dope_ahmine

@fastasleep @crowley ;
Remember "You’ll see" a month ago?
Eat your lil Valentine hearts out, boys.
  

(…and there's even more fixes in the background than any good user needs to know.)

@GeorgeBMac said:

”Will anybody trust the Aussies again?”

Absolutely … no problem. Just follow their rules. Like all the other players did, including all of Djocovic’s Serbian countrymen.

mbdrake76 said:

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.

@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.

Haha… I just handed out a beautiful multi-billion dollar solution in my post here a few days ago, and nobody hasn’t even commented on it. Too complicated? Brains, boys! Brains!

There is a possible way for Apple to open up for non-verified 3:rd-party apps if these were sandboxed as web apps. Because I don’t think a bad web site is damaging Apple’s brand or jeopardizing its system safety today, right?

So, I think an easy way for Apple to escape this growing App Store problem would be to simply offer a special section for web apps in the store. These web apps would be runnung in WebKit, and possible to install and execute on the iOS desktop like today.

In this way, anybody could offer their apps on the App Store without Apple’s control or commission, and they still would work inside Apple’s ecosystem — albeit limited to WebKit functionality. They would be coded in the way “originally intended” for the iPhone.

If you want to code your app in an even fancier way, with deeper “native” integration to Apple’s iOS, then you would be demanded to undergo quality- and security verifications. You would naturally also be charged for that process, as well as access fees to the API:s Apple has developed — for example in proportion to the number of API calls made by each user running that app.

I think it would be quite hard for developers, and others, to drive a court case against that.