mbdrake76

brian.on.android said:

I think people would lay off Apple if they would just allow third party payment systems fully.

Developers already spend $99+ a year for distribution of their apps in the app store. 3rd party payments require $0 for Apple to maintain because they use zero of Apple's infrastructure outside of the phone you already paid for.

Apple doesn't need to take a cut in your entire business.

I'd rather go through Apple with any payment related issues than countless other payment processors such as Worldpay, Cleverbridge, Stripe, or whatever is being used.  But nobody seems to be giving a damn about the consumer and what they think about all this - just the profit margins of Apple and the app developers.  Apple will still charge their cut regardless of whether you use their or a third party payment processor.  Apple will still want payment for hosting the app (along with vetting it - which I will say they desperately need to improve upon - but Google also needs to up the ante too).  The key issue here is how much they're charging for that service.  It's up to the developer whether that's worth it or not.  Nobody has a God-given right to any particular platform.

As for the annual $99 - that's barely anything.   Having run a small ISP, there were significantly greater annual charges than that, plus the rest.

What about Microsoft buying pretty much every games development studio under the sun?  They've been consolidating quite a few of late - more so than Sony has, that's for sure.  Will there be any games companies left that aren't owned by Microsoft or Sony?

dope_ahmine said:

@mbdrake76 Lucky you. You must basically live on top of a GFN server that is hooked straight into a Fortnite server. In Europe it’s hard to reach 60 fps at 1080 when playing this game, even with Gb/s internet connections. Most of the time its more like 20-30 fps, and with second-long dropouts when scenes change rapidly or plenty of players enter your viewfield.

The problems are many: GFN servers are overloaded, the nearest GFN server is too far from you, the nearest Fortnite server is too far from your GFN server etc. Nvidia is at best only optimizing the first link in this chain. Their service would be better if they tried to optimize the whole gaming experience. But I seriously doubt they could match the performance of a real gaming console today — except maybe in those rare cases of @mbdrake76 ’s situation.

I must admit to having thrown a bit of money at it.

I'm based in South East England, and I imagine I'm connecting to NP-LON-05 with good routing from Virgin Media on a 1Gbs connection (and I've just updated my router to a Netgear Nighthawk RAX200 which has definitely improved sustained throughput).  I'm connecting to NA-East Fortnite servers which usually provides better players than Europe (and more of them during bouts of insomnia), and don't experience any performance issues (yet).  The RTX3080 tier is the most expensive plan, and its difficult to ascertain how many people are currently using it - but so far I've always been able to connect without issue.

This is a 10-minute sample of Fortnite gameplay on GFN RTX3080, using the GFN client on macOS Monterey (which is partially Apple silicon native):

I often play Fortnite on my 14" MacBook Pro M1 Pro via GeForce Now RTX3080 tier at Epic settings with a resolution of 1440p and it's absolutely fine - every bit as good as playing it natively on my HP Omen laptop with RTX2060.  Providing you've got the bandwidth and latency, GeForce Now is a good option.  Shadow of the Tomb Raider (which I picked up free via the Epic Games Store) runs around 100-135fps at 1440p on GeForce Now.  GFN could do with more support from developers, but ultimately I'm very happy with the performance and availability of the service.

M68000 said:

Why are people so up in arms about this?  If you have nothing to hide why are you fighting Apple’s attempt to make the world safer from criminals and sick people?   This “ceo” made the amazingly stupid comment about “presumption of guilt”?   Well,  at least in the United States a person is innocent until proven guilty.   

I’m frankly amazed by the feedback in this forum in the last few days,  people who trust and love Apple and now don’t want to help Apple try to make the world safer.  

If you work for any large company I hope you know that any email, chat messages and files on company computers can be looked at and scanned by security and network admins.

if you want total privacy,  get rid of cloud storage and maybe go back to using a typewriter LOL

Apple does not want their products used for crime and is making an attempt to do something about it - what is so hard to understand?

Your employer has the right to monitor your activities at work - but certainly not at home.

My general concern is if things were to go wrong, and things can and do go wrong.  We're Apple users, we expect things to go wrong!  Due to a bug or hash mismatch (okay - the odds of it triggering a false positive are very low), it could be possible for completely innocent images to be flagged up incorrectly.  Apple hasn't exactly the most marvellous reputation for dealing with sensitive and urgent problems when accounts are closed for something the account isn't responsible for.

But, as many other people have said, it doesn't have to stop there.  The same tech can be used (or expanded) to check for other content that, say, governments can enforce on Apple to weed out and notify them of any infraction.  This has the capability (mind you, most things do) for abuse.

HOWEVER..

Adobe already do this with their cloud services.  This is outlined here:

https://www.adobe.com/uk/legal/lawenforcementrequests/childsafety.html

So those using Lightroom Desktop/CC or Lightroom Classic which syncs photos to the Adobe Creative Cloud are already having their photos scanned with CSAM technology when it's uploaded to their servers.  I've not seen any articles that mention this, or any feedback that Adobe has to say on it.

I can definitely see why Apple wants to implement CSAM on the iPhone (and perhaps give Apple a chance to say to law enforcement - hey, you don't need to crack the phone - we do the job for you!) - and it'd be one of the few companies that aren't already doing so (Google already do it through many of their products and services already - https://transparencyreport.google.com/child-sexual-abuse-material/reporting?hl=en), but it does somewhat go against their privacy matters mantra.