Apple Rejects Valve's Steam Link App Due to 'Business Conflicts'

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I'm not suing to make them do something. I'm suing to make them stop doing something. They intentionally go through the effort of keeping apps from being installed via any means other than the App Store (or a shortlist of other means - iTunes, Xcode, TestFlight... I think that's all.) That's not magically there - that's a consequence of code they wrote. There is code that can be removed to allow outside apps to be installed and run on it.

Apple could choose to address this by replicating the system they have on macOS - that's fine. That'd be more work. It'd be more secure than just throwing the doors open.

If Apple was a monopoly, you'd probably have a case. But the defense here is simple: "you are not obligated to buy our offerings if you don't like details about them."

I'm not against your mentality on this issue. I WISH that Apple was the Apple that originally drew me in about 20+ years ago... where maximizing corporate profits seemed secondary to delighting customers... where Apple would seem to go out of their way (and spend a little extra) to go the extra mile for customers. But let's face it: that Apple is gone (if it ever existed at all- maybe Jobs was just much more skilled at hiding corporate greed???). The new Apple is ever-more focused on squeezing every nickel out of every opportunity. Some might argue that that is their obligation as a public cooperation. But consumers have ONE way to deal with this scenario when final straws are reached. As such, that one option also happens to be the most likely way to wake up this giant and potentially get them to shift back toward trying to strike a better balance between maximizing profits and better meeting customer wants/needs.

As is, Apple probably can't even begin to see that there is a problem while every quarter is a record quarter. From their perspective, customers ARE voting with their wallets... and the votes are shouting a resounding yes to every decision that Apple makes for customers. The one thing that would drive change at Apple is consumers as a group taking the one action that will make Apple notice a problem.

Otherwise, from my perspective, this is just the Sony or Blackberry stories again. Record result after record result thoroughly implies that all is well... that every decision being made is readily accepted and welcomed by customers. Chasing record results involves squeezing the base harder and harder to shake loose any spare change. Eventually the base reaches their final straw moments and quits. If enough do that at about the same time, the norm of "another record result" becomes a shocking miss. Then, executives are "forced" into trying to plug holes. That forces them to get back in touch with consumers, probably becoming aware of how seemingly small- even "courageous"- decisions became the "straw" for groups of former, loyal, regular buyers. That might make them course correct or arrogance might make them attempt to wait out this "short term storm" (because "we know best in spite of what we're hearing from these former customers"). If the latter goes long enough, execs start getting fired and new ones come in with new ideas to "fix" the problems. The new ones typically lack the accumulated arrogance as they have no stake to past record results. Instead they are challenged to innovate ways to fix problems and turn things around. The easiest way to do that is to get back to delighting customers, re-inflating overall goodwill instead of burning it because we can to hit our numbers THIS quarter.

I'm sure 5 or 10 guys will read some "Apple is doomed" message in there... but I'm not saying that. As is, Apple still has time to proactively course correct before chunks of buyers reach their "straw" moments. Decisions like this one seem like exactly the kind of decision easily reversed to make the gaming segment happy. If so, some chunk of them don't take this as their "straw" and opt to keep buying Apple stuff instead of rebelling against Apple.

In my own case, I quit buying iDevices with the headphone jack decision. That was my straw for that product line. I'd LOVE to buy new models but I do not want to play the dongle game (even if I'm given the dongle), do not want to accept lower quality audio even if we want to call it "the future" and I prefer to lug along one set of headphones that can connect to pretty much anything & everything I encounter instead of some mix of stuff to try to replicate that. Does my $500-$1500/yr purchase loss matter to a company banking tens of millions per quarter? Not a bit. But "courageous" decisions like that one and this one can prove to be THE one that moves more than any one individual to stop buying. When there's enough of that quitting that "records" become "shock," Apple will notice. Until then- from their perspective- Apple can do no wrong. Customers voting with their wallets say so.

 

[mryingster]

Steam used to be good, now it's just a dumping ground for everyone's ****** indie games. Once in a long while there's something decent, but for the most part it's a giant garbage dump with the occasional gem.

I feel like the same could be said of the AppStore... When you let anyone publish, you're bound to get good and bad quality results...

 

[curtvaughan]

If you have iOS to play PC games on your PHONE, well...head slap. I guess if that's the most important issue you are welcome to buy another phone. All 22 of you.

This is the same kind of retort given to folks who wanted the phone jack to remain on the iPhone - "you're all welcome to buy a different phone". And guess what, I've done just that, and until Apple brings back the phone jack and/or comes up with a viable alternative to high end wired headphones, my 6S+ is my last iPhone. Now, here we are again, with the same old arrogant retort. What you have to realize is that as Apple offends iPhone users, Mac Pro users, Mac Mini users, Airport users, and MBP users, these represent a lost customer base. Eventually Apple will have to make up for those losses by continuing to raise prices and/or attract a different kind of clientele to replace those former customers and revenue resources. In the meantime, PC and mobile device competitors are not staying still. They continue to innovate and look more attractive year by year, both in price point and features offered, and cross-hardware software applications are becoming more available. I can already use Open Whispers' "Signal" for most of my messaging, and it works on both Android and iOS, as well as MacOS, Windows, and Linux platforms. The only disadvantage I can see, in comparison to iMessage, is that it must be downloaded and installed by the end user for each device/computer.

 

[gnipgnop]

Just think through the money flows:

• How does Apple make money on game app sales? Does that persist with this app?
• If you are a game app dev and you see an approved way to still deliver your games AND keep the 30% too, do you shift in this same direction or do you want to keep giving away 30% right off the top?
• If you are a game player, are you more attracted to the quality of games that can run on full-power computing hardware or those limited to the horses that fit inside a "thinner, thinner, thinner", "power-sipping" mobile device platform?

Ahem...Steam itself takes a 30% cut on games sold in the Steam store. That's one of the reasons that Blizzard doesn't sell their games on Steam, so the whole "Apple is too greedy and is going to chase people away" stuff is fairly ironic. Also, there are already apps available in iOS that would allow you to stream games from Steam (like Moonlight), so I think people are jumping the gun when it comes to the idea that Apple's position is just "we won't allow PC game streaming".

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Business conflict????

What does that mean? I’ve never read any where else Apple using that term for App rejection.

PR spin.

Translation: this doesn't support our existing commission-off-the-top model and risks others adopting a similar approach to get around paying us our commission. The most important mission of apps in our store is paying us.

Apple can't reject for "corporate greed" purposes. So it gets spun into a lessor-sounding "business conflict." It still can mean exactly the same thing... just doesn't sound as blatantly self-serving.

 

[GeneralChang]

DAG NABBIT APPLE!

I kinda wish this were surprising, though...

 

[Internet Enzyme]

It looks like Valve's planned Steam Link app for iOS devices isn't coming after all, because Apple has rejected the app due to "business conflicts."

In a statement, Valve said that Apple initially approved Steam Link for release on May 7, but ultimately decided to reject the app because of conflicts that had not been recognized by the original review team.Valve's appeals have not been successful at the current point in time, and the company is now hoping that media attention may spur Apple to change its mind.

The Steam Link app for iOS, which was announced on May 9, is designed to allow Steam users to play their Steam games on an iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV using either a 5GHz WiFi network or a wired Ethernet connection to a host PC or Mac.

Valve was planning to launch the Steam Link app this week, and Valve had worked to add Steam Link support for the Steam Controller and Made for iPhone controllers ahead of the app's debut.

Earlier this week, our sister site TouchArcade was able to go hands-on with the Steam Link app and said that it works so well that "it feels like there's some kind of actual wizardry powering it all." In what might have been a bit prescient, TouchArcade editor-in-chief Eli Hodapp said he was "dumbfounded" Apple was allowing it given how good the gaming experience was.As Valve says, there are many other remote access-style apps available in the App Store, so the reasoning behind Apple's decision is unclear. It is not known if Apple will ultimately end up reversing its position on the Steam Link app given the media attention, which has happened in the past, but we've reached out to the company for a comment.

Article Link: Apple Rejects Valve's Steam Link App Due to 'Business Conflicts'

That ****ing editor in chief of that website did this lol

 

[cube]

I think Apple also want people to buy games from the Mac App Store, not Steam.

 

[panjandrum]

Yeah, this really doesn't shock me at all. I'm sure someone at Apple thinks it will cut into native App sales, but that wouldn't have been the case - at least not very often. It would be one thing if the majority of PC titles available on Steam were also ported natively to iThings, but that's just not the case. Keep your fingers crossed that Apple will do an about face on this, but don't hold your breath.

On the positive side, that gives all of us yet one more reason to jump from Apple's sinking ship. (And yes, I'm one of those crazy people who judges a company, regardless of size, by the quality of product and value to consumers, not by their profits.)

"Everybody knows that the boat is leaking, Everybody knows that the captain lied." - Sincerely, L. Cohen.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Ahem...Steam itself takes a 30% cut on games sold in the Steam store. That's one of the reasons that Blizzard doesn't sell their games on Steam, so the whole "Apple is too greedy and is going to chase people away" stuff is fairly ironic. Also, there are already apps available in iOS that would allow you to stream games from Steam (like Moonlight), so I think people are jumping the gun when it comes to the idea that Apple's position is just "we won't allow PC game streaming".

Trying to move goalposts, while nothing new for you gnipgnop, doesn't alter the basic issue here. Based on our cumulative interactions, I realize it's probably your "job"(?) to hang out in places like this and defend anything and everything Apple opts to do by any means necessary, but this one is pretty simple.

This app might be called an interactive video player. It basically mirrors the display of another computing device. Through interactive features, one can influence what's happening in the processing of that other device. And as such, this opens the door to desktop/laptop quality gaming experiences being had on power-sipping mobile devices and TV. From us consumers perspective, it makes a device like TV much more appealing and useful. Conceptually, such experiences would lead to friends wanting to buy TVs too so they can have the same kinds of experiences. Thus, good for Apple hardware sales too.

So why block it? Other apps "mirror." Other apps mirror and allow interaction to control what shows next. So what's actually different about this app vs. others available in the app store?

Guys like you can defend and defend and defend all you want. But look through threads like this one. A number of posts are from self-proclaimed "long-term fanboys" seeing this as their "final straw" moment. That seems to be a trend as Apple keeps making decisions that seem to work against consumers for what appears to be only money-grubbing reasons. At some point, even the most passionate fanboys have to be able to see such squeezing. At some point, one must recognize that Apple has so, so, so much (money)... that yet another nickel & diming tactic seems just too much.

From your passionate biases in countless posts, I know that can never be you. But the bulk of people here and beyond are not like you at all. And those in the middle rather than at the extremes is where the bulk of the money that flows to Apple originates. Alienate the middle with enough nickel & diming decisions and that middle can be turned. It's happened many times before with many other much-loved companies in their day.

 

[robertojorge]

What do you mean protect their turf? What decision would you make? I could be wrong but this sounds like one of those "Apple made the decision so it must be right" posts. Apologies if I'm wrong, but nothing in your post makes sense.

Funny is that people dont realize that the app that actually let us buy games is available on the app store https://itunes.apple.com/app/steam-mobile/id495369748?mt=8

The new Steam link App is just a streaming app like moonlight, the advantage is that we can use any hardware, unlike moonlight that we need Nvidia cards.

So instead of letting Apple user use their imacs, MacBookpro´s to stream to Ios, No ahah!! They refuse the app.. So dumb that is hard to understand.

 

[gnipgnop]

Trying to move goalposts, while nothing new for you gnipgnop, doesn't alter the basic issue here. Based on our cumulative interactions, I realize it's probably your "job"(?) to hang out in places like this and defend anything and everything Apple opts to do by any means necessary, but this one is pretty simple.

LOL...personal attacks aren't going to help your "greed" argument when Steam obviously runs a similar business to the App Store and also obviously takes a 30% cut on games. Steam isn't some sort of white knight relative to Apple when it comes to the business side of things.

 

[Mac-Rumours]

Don't like Apple's decision?

Send them feedback!

http://www.apple.com/feedback

 

[simultech2]

Dumbest move in years from Apple, especially regarding the Apple TV (which would have given me a reason to actually use the thing again). Its the equivalent of if Apple had banned the Netflix client app in 2015 because they were worried it would hurt iTunes sales. All of that being said, if its anything like the other apps I've seen banned for this, its mostly just making sure that people cannot buy anything through the app (so purely a player), then they have no grounds for banning.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

LOL...personal attacks aren't going to help your "greed" argument when Steam obviously runs a similar business to the App Store and also obviously takes a 30% cut on games. Steam isn't some sort to white knight relative to Apple when it comes to the business side of things.

If you received that as a personal attack, I apologize. That was not the intent. I'm around here frequently and I never see a post from you as a consumer. Instead Apple is apparently always right in every single thing they do through your eyes. And you seem to be here to challenge those that don't see it that way.

So again, my apologies. I simply do not see Apple as you do in this issue. I am a consumer (first). Other "mirroring" apps that basically work very similar to how this one works are already in the app store and already long-since approved. What is different about this one?

The one difference is that this one does offer a way to not cut Apple in for 30% on games purchased and ran on computing devices running elsewhere in the home... including on non-Apple PCs. Should Apple have a claim to 30% of revenues on those sales? Should they have claim to 30% on movies purchased on those other devices being streamed to TV? If I buy CDs of music and rip them into iTunes, should Apple be given a cut of 30% of those sales so that I can stream them to my TV? From my perspective- as a consumer (first)- that's what this looks like. How is buying a game on a PC or Mac and streaming its video different than buying a DVD and streaming that to my TV?

 

[shareef777]

You'll so regret having to put up with a headphone jack, USB-C and fast charging - so not the future, but hey, you get what you pay for! It's only half the price of the iPhone X, and you have to also put up with some feature called "gaming mode" - can't imagine why anyone would want that - and if you're feeling homesick, it even features a notch.

My only concern is getting the latest software. There’s an Android P beta available for it, but if it takes too long to get the latest software I’ll have to stick with Apple. It’s insane that we’re in 2018 living in a devops world and some phones don’t get the latest versions after being on the market just a year.

 

[gnipgnop]

And you seem to be here to challenge those that don't see it that way.

I challenge people who have flimsy arguments. Are there iOS apps available that allow users to stream Steam or PC games from their computer? Yes. So there's a hole in the "Apple fears people streaming PC games" argument right off the bat. Does it really make much sense to characterize Apple as being greedy for their 30% cut on games when Steam itself also takes a 30% cut on PC games sold in their store? No. Anyone who objects to Apple's ability to run a store where they take a cut should also object to Steam in the same manner.

 

[rams]

wow so much courage. and another wasted opportunity for my ipad pro.

wait: will they announce a streaming app and tell the world that they are the first who invented it?

 

[shareef777]

If you received that as a personal attack, I apologize. That was not the intent. I'm around here frequently and I never see a post from you as a consumer. Instead Apple is apparently always right in every single thing they do through your eyes. And you seem to be here to challenge those that don't see it that way.

So again, my apologies. I simply do not see Apple as you do in this issue. I am a consumer (first). Other "mirroring" apps that basically work very similar to how this one works are already in the app store and already long-since approved. What is different about this one?

The one difference is that this one does offer a way to not cut Apple in for 30% on games purchased and ran on computing devices running elsewhere in the home... including on non-Apple PCs. Should Apple have a claim to 30% of revenues on those sales? Should they have claim to 30% on movies purchased on those other devices being streamed to TV? If I buy CDs of music and rip them into iTunes, should Apple be given a cut of 30% of those sales so that I can stream them to my TV? From my perspective- as a consumer (first)- that's what this looks like. How is buying a game on a PC or Mac and streaming it's video different than buying a DVD and streaming that to my TV?

Couldn’t agree more. Apple makes great products, no denying that, but some people’s cult like belief that Apple could do no wrong is astounding. It’s profit and business first for Apple just like any legitimate business. Which is why I find it odd that people are so passionately against Apple’s competitors. They behave and operate just like Apple. The only difference being that we prefer one ecosystem over another.

 

[cube]

Does it really make much sense to characterize Apple as being greedy for their 30% cut on games when Steam itself also takes a 30% cut on PC games sold in their store?

Valve does not prevent your buying games from somewhere else.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I challenge people who have flimsy arguments. Are there iOS apps available that allow users to stream Steam or PC games from their computer? Yes. So there's a hole in the "Apple fears people streaming PC games" argument right off the bat. Does it really make much sense to characterize Apple as being greedy for their 30% cut on games when Steam itself also takes a 30% cut on PC games sold in their store? No. Anyone who objects to Apple's ability to run a store where they take a cut should also object to Steam in the same manner.

Since you want to cling to 30% cuts being the crux, there is not an argument being made that Apple as retailer of games sold in the app store does not deserve a cut of those games. Steam as retailer of games sold in their store deserve a cut too. Both play the role of middleman retailer, offering some level of service, for which they deserve some level of compensation.

However, the "greed" being implied is that the sales in this scenario are being made OUTSIDE of the Apple store... much like buying a DVD or CD from Walmart and streaming it to an TV. Does Apple (or Steam) deserve a 30% cut of a Walmart purchase like that? Of course not. Walmart is the retailer middleman in that scenario, not Apple (or Steam).

 

[gnipgnop]

Does Apple (or Steam) deserve a 30% cut of a Walmart purchase like that? Of course not. Walmart is the retailer middleman in that scenario, not Apple (or Steam).

When has Apple ever said they deserve a cut on sales made outside of an app? That's a non-factual argument.

 

[azulon1]

Gotta protect all those garbage apps in the AppStore, especially their precious pay2win revenue, from being cannabalized by actual real games.

Honestly, nobody is listening, I am starting to despise Apple. People yell and complain and beg, but Apple is a black box. They don’t seem to be listening. I am sick of their behavior. I am also sick of their draconian behavior regarding App Store rules created for business reasons. I understand and appreciate the blocking of an app for security reasons but come on just because you don’t want to compete. The stupid thing is it’s not even competition, the app stores fart games are never ever competing with AAA pc titles. This is boneheaded to the max.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

When has Apple ever said they deserve a cut on sales made outside of an app? That's a non-factual argument.

OK. So best guess: why is this app approved, then rejected for "business conflicts?" Please offer your best guess about what "business conflicts" means here. Give us a better hypothesis behind this rejection than the working one. As someone with tons of Apple stuff and a long-term (2 decades+) buyer of Apple stuff, I'd much prefer a better guess than the one that seems most likely here.

 

[gnipgnop]

Valve does not prevent your buying games from somewhere else.

Valve's self-branded hardware was a flop, so they have no choice.