linuxplatform

Beats said:

Microsoft thought they would get special treatment. They'll come along eventually. Android users hate paying for things and most knockoff devices have terrible quality screens and crap performance(Yes AI smart asses, I KNOW this is cloud computing, not the point).

Admittedly I missed this line before posting the above:
"App Store guidelines state that an app can't rely on streaming from the cloud."

What about video like Hulu?

Anyways, where there's a will there's a way. How did MS do the test flight? Thought the app had to be operating with the public.

Sigh.

1. Microsoft never thought they would get special treatment. They can't "come along eventually" because the only alternative is making full ports of console games to iPhones and iPads. Let's just say they aren't doing this on WINDOWS - let alone Android - so please just give it up.

2. I have told you this before. iPhones are knockoffs of Samsung phones now and have been since 2014.

3. There is no will or way. Apple either supports streaming solutions like this or they don't.

4. Microsoft only tested with a single game. That was how they avoided breaking App Store rules.

5. What about video like Apple TV+? And iTunes? Well that is your sole good question.

danvm said:

9secondkox2 said:

Stinking Microsoft. 

Always trying to fight with apple. 

I don't think that MS always tries to fight Apple.  Look how, for example, Apple present them in their keynotes showing MS Office and Minecraft AR.  They were event mentioned to have MS Office for Apple Silicone devices.  

And always banding together with the other also-rans 

Lol

Good luck with that

Did Apple gave them other option?

Thanks my good man. Now for an Apple site that is actually willing to tell the truth: https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/05/microsoft-ends-tests-with-xcloud-gaming-platform/
"Microsoft hasn’t provided details about these App Store policies, but they’re probably referring to the fact that Apple rejects any app that offers its own catalog of apps or games within the App Store."

But here's the good news: Android devices are relatively cheap. You can get an Android tablet capable of running xCloud for $60-$80 and a phone - with a 6.5' screen no less - for about $99. In other words, less than what Apple charges for a Thunderbolt 3 Pro cable. (If official xCloud support comes to Android TV ... they run as little as $50). So there you go.

Beats said:

Well.... this is a first.

WRONG as usual. But this time it isn't QUITE your fault. It is the fault of the UTTERLY DISHONEST columnist WHO KNOWS FULL WELL THE REASON but won't admit it. The entire reason is that while competing full-fledged app stores like the Amazon AppStore and the Samsung Galaxy Store are allowed on Android, they are not allowed on iOS, iPadOS, watchOS or tvOS. 

Let me give you an example. Razer once had (and Nvidia still has!) an Android TV devices with their own app stores that contained their own games and apps. Nvidia cross-lists their apps on the Google Play Store but Razer didn't. But on iOS/iPadOS/tvOS? Such folly isn't allowed. 

Same deal here. Just like Steam and Nvidia GeForce Now, xCloud is going to be an app store for games. Apple only allows competing app stores - especially ones where you set up your own payment arrangements - on macOS. That is why xCloud was only allowed to test a single game on iOS. Offering multiple games would have violated iOS policies.

In other words, xCloud will never be on iOS for the same reason that Nvidia GeForce Now isn't on iOS and why Stadia isn't on iOS. Think about it. Use your heads. Office 365 and all the other Microsoft apps are on iOS. YouTube, Gmail, Chrome and all the other Google apps are on iOS. So if there is a reason why xCloud (Microsoft), Stadia (Google) and GeForce Now (Nvidia, not even a direct Apple competitor unless you count their Android TV box that almost no one buys) aren't available then that reason begisn and ends with Apple.

Let me spell it out for you. With iOS/iPadOS/tvOS you have TWO BILLION USERS ON A PLATFORM THAT IS BY FAR THE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE PAYING SUBSCRIBERS INSTEAD OF PRIMARILY FREE-TO-PLAY OR FREE-WITH-ADS CONSUMERS. You have to be either TOTALLY NAIVE OR COMPLETELY NUTS to think that Nvidia, Microsoft AND Google made the decision to put their subscription gaming service - or ANY subscription service for that matter - on ANDROID but not iOS/iPadOS/tvOS. NO ONE ELSE - NOT EVEN GOOGLE - DOES THIS. I repeat ... NOT EVEN GOOGLE PUTS SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES ON ANDROID AND NOT IOS/IPADOS. IF ANYTHING GOOGLE INTRODUCES SOME FEATURES AND PRODUCTS ON IOS/IPADOS BEFORE THEY GET TO ANDROID AND CHROMEOS.

So instead of allowing this columnist's creative obfuscations cause you to hate and resent Microsoft ... ask yourself why GeForce Now isn't available on anything but macOS either. Ask yourself why Steam isn't supported on iPads even though the A12X is perfectly capable of meeting its performance requirements (older Steam games can run on very cheap Windows and Linux hardware), Steam is on record stating that they NEED to diversify their platforms from being dominated by Windows AND IS GOING TO BE SUPPORTED ON CHROMEBOOKS LATER THIS YEAR OR EARLY NEXT YEAR. (That is right ... Google is going to enable and promote Steam on ChromeOS DESPITE KNOWING FULL WELL THAT IT WILL TAKE STADIA CUSTOMERS FROM THEM. Just as Microsoft has no problem with Steam, Origin or Epic despite fully knowing that they compete with XBox, even more so than they do with PlayStation or Nintendo.)

I repeat. Blame iOS/iPadOS/tvOS (macOS not so much) App Store policies for this. NOT Microsoft. (Or Google or Nvidia.) No matter how much Apple sites like this run interference for them.

9secondkox2 said:

Stinking Microsoft. 

Always trying to fight with apple. 

And always banding together with the other also-rans 

Lol

Good luck with that

Stinking Microsoft ... that is subjective so I will let that pass.
Always trying to fight with Apple ... so they AREN'T supposed to offer products and services to compete with Apple's? If that is the case then Apple shouldn't sell iPhones because Microsoft was selling smartphones first. Or the iPad Pro because Surface. Or "Pro" smartphones with bigger screens because Samsung. Or AirPods or the Apple Watch because Samsung had their products first. Or HomePods. Or Apple TV. Or Apple TV+. Or Apple Music. Or iWork because Microsoft Office. Or Apple Arcade because XBox Play Pass. Etc. Meanwhile Microsoft has TONS of VERY PROFITABLE PRODUCTS where Apple doesn't even compete in. Oh I almost forgot ... no Apple Silicon because Microsoft (and Google) had Windows and ChromeOS on ARM years ago.
Always banding together with the older also-rans ... you mean platforms that dwarf Apple's market share? Besides, it isn't as if Apple gave them a choice in the first place. More on that later.

Lol Good luck with that. Again subjective so I won't comment. 

Beats said:

Thought "Apple Silicon" branding was for Mac SOCs? This family of chips will be faster than the A-series found in Apple TV.

Unless you're being sarcastic, which is technically correct!

Ummm ... no. Apple Silicon is ... Apple Silicon. It is inclusive of every chip that Apple designed. (Aren't there several "Intel-based Macs already run Apple Silicon" articles on this site referring to theT1 and T2 chips?) 

Apple Silicon is merely a BRAND and it is the brand name that is new. But the brand includes everything from the special purpose security and TouchBar/TouchID controller type chips in Macs to the S series chips in the Apple Watch to the A series chips in Apple TVs, iPads, iPhones and soon Macs. The branding is brilliant too because it tells people that every CPU in every Apple device is designed by Apple exclusively to be integrated with the hardware and operating systems in Apple products. 

Come on, this is your brand so you should know this stuff already. I can get you being wrong about Android, Linux and Windows - which you pretty much always are - but at least get your own brand right.