.

mjtomlin

crowley said:

I don't subscribe to Stadia, but I'm downloading this on principle.  Apple are way out of line with their current App Store stances.

These rules have been in place, they are not "current". What is actually current, is developers trying to break and bypass these rules more and more.

foregoneconclusion

gatorguy said:

foregoneconclusion said:

15,000 downloads doesn't really seem that significant considering all the heavy breathing game streaming on iOS is getting in the tech press. 

Essentially no one knew that app even existed until yesterday.

It was widely reported on tech sites when it was originally available. That was at the height of the pearl clutching regarding lack of game streaming through App Store apps.

cloudguy

roake said:

coolfactor said:

I normally defend most decisions that Apple makes, but this feels like a dick move to me. Unless users are somehow put at risk, I can't think of a single reason for the removal of this app. And I'm not a gamer.

If this app is putting users are risk, then I support its removal, with the condition that the issues be addressed. But I'm learning towards Apple just not liking that something is competing with Arcade and their "service" revenues.

Even if that is the case, the Developers have agreed to Apple’s Terms prior to even getting the development kit.  With apps like this, they are in violation of that agreement.  Apple IS a business; they did not spend tens of billions of dollars building the infrastructure just because of their altruistic nature.  I don’t understand the argument that it’s a “dick move” not to allow Google to utilize that infrastructure for free (or at all for apps in violation of the Agreement).  This app was 100% written to get Google Stadia on iOS devices in violation of the Agreement.  If I were this developer, I would have been shocked if Apple DID NOT remove the app.

Someone better at it than me should check to see if this guy had any professional ties to Google.

And why would Google - a company with a $1 trillion valuation - sponsor this just to get a few thousand users onto a competing platform for a service that is currently losing them money (it will take years for Stadia to break even, assuming that it ever does)? Why on earth would Google prioritize this over, say, a solution that would get Stadia on the tens of millions of Android TV devices? Lots of Apple fans who only buy iPhones and iPads and as a result will never buy an Android phone or tablet or a Chromebook nonetheless own smart TVs with Android TV on it. Android TV would be perfect for those folks! But nah, instead of working on that, we are going to slip a few bucks to some random iOS developer to create an app that is obviously against Apple's terms and will get shut down anyway (frankly I am shocked that Apple took this long to shut it off). Makes perfect sense, right?

Good grief, xCloud, Stadia and GeForce Now are all essentially in beta, are all losing vast quantities of cash, are all primarily commercials to promote their various cloud solutions to enterprise customers as opposed to actual products and services of their own, and will all be on iOS by 2021. So quit it with the conspiracy theories. That you guys are so nervous and protective over the wealthiest and most powerful corporation in the world as if it is some beloved mom-and-pop corner restaurant owned by dear relatives or something is absolutely crazy.

gatorguy

foregoneconclusion said:

gatorguy said:

foregoneconclusion said:

15,000 downloads doesn't really seem that significant considering all the heavy breathing game streaming on iOS is getting in the tech press. 

Essentially no one knew that app even existed until yesterday.

It was widely reported on tech sites when it was originally available. That was at the height of the pearl clutching regarding lack of game streaming through App Store apps.

I do a LOT of reading and never once saw it mentioned. No doubt it was, but widely?

gatorguy

roake said:

coolfactor said:

I normally defend most decisions that Apple makes, but this feels like a dick move to me. Unless users are somehow put at risk, I can't think of a single reason for the removal of this app. And I'm not a gamer.

If this app is putting users are risk, then I support its removal, with the condition that the issues be addressed. But I'm learning towards Apple just not liking that something is competing with Arcade and their "service" revenues.

Even if that is the case, the Developers have agreed to Apple’s Terms prior to even getting the development kit.  With apps like this, they are in violation of that agreement.  Apple IS a business; they did not spend tens of billions of dollars building the infrastructure just because of their altruistic nature.  I don’t understand the argument that it’s a “dick move” not to allow Google to utilize that infrastructure for free (or at all for apps in violation of the Agreement).  This app was 100% written to get Google Stadia on iOS devices in violation of the Agreement.  If I were this developer, I would have been shocked if Apple DID NOT remove the app.

Someone better at it than me should check to see if this guy had any professional ties to Google.

LOL...
Google is working directly with Apple to have it implemented. They don't need to work with a small developer to get it done any more than Apple does. Both companies are well-stocked with their own. 


Some people are so accepting of conspiracy theories, and if there's not one they like they'll make up their own. Critical thinking is so passe, right?