aderutter

@CheeseFreeze, Thanks for your take on your experience, but to be honest I'm surprised by your stated perceptions. Are game studios participating in AA paid per download or a flat amount per month for example?

I haven't had any dealings with respect to Apple Arcade, but I strongly recall Apples approach to iAds was pretty much the opposite of what you are saying about AA. With iAds, the payout to developers was tenfold the competing networks, so Apple effectively threw lots of money at iAds, and developers (like me) that took advantage reaped significant rewards. I feel that iAds was closed down likely due to them over-spending and over-investing, which is the opposite of what you are saying is happening with AA. 

Further, my personal conversations with app-store staff, for example, did nothing but leave me with admiration for Apple's pursuit of excellence for its end-users.

I strongly suspect that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and would be interested to know how much revenue a game studio can expect to receive for having a single game in AA. I imagine it's far more than some may think you are implying but likely far less than the opportunity available to the larger studios via the unsavory alternatives of ads or IAP. Personally I'd be happiest if Apple just banned all ads and IAP in games.

Beats said:

aderutter said:

For example you can’t release a game that only works with an A13 or above for example. 

You have to support all iOS 13 devices, so that includes iPhone6S generation devices, hence no cutting edge games.

WTF? I didn't know this. No wonder all the latest games look like crap for what the hardware is capable of. THIS needs to be lifted. Even if a game says "Requires iPhone XS and above" it may piss off a gamer temporarily but it will encourage him/her to upgrade which means another sale for Apple.

Well Apple should not allow Epic back regardless.

Other than that, I hope that Apple adds a new app-store rule stating that apps that use in-app purchases other than Apple-Pay cannot be free to download.

I suggest a minimum purchase of $4.99 of which Apple get the usual 15%/30%. Apple needs to recoup it’s costs somewhere.

I guess Apple need to stop selling in the EU.

Let EU citizens import the devices from the UK if they want them. 

Airpods Studio? Lol

Apple very recently updated their guidelines:

If there’s any truth to this then it’s a pre-production prototype and likely not yet down-clocked for real-life heat issues, so final product will have lower numbers.

red oak said:

Hard to believe Apple would launch M1X MacBook Pros and then 6 mo later launch M2 MacBook Airs 

Does not add up 

An M1X would be faster than an M2.
Totally adds up.
M2X a further 6 months later would subsequently be faster than an M2 of course.

If you look at Adobe apps for example, they benefit more from CPU as long as the GPU is at a certain level. Once a user has a mid-range GPU then they don’t need GPU as much as RAM & CPU (and the real-life RAM requirements have decreased with Apple Silicon). 

Another example is ZBrush which is purely CPU based. Even most of the time working in other 3D applications the CPU is more imporant as people working in 3D spend more time not-rendering than rendering and the machine can render while you put the kettle on. 

It’s gamers and some 3d renderers that use more GPU - but CPU 3D Rendering is more accurate and so CPU rendering (obviously with farms) is the default in hollywood whilst us mortals have to just use what’s available on our budgets - typically a desktop GPU rather than a cloud render. The usual options when thinking only of rendering for games or lower-end 3D rendering are GPU (cheap and fast on PC), or CPU (slower, more accurate and slightly better on Mac generally).  

When/if Apple release an M4 Ultra that is twice the performance M4 Max (GPU) it should be equivalent to an Nvidia 4090 and set the cat amongst the pigeons. 2025 could be the start of Apple desktop disruption.

StrangeDays said:

CiaranF said:

Maybe people are getting pissed off with your prices eh? Your actions on the market then drive up the prices of other smartphone manufacturers cos then they get greedy too. I remember buying my first iPhone 3GS for £299 or £349 back in 2009 or so. Now the same equivalent for me in a Pro Max model is circa £1400. That’s greed too, not inflation. 

You’re price comparing to the top of the line model. You should compare to the base iPhone. 

And how much more tech do you get on todays devices? Fact is people want more & better and are prepared to pay for it.