cloudguy

Beats said:

mjtomlin said:

Beats said:

Do you think Apple will have a closed App Store except for rare software? I'm thinking Apple is gonna reset apps for Mac with Apple Silicon. This will close security holes etc.

No.

Right. Didn't work for iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch.

/s

Apples and oranges. iPhone, iPad and Apple Watch aren't productivity or enterprise platforms for software people (developers, programmers, architects, engineers), IT workers or lots of other professionals. Such people are going to make heavy use of software and tools that will never be in any app store. In fact, even if it isn't heavy use but rather even very occasional use - like once every couple of months - that tool has to be available if you need it for your job. Some people need tools that they literally have to pull down from GitHub and compile from source, for instance. Locking down Macs would take Apple back to the 1990s - prior to switching to Intel and in particular before iPods and later iPhones caused Apple market share and mindshare to explode - when the only people who use Macs are the creative crowd. 

Beats said:

cloudguy said:

This is absolutely absurd.

0. Apple does not make iMessage available to Android.
1. Apple does not make iTunes available to Android even though it is available for Windows.
2. Apple releases AppleTV+ on every platform but Google Android including Fire TV (non-Google Android).
3. Apple blocks Stadia entirely, depriving it of any chance of gaining a subscriber base before superior xCloud launched (and before Amazon Prime Gaming Cloud launches in 2021).

And you folks are upset that Google isn't supporting a single brand new feature on iOS? 

Wow, talk about entitled. People who own both Android and Apple devices - yes there are a lot of us - don't even have iCloud apps. We have to use the website. Yet you expect top tier support for a feature that was enabled just Tuesday? From a competitor?

Let me put it another way. You are only now able to make Chrome and Gmail default apps on iOS. (Or at least you will when Google gets around to updating the apps.) Unlike PIP for Apple, Chrome and Gmail are vital services for Google's survival!

Even better: Apple won't even let apps named "Android" in the App Store! Google had to rename them "Google" and change their entire branding strategy! 

Look, Google isn't obligated to allow iOS access to YouTube at all. So long as it is available to Windows and macOS through the browser, it isn't a monopoly. (Google infamously refused to provide YouTube, Gmail, Chrome and Google Docs apps to Windows Phone, remember?) And even if it is a monopoly, so what? Google has just as much right to monopolize services for its own platform as Apple had the right to buy Dark Sky, delete it from the Google Play Store and cancel the service for its millions of Android subscribers, turn off its API that was used by dozens of Android apps and even shut down its website!

Wow, isn't someone - anyone - out there willing or able to provide a reality check here?

You do realize the entire Android OS is a complete ripoff of Apple's work? They owe Google NOTHING.

There are rules in place for apps. If developers don't follow them, Apple should kick them out for the safety of it's users.

"Let me put it another way. You are only now able to make Chrome and Gmail default apps on iOS."
And you still think Apple is being unfair? This move can damage Apple's ecosystem like it did Windows.

"Chrome and Gmail are vital services for Google's survival!"
No one who values privacy cares dude. Go cry to iKnockoff users.

2nd to last paragraph has so many contradictions I don't wanna spend another 10 minutes explaining it.

Google INTENTIONALLY blocked a free feature that complies with Apple's rules. How you managed to compare that to XCloud intentionally breaking rules is beyond me. A stretch to hate Apple I suppose.

0. You do realize that Android was created in 2003 and bought by Google in 2005? The only portion of Android that "is a ripoff of Apple's work" is the UI. Everything else - the custom Linux kernel, the C++ NDK, the custom JVM and runtime, the Java + Javascript + XML application layer etc. was created by Android and Google. Since the Supreme Court ruled in Apple versus Microsoft (over Windows) that it is perfectly legal to implement your own version of a user interface so long as the implementation details are different - and every major legal body, trade body and standards body on the planet has endorsed this decision since - Android is in no way a copy of iOS. That is why Apple never sued Google over Android. It is also why Microsoft never sued Red Hat or Canonical over Gnome and the other Linux desktops being blatant copies of Windows XP/Vista/7. They would lose. That is why people who claim that "Android is a ripoff of iOS" have no idea what they are talking about from a software, hardware, architecture or legal sense.

1. We agree that Apple doesn't owe Google anything. MY POINT WAS THAT GOOGLE DOESN'T OWE APPLE A YOUTUBE APP AT ALL. If Google was able to withhold ALL their apps from Windows Phone ENTIRELY what makes you think that iOS is ENTITLED to picture in picture.

2. I personally could care less that Apple blocked Stadia. I don't care about any platform blocking any product or any feature for any reason. It is iOS people whining about not getting gold star service from Google when Apple blocks Google apps, services, branding etc. all the time. That is why I called the iOS people complaining about this entitled. Can't you understand that it is absurd to complain about Google not providing a minor feature to iOS users when Apple A. only provides Apple Music to Android and B. blocks things from Google wholesale? 

3. "Google INTENTIONALLY blocked a free feature that complies with Apple's rules." Who cares and why? I repeat ... GOOGLE IS NOT OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE YOUTUBE AT ALL LET ALONE ANY PARTICULAR FEATURE THAT IT MAY OR MAY NOT CHOOSE TO PROVIDE FOR ANY REASON INCLUDING GOOGLE WANTING TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. 

4. Huh? What on earth are you talking about? EVERY SINGLE VIDEO GAME STREAMING COMPANY HAS USED NETFLIX AS ITS MODEL. FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. There were other game streaming services before the current Stadia/GeForce Now/xCloud batch. There will be at least 3 major others to launch by 2022: Amazon, PlayStation and Steam. All of them will use the same general Netflix model that is used for movies, TV shows, songs and books. Or to to be honest you can call it THE ITUNES MODEL since they Apple and iTunes were the first to popularize the media catalog within an app going way back to 2001 which Netflix itself adopted. That's the hilarious thing: Apple is now claiming that their own innovation is now against their rules.

Also, you don't seem to understand ... xCloud doesn't need Apple to succeed anyway! Microsoft has 10 million GamePass subscribers and 90 million XBox Live subscribers. Add to that the many tens of millions more who own or have owned an XBox console. Those people will either A. buy an Android phone or tablet if they don't own one already - newsflash as there are 3 billion active Android devices on the planet most already do - or they will B. wait until xCloud is available on Windows in 2021. The same thing will happen when Amazon launches their video game streaming service in 2021. It will be available on Fire TV devices (the #2 set top box platform), Kindle Fire tablets, Android tablets and phones as well as PCs. When PlayStation and Steam add their streaming services - they will have to in order to compete with xCloud and Amazon (Stadia  and GeForce Now not so much) they will bring their existing customer base, most of them already have Android hardware or will have no principled objection to getting a $60 Android tablet to use it. (That's the beauty of web/cloud services ... you don't need an A14 chip for a good user experience!) Game streaming does not need iOS to succeed and Apple is only hurting itself - though admittedly by only a very tiny marginal bit - by blocking it.

Basically, you are fine with Apple locking out others completely and not putting its services on other platforms at all WHILE WHINING ABOUT A SINGLE FEATURE ON A FREE APP. Don't you realize how entitled that is?

Now I am going to restate. My problem isn't that I think that Apple owes Google anything. They don't. YOUR PROBLEM IS THINKING THAT GOOGLE FOR SOME REASON OWES APPLE EVERYTHING. THEY DO NOT. 

22july2013 said:

CheeseFreeze said:

A mobile ecosystem is not a console ecosystem. 

What is the Nintendo Switch, a mobile ecosystem or a console ecosystem? After you answer, I may have a follow up question to determine your level of consistency in applying the rules.

You are kidding, right? The mobile platforms all began primarily as operating systems for mobile phones (cell phones). They merely extended to other device categories - tablets, smart TV boxes, smart watches, smart home/IoT devices - because of the massive success of the mobile platforms and the ability to connect to the other devices with the primary smartphone device. (Note that Microsoft wanted to accomplish the same with their PC and XBox platforms but failed. Instead, now a PC is just another client for the smartphone with Continuity for macOS and a number of apps to connect Android phones to Windows PCs and the Chrome browser.)

Granted, the Nintendo Switch uses a mobile hardware platform: it is the same hardware, drivers and Vulkan graphics stack as the Nvidia Shield K1 Android tablet. Even the dock providing connectivity for USB controllers and HDMI has been common on Android devices since at least 2011. But the software for Nintendo Switch is the same as is used for the Nintendo 3DS (with APIs added for compatibility with the Nvidia SOC drivers and Vulkan). As the Nintendo 3DS has absolutely nothing to do with mobile phones beyond several very good 3DS emulators being available for Android then no, the Nintendo Switch is not a mobile ecosystem. It is a console ecosystem that was implemented using hardware and API standards created for the Android mobile ecosystem, true, but the software ecosystem is from their already in existence 3DS console.

The Switch being portable, having Wi-Fi access and an app store is no big deal. Any number of handheld consoles - including the PlayStation Portable - have the same. Moreover, Windows 10, ChromeOS and even Linux tablets are very much a thing. They all have app stores supplied by their various operating systems and it is possible to add third party app stores to them all as well. Yet no one calls Windows 10, ChromeOS or Linux "mobile ecosystems" because they were all designed for and are primarily desktop, PC (and in the case of Linux ... workstation, server and cloud) operating systems. 

Bottom line: no judge is going to accept Apple's argument that tries to draw an equivalence between a platform that is on nearly 1.5 billion mobile phones and tablets and runs - for example - video production, banking, engineering and diagnostic medical applications (iOS) and a platform that is on less than 70 million "Android tablets" for whom the only non-video game apps available are Hulu and YouTube .

chadbag said:

Dear Apple Insider:

The headline claims that Epic has refuted Apple's claims, but the article gave no evidence of that. Epic did file counter claims but they are just that, counter claims.  Those counter claims have not been proven to be true / factual, which is necessary for an actual refutation to have taken place. Please refer to the definition of "refute": 1. to prove to be false or erroneous.  2.  To prove (a person) to be in error.  (Dictionary.com).   In both cases thir needs to be proof, not just claims.  

Apple hasn't substantiated their claims either. So at the very best we have two competing unsubstantiated claims. Which Apple's claim falls short of. Consider:

The gaming industry is watched like a hawk by many analysts because it is so economically and culturally important. Gaming is actually bigger than Hollywood now. By a mile. And this was before coronavirus shut down the movie industry. And gaming has a bigger economic reach because it drives both hardware and software. (Hollywood benefits from technological changes as opposed to driving or creating them.) So had there been a 70% drop in Fortnite - the biggest game in the world - then we would have heard about it long ago and from someone else other than Apple. Goodness, you had pop stars holding concerts in Fortnite because they can't tour right now. You also had trailers for major motion pictures to debut in Fortnite because - again - people can't watch trailers in movies. Now I do agree that while Fortnite was the frenzy in 2018 and 2019, the gaming story of this year has definitely been Animal Crossing. Problem is you need a Nintendo Switch to play Animal Crossing (and not all Switch owners bought it or even close). As far as free to play multiplatform games Fortnite is still #1 with nothing else coming close by a mile. Plus - thanks to the aforementioned COVID - gaming in general has gotten a massive boost, increasing the participation for even niche and declining franchises. So a 70% drop during the worst of COVID, as opposed to now when lots of places are reopening and kids are back in school? 

So Fortnite being able to cite their own data plus nothing anywhere similar or close coming from any of the many other industry watchers and metrics following video game industry trends indicates that the ball is in Apple's court to prove their assertion, not Fortnite. Especially when Fortnite was on record 

Gaby said:

Somehow I doubt apple needs to use google trends data when it has plenty of its own from App Store activity and app usage data. 

Epic continues to insult our intelligence and disrespect the court in the same manner. It’s arguments can be described as weak at best. I really cannot abide Sweeney. He’s so disingenuous. Even his photo creeps me out

Huh? Apple's data is only relevant for users on Apple's platform. Meaning that if iOS users fell by 75% while users on all other platforms - PlayStation, XBox, Android, Windows - increased by 75%, only Epic would know this. Apple would only know about the 75% decline on iOS, iPadOS and MacOS. Since Apple has to get data on Nintendo - for example - user engagement somewhere, it would have had to have been Google or some other third party source. Like it or not, Google search and ads data is pretty much going to be the best there is for a global (sans China) multiplatform perspective. Apple's walled garden - and its hardware first services later focus - isn't cut out for that type of stuff.