mpantone

entropys said:

I can understand trying to stop distribution, but why sue? Did Ubisoft ask nicely first?

I'm guessing Ubisoft did ask first.

Filing lawsuits costs money. Lawyers and time aren't free. A lawyer from Ubisoft likely sent a boilerplate cease-and-desist letter at some point as well.

lkrupp said:

Kuyangkoh said:

Why dont you go w Alibaba

Deep pockets theory. Sue the one’s with the most money.

Alibaba is the rough equivalent of Amazon in China. They're big, to the tune of $544B market cap. There aren't many bigger than Alibaba. They can dance with Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Facebook.

Ubisoft is probably suing Apple and Google as distributors; due to copyright protection in the USA, Ubisoft has a strong case. Ubisoft could also go after Alibaba as the content producer's (copyright violator) parent. The copyright protection in China is not the same as here in the USA, would be a steeper hill litigation-wise for Ubisoft to climb.

Ubisoft is not going after Apple and Google just because they have lots of money. They are also doing it because of US copyright protection laws. The market cap difference between Apple, Alphabet and Alibaba isn't a discerning factor in Ubisoft's choice here.

beowulfschmidt said:

Virtually every single entry on that list above Apple is either a full-focus gaming developer, distributor, or publisher (e.g. Valve), or has a major division devoted to gaming (e.g. Microsoft), while Apple is primarily a general computing product and services company.  While Apple does pay attention to mobile gaming, I've posted before that I think they don't really care about gaming on Mac OS, and I don't see much evidence that they'd be heartbroken if even mobile gaming weren't a runaway record shattering thing.

Not sure this is an apples to apples, or even oranges, comparison.

You are correct.

This is even less surprising when one takes into account the platforms and marketshare.

Apple Arcade only runs on Apple devices running the latest version of the operating system. My iPhone XS is on iOS 12.4.1; no Apple Arcade for me. My two Macs are both running Mojave 10.14; no Arcade games there. And I have a third generation Apple TV. So no Apple Arcade in my home.

Game publishers like Activision Blizzard have titles that run on multiple platforms, almost all of them with more marketshare and penetration than Apple products. iPhones don't dominate the smartphone market, Macs comprise less than 10% of the PC market, and Apple TV is not the dominant force for set-top TV streamers. Plus Activision Blizzard has titles that run on consoles and likely handheld units. There is no Apple console hardware. Only the most recent iPod touch is supported by Apple Arcade. The previous generation iPod touches (like mine) is stuck at iOS 12.4.6, no Arcade there either.

You add all of this together and there's no plausible argument for Apple to have a dominant stance.

I don't even play videogames but this analysis is pretty short-sighted.

Japhey said:

lkrupp said:

Xed said:

What I want to see are WIFI6, LRDDR4 RAM, and Face ID.

Then continue to wait...and wait...and wait...forever if it so moves you.

It’s long been my belief that Apple would wait until the ARM transition to include Face ID on the Macbook. But it seems like you think it will never happen and I’m just curious what Information you base your theory on. This is not a troll post, I’m seriously wondering what information I missed along the line. 

Apple historically introduces premium features on high-end models not entry-level devices.

If Face ID arrives on the Mac product line, it would debut on the flagship MacBook Pro 16" not an entry-level MacBook (whether it be Intel, AMD, ARM, whatever).

Faster Ethernet, faster WiFi, faster USB, Retina Display, Touch Bar, Touch ID, Thunderbolt, 4K support, 5K support, etc. have all debuted on high-end Mac notebooks.

I will bet you a buffalo nickel that the first Mac notebook to support 8K video will be a high-end model.

There is nothing technically that prevents Apple from debuting premium features on low end devices;  it is entirely a marketing decision.

Premium features debut on high-end products then trickle down. This is not behavior unique to Apple. Many other companies use the same strategy.

ravnorodom said:

My son's school uses Zoom. My work colleges use Zoom. My wife's company uses Zoom. College virtual tours also use Zoom. Funny how Zoom becomes the standard out of no where. Zoom is great only for local conference. For oversea conference, Microsoft Teams work the best without flaws.

The de facto overseas corporate standard still remains Skype to this day.

There's no surprise why Zoom became so popular. It is really easy to use and doesn't require registration unlike Skype, WebEx, Facebook/Google/whatever. If you're on a computer, if you don't want to install any software, you can connect via your web browser.