linuxplatform

tmay said:

I like Apple's curated approach, and I like that Apple doesn't rush into whatever the fad of the market is. Do you really think that streaming games, affected by latency issues, will be a wonderful experience from the get go?

Perhaps you can provide a detailed, first person experience with specific hardware and services, to all of us.

This is just wrong. First off, I use Stadia - on my Samsung phone, the browser on my MacBook and the browser on my Chromebook - and have experienced no more lag than I have on Steam or Nintendo Switch. (And less lag than on the Wii U). Go on various sites and read comments and blogs from people who have used Stadia and they will tell you the same. 

Second, as a user of Android devices, the idea that the services that come to Android first are terrible until Apple comes along and makes them good ... is fiction. Even if you agree with the very debatable idea that Apple's implementations of Android ideas are better that doesn't change the fact that those features worked capably for hundreds of millions of users for years on Android, and as a result constituted a real benefit for the owners of these devices.

Feel free to defend Apple's approach. But don't make up falsehoods while doing so. All that does is weaken's Apple's case.

sflocal said:

First remotely playing games, next it will be apps.  What’s to stop companies from creating remote (I.e. “steamed”) app stores disconnecting Apple’s control and user privacy?

This is a very slippery slope.  I can understand Apple taking this approach.

Like others are saying, if you don’t like it move to Android. 

This sentiment is bizarre. I never "moved" to macOS, for example. I just added macOS devices to my existing Windows and Linux computers. Similarly, if I ever buy an iPad - extremely unlikely at this point for reasons that I won't get into that have nothing to do with the quality of Apple products because I am enjoying my Macs very much and also very much enjoyed iPads, iPods and Apple TVs in the past (my only issue was with iTunes but that is another story) - rest assured I will not be throwing my Chromebooks in the trash.

So you do not need to switch platforms. All you need to do is buy an Android device capable of running xCloud and/or Stadia. And that is when one of the primary benefits of the Android ecosystem can help you: serviceable Android devices can be very cheap. Can't tell the good from the bad? Allow me to state that Nokia and Motorola make quality low cost phones, and the Nokia ones in particular receive regular updates for 3 years. Tablets are a bit more challenging, but if you are not up for buying an Amazon Prime tablet and sideloading the Google apps onto it, your next best bet is probably the Samsung Galaxy A series tablets. If you are only going to use these devices for cloud gaming and whatever else is available to you on Android that is not available to you on iOS then the so-called horror show that Apple chauvinists insists exist on every other platform won't affect you.

This "if are you not with us you are against us" stuff ... it makes no sense from a consumer pespective. At all. The only one that makes sense is  "I am going to find out what is best at doing the job and get it to do that job."

red oak said:

Playing games is completely different than watching a one-way streamed video.    How is that not obvious to you? 

If this is allowed,  developers in all categories will try to create "streamed" versions of their apps to circumvent Apple.  Will be become a shit show 

Developers in all categories are trying to create "streamed" versions of their apps already. Google and Microsoft would actually prefer that you do it and have released an SDK for the purposes of converting your traditional app to a streamed app. 

https://medium.com/pwabuilder/microsoft-and-google-team-up-to-make-pwas-better-in-the-play-store-b59710e487

Google, Amazon and Microsoft don't make any real money on hardware. So if a billion iPhones sell - hardware money for Apple - and all rely primarily on apps submitted to the app store that are downloaded and physically installed on the device - 30%/15% services revenue for Apple - they don't see a cent of that except for whatever apps of theirs that also are bought or sell subscriptions on the app store who have to compete with a million other apps that do the same thing. But if Google, Amazon and Microsoft can convince developers to shift from relying on apps that are downloaded to iOS devices to apps that live in the cloud, they can make money that way by offering to host those apps on AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform.

For the developers, this may actually be better. For one, it makes being multi-platform a lot easier. Instead of having to code the app in Swift or Objective C for iOS, Java or Kotlin for Android and C# for Windows 10/10S/10X, you write the main app once for your cloud deployment (i.e. using the Javascript-based MEAN stack that all the cloud companies support) and then merely have to tweak each version of the Vue.js PWA front end to fit each platform's requirements.

For the record, this post claims that Apple supports PWAs and has from the beginning. 

https://love2dev.com/pwa/ios/

So whatever point you are trying to make here is wrong.

velasarius said:

This article is extremely one sided. Who is to say that big game publishers wouldn't absorb significant numbers of mobile game developers to their own streaming platforms and practically deprive Apple iOS and Mac game stores over night. This is a standalone business model so you bet your ass that big game publishers or even new venture capital wouldn't try this. Not all gaming should work this way, mobile games should run locally so Apple is right and they cant open the flood gates by letting MS or Google do it.

Because mobile gaming and AAA PC/console gaming are different entities with different developers targeting different consumers. Anyone who thinks that people are going to stop playing Candy Crush or Clash of Clans and start playing Call of Duty or Kingdom Hearts is totally unaware of the differences in gameplay, technology and target markets involved. Besides, I know how Apple fans love to portray themselves as the persecuted victim but please drop it. Apple's valuation and profits are probably bigger than Microsoft and Google combined. Also, it isn't just Microsoft and Google. There were several small video game streaming services trying to get off the ground. Had they been allowed on iOS they might have gotten traction. Instead, this allows the much bigger companies like Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Nvidia - all of whom make their own hardware and don't need the iOS platform (they want it but don't need it to survive and grow) - to get entrenched. When Amazon launches their video game streaming service next year, for instance, they can just give their Fire 7 tablets or Fire TV sticks - which often sell for as little as $35 - away to whoever asks for one in return for signing up for the service (which will almost certainly be bundled with Amazon Prime anyway). 

Gaby said:

And rich corporations that publicly complain like petulant and calculated children about another business not bending over backward to allow them to piggyback on their successes, well again they have free agency to put their money where their mouth is, and create their own platforms and hardware to compete. 

I presume that you have the same view when Apple attacks other companies? Which is not uncommon at all by the way.