Not a problem since I have a gaming PC with one, but even if it didn't have an Nvidia GPU I could still stream using the android Steam Link app.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Phil Schiller Explains Why Valve's Steam Link App Was Rejected
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am a UK Sky subscriber. I can download tv shows and film to my Samsung Tablet for no extra charge or approx £5 if from the Sky film store, to watch anywhere, gym, plane etc. Are people suggesting that if I used an iPad that Apple deserve a cut of my Sky contributions?
They did the same thing with a Spotify update. Apple has monopoly power over their operating system, clearly violating, in my mind, precedent setup by Microsoft Corp. vs US Government.
I miss the good old days when innovation = hardware. Now it seems like everything Apple does is geared towards nickel and diming its customers. I’m not so keen on this new Apple. I never look at the App Store any more because it’s so overrun with crap. I have absolutely no interest in original programming from Apple. Years ago I wanted them to buy Netflix, go all in on video, and turn Apple TV into the premiere home entertainment device (high end gaming). Getting into original content now seems foolish and “me too”. Meanwhile the Mac withers on the vine and PCs look more appealing and innovative. Strange days.
It's just a streamlined experience. You select Steam Link and it launches Steam Big Picture on your PC automatically.
Good question. That figure I gave for the RIAA including Apple Music is up about 50% from a few years ago, almost entirely driven by Apple. They didn't take a slice of the music industry, they expanded it and took the entire expansion for themselves.
There's no reason to think they couldn't do the same with gaming.
That is true - and it is another reason I am looking to move platforms. I have purchased a number of games that I simply can't play on my Mac Pro due to the video card situation.
Then let’s hope it gets approved.
They don’t have to justify it. iPhones go through their store and it plays by their rules. That’s all that needs to be said to “justify”.
That’s not true. I was just buying this.
I have purchased old games on steam for $0.49 cents (and I don't have to worry about the disc getting scratched).
Can those even be run on a console that new today?
[doublepost=1527449988][/doublepost]
Playing on a 50" screen is a little different than playing on a 27" screen.
It is not about what Apple deserves. The implication was that the gaming industry is huge and that denying this app is a big deal for Apple that will hurt them.
So I asked if Apple reverse the decision, how much more money would they make, specifically from gamers.
Maybe if they were Apple Music subscribers and wanted to a quality speaker.
Xbox One is increasing backward compatibility with 360 games every month, so it’s not unlikely.
This statement means they realized that for the first time there’s a substantial amount of iOS fans that won’t accept an Apple decision. With this statement they try to give the image that it wasn’t a business conflict. But it is. However, the fans shouting they look to Android, is also a conflict. They’ll try to navigate between these two conflicts. But Steve is no longer here. And the guy on charge is running a political career, with Apple being just a tool for his own interest. So the outcome will be bad, as everything at Apple these years.
Sony offers PS2 and PS3 games via PlayStation Now, otherwise you have to jailbreak the PS4.
That's a fair point. I forgot about the Apple TV.
It actually does in fact sustain a higher frame rate for games. Barely noticeable, but it is a boost in cock speed nonetheless
EvilEvil,
Honestly, as much as I agree with this statement do we really believe it would have been any different with Jobs around? He’d have been even more adamant that no one but Apple should be in or on Apple hardware.
Remember adobe Flash? LOL
Can such acts by Apple be called monopolistic? Making it {difficult for/not allowing} competitors to use their App Store due to 'business conflicts' seems to me like something which warrants an antitrust case.
Apple is cool with doing some things themselves on their own platform but are not allowing potential competitors to do so, even when it can technically allow such apps.
Apple is cool with doing some things themselves on their own platform but are not allowing potential competitors to do so, even when it can technically allow such apps.
It’s still better to just play your old games without having to have PlayStation Now.
Then I take back. Two, though.
Valve is a private company so this is completely a baseless statement. No one knows what the actual value of Valve would be it would go public, but I can guarantee it it wouldn't be 1/30 * Apples profit per quarter. It's already speculated that Valve does over 1B per quarter on just CSGO items alone. They would likely be valuated around ~100B if they went public.
Bingo. Apple are scared that people will get hooked on the higher quality AAA games and abandon the repetitive grind and IAP extortion of mobile games.
Apple are caught between a rock and a hard place place. Either block the Steam app and have pissed off customers abandon the platform. Or, allow the Steam app that will eat away income from lucrative IAPs.
If Valve was valued at 100B, it would prove that the market is on drugs.
Steam family share perhaps?When you've finished playing your £20 game you got on steam.
Which family member do you pass it onto? A close friends child perhaps?
Or sell it on to someone else, to help towards the purchase of another game?
None of those? ahhhhhhhh