bleab

This is straight up why I use Chromebooks instead of iPads: being able to install and run executable and arbitary code is an unconditional requirement. I mean for cheap stuff like the $80 Wal-Mart and Amazon Kindle Fire Android tablets that I just use as e-readers and for Netflix yeah fine doesn't matter. But anything that I pay real money for and use for work or school? Needs to run arbitrary code. That is why that "the tablet that can replace your PC" iPad commercials never applied to me, and the A12Z and M1 being faster than anything below an octacore Intel Core i7 didn't matter either. Can't run what I need means can't use it.

"The company might release them individually through the App Store"

Yeah right

"though it could conceivably go the route of Apple Arcade"

Not happening

 "Microsoft's xCloud by fielding a first-party network"

We have a winner! Google, Nvidia, Microsoft and Amazon all tried to create "Netflix for games". Well now we are going to have Netflix do a Netflix for games.

Thinking that they are going to do anything but what Google and the rest have done is hilarious. Netflix isn't an app developer like Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia and Google. Netflix is their sole app and they have it on every conceivable platform. They also don't have platforms to push like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Google (plus Nvidia if you count GPU-based hardware platforms). They also don't have hardware like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia and Google. Meaning that they are going to add a "games" section to their existing TV and movie sections in the Netflix app. 

Forcing Google, Microsoft and Amazon to make PWAs when they have less than 100 million subscribers combined - with the vast majority of them on Microsoft (who get xCloud as a throw-in for the existing XBox and Windows centered GamePass subscriptions) and most of the rest on Nvidia - is one thing. Telling Netflix - the #2 streaming app in the world behind YouTube - that they can't add a major feature that is going to be present on Android and the other competitors is a whole other matter. We are going to see if Apple is going to stick to their "need to review each individual app for security, content etc." guns or if they are going to have to be forced to let Stadia, xCloud, GeForce Now and Luna through in order to accommodate Netflix.

applguy said:

How would one play a game with a Roku remote? I guess that’s for Mike Verdu to know/figure out and me to find out. Sounds like an input peripheral nightmare. 

The article stated that they are going to focus on mobile gaming first. There is also nothing keeping Roku from releasing:

A. gamepads that use the same protocols as their controllers
B. new streaming boxes that are bluetooth compatible

Note that Roku already lets you connect to a smartphone through their app, which means that you can also connect to bluetooth headphones that are connected to the smartphone. They also have StreamBars - Roku branded soundbars - that connect to Roku devices using the same protocol that their remotes use. So if Roku has to do this in order to keep Netflix gamers from fleeing to other hardware, it would be easy and simple to do.

Beats said:

bleab said:

shamino said:

Apple is trying to pretend that they have an exclusive right to the concept of wireless earbuds and they're using US Customs to enforce that nonsense.  At least against small no-name companies.  They are steering clear of going after Samsung or other big players who are selling the same things.

Ummm ... no. Apple can't be trying to pretend that they have an exclusive right to the concept of wireless earbuds because Apple wasn't the first to patent or market such a device. The first true wireless earbuds were launched in 2015 by Onkyo a small Japanese company. At least 3 other small companies launched their own versions in 2015. The Onkyo device and at least one of the others were available internationally - including the U.S. - via Amazon and other ecommerce outlets. And then of course Samsung launched the Gear Icon X true wireless earbuds in July 2016. Meanwhile, AirPods launched in September 2016. So even though Apple clearly defined this category - as they did with the true smartwatch (as distinguished from RTOS fitness trackers) and to a lesser extent the iPhone - they were nowhere near the first. Also, even if they were the first, they still wouldn't be able to claim exclusive rights to it. If they could, Windows and Android would have never existed (for example).

There’s idiots out there who claim Apple developed AirPods in 2 months to copy the launch of GalaxyPods or whatever they’re called.

Same with all other Apple products.

Also, I wouldn’t call Onkyo a small company. They’ve been huge pre-iPhone era. I think Apple has every right to destroy products that copy their earbud designs. Luckily, Onkyo chooses to stay original.

There are also people - including commenters here - who claim that Samsung studies the rumor mill (Prosser, Ming-Chi Kuo etc.) and Apple patents in order to copy Apple before Apple releases their products! The last time that talk was circulated was when Samsung released SmartTags, the AirTags competitors. Never mind that A. Samsung could have just as easily been copying Tile which has been around since 2013 or B. that Samsung created a similar device years ago via a partnership/promotion with another company. 

As far as Onkyo, I do acknowledge having heard of them in the past. You are right that Apple should be able to go after AirPods copycats especially since Samsung, Sony, JBL, Anker etc. have had a lot of success with wireless earbuds that don't resemble AirPods at all. Of the major "branded" wireless earbuds, only OnePlus made AirPods knockoffs (and theirs were the only ones from a major manufacturer that were seized by US Customs).

shamino said:

Apple is trying to pretend that they have an exclusive right to the concept of wireless earbuds and they're using US Customs to enforce that nonsense.  At least against small no-name companies.  They are steering clear of going after Samsung or other big players who are selling the same things.

Ummm ... no. Apple can't be trying to pretend that they have an exclusive right to the concept of wireless earbuds because Apple wasn't the first to patent or market such a device. The first true wireless earbuds were launched in 2015 by Onkyo a small Japanese company. At least 3 other small companies launched their own versions in 2015. The Onkyo device and at least one of the others were available internationally - including the U.S. - via Amazon and other ecommerce outlets. And then of course Samsung launched the Gear Icon X true wireless earbuds in July 2016. Meanwhile, AirPods launched in September 2016. So even though Apple clearly defined this category - as they did with the true smartwatch (as distinguished from RTOS fitness trackers) and to a lesser extent the iPhone - they were nowhere near the first. Also, even if they were the first, they still wouldn't be able to claim exclusive rights to it. If they could, Windows and Android would have never existed (for example).