InspiredCode

mattinoz said:

RonnyDaddy said:

Another in court for Epic coming up? https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/quebec-class-action-alleging-fortnite-is-addictive-will-go-ahead-judge-rules/ar-AA153GQh

Fingers-crossed for the win here as Apple could then justify removal or restrict of Loot boxes games on mass as gambling products. 

Make developers pivot to a more sane model of making a product lots of people feel is worth a reasonable price. 

I wish it was easier to find games without loot boxes. They overrun the App Store. I refuse to play any of those games out of principle.

My thoughts on what should be regulated and what should be voluntary good behavior by Apple:

• Apple should stop rent-seeking and any government regulation should narrowly target this and nothing else. There are a couple significant sources of rent seeking on the App Store: (1) Apple shouldn't require more than transaction fees from direct competitors to its first party services. (2) Non-platform content like eBooks or audio books shouldn't require more than a transaction fee. 

• Apple should introduce a creator-content level of App Store IAP fees when there are three parties involved. These creators are similar to small developers that Apple only takes 15% from anyway. Apple could ultimately take 15% from these transactions and allow the app developer to take another 15% for a 30% total fee.

• The 30% fee is perfectly reasonable for games. Epic Games has nothing of merit to complain about when it comes to Fortnite.

• Any place the agency model is traditionally used should be exempt from incompatible fees, but generally that is just non-platform content that is covered by the first bullet point.

• The iPhone should not allow side-loading for security reasons, but Apple should voluntarily allow iPad (or at least iPad Pro) to side-load since it is marketed as a general purpose computer. It should allow open source software and complex workflows. With the direction that iPad is trending each release this feels inevitable. I don't think side-load should be required through any regulation since it is too blunt an instrument.

• Apple should allow game streaming because it essentially transforms the iPhone in to an input peripheral for another device (even if that device is a cloud server). This shouldn't be limited much like Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony doesn't restrict Apple from adding game controller support to iOS. There should be no expectation of content moderating for this class of app if it is listed for adult maturity levels. I think it is fair not to allow such an app in the game category of the App Store since it's not a game and it might dominate rankings essentially providing free advertising. It could be placed in a utility or entertainment category. Despite Apple previously saying the opposite, I don't think Apple should allow games in the games category that are just a thin wrapper around single-game streaming. Fortunately Microsoft opted not to do this. The games category should be for native games only.

• Apple should do whatever it takes to avoid streaming video services from sending you to a web page even if it means not taking more then a transaction fee. This burns good will from consumers that are increasingly aware that Apple is requiring this. It may be considered rent-seeking since Apple offers a first-party service that doesn't require fees although this is fuzzy since the actual content content is typically different. It is not commonplace to charge these fees on non-phone platforms and the medium is non-platform content.

Google should at least get their own customers to adopt it before trying to push it on everyone else. Not to mention the spec is unfinished. Their E2EE support isn't even standardized yet. Since it continues the SMS tradition of support for big-brother monitoring by state actors, it is full of security and privacy issues. We've been stuck with SMS (and will continue to be) for ages, this would just push out an SMS-like technology that doesn't preserve privacy even further. The EU isn't even likely to approve RCS in it's current form due to privacy issues.

lkrupp said:

This is going to be the next big thing that isn’t going to be the next big thing. VR headsets have never caught on and AR headsets won’t either. Hey tech giants, learn the lesson taught by Google Glass. These headsets are already being mocked on TV ads depicting various morons hopping up and down and knocking over furniture.

It will at least eventually. The potential of XR despite current limits of technology is undeniable. Every release will have fewer flaws until it is mainstream. I suspect even Apple's first headset will be pretty close to getting there though. It will certainly be the best-in-class device for enthusiasts and professionals.

bloggerblog said:

I haven't read the iMessage API documentation, but if it can be done 'legally' then Google would've jumped on that bandwagon ages ago. I'm skeptical

There is no documentation or SDK for Apple Messages. It is probably not legal or it won't be in the future. All Apple needs to do is forbid it in their Apple ID user agreement. An open source non-commercial program could probably get away with it, but a commercial entity would probably need to get Apple's permission.