Apple's Phil Schiller Explains Why Valve's Steam Link App Was Rejected

[Abazigal]

People like their apps and not a clunky website experience on a phone.

Except in this case, the Facebook website is arguably better than the app for battery life and privacy (especially since you can run ad blockers).

 

[alvindarkness]

And they would just go to the website.

Can you get hit with Antitrust if you’re not a monopoly?

If you look at antitrust and competition laws (in the US, EU and AU) it seems you can. The determining factor isnt having a monopoly.

If you remember Apple's early iBook collusion with publishers, they were charged under antitrust laws, despite the iBook store having no foothold in the market.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

Except in this case, the Facebook website is arguably better than the app for battery life and privacy (especially since you can run ad blockers).

Which are not in forefront of a lot of people's thoughts. If the website experience is so good why is there a Facebook app for Windows? How many of the billions of Facebook users use a web browser for Facebook on phones? Are you a Facebook user? Do you use the App or a browser?

 

[alvindarkness]

Mmmmm Actually....

From a Business standpoint I fear Valve understands that Steam might be on the wrong side of the future...

Today PC game revenue is still strong, but a big share of those revenues escape Valve's reach.
For exemple Fortenite, World of Warcraft and other MMOs that have their own stores / platforms.

As for AAA titles for years Consoles have been making the biggest share of the sales figures.

Consoles might be getting to a point where for a similar experience (4K gaming) they offer a much better deal than a gaming PC. (due to price inflation of GPUs and RAM because of crypto, but also because the PC market is evolving to handle the transition foretold by Steve Jobs ^^)

I think Valve is very clever with the Steam Link app and also with their communications team ^^. They are trying to strong arm Apple but probably won't get anywhere.

To be fair they are not angels, they take their share of the games sold on the store, have changing rules about who stays or not (recent polemic about Japanese style adventure/dating games), they are a pretty tough master of their store.

So their move here is clever because they are trying to ensure that anyone sitting on their couch (almost all TVs have an android OS now but I am not sure they can handle the Bluetooth controller and the rest of the features needed has good has the AppleTV for exemple), can play their Steam game BUT MOST importantly keep buying vanity items and stuff for their favourite game.
This was never about being nice and offering an experience to their customers, but about MONEY and ensuring that after the failure of their Steam Machine console plans they could still have a place in the living room where they could reach their audience.

My prediction, either they accept to send a share of the transactions to Apple (which might mean a more expensive price when buying from your couch that if you just walked to your desk), or they won't make it at all because they will never accept to block the transaction system because it's the whole point of this apps.

PS Apple TV is seeing some evolutions these days that might make it much more useful than before with Cable operator allowing it to replace their boxes.


While Valve is still privately owned it's revenue is said to be around 5 Billions...
Apple's?
229 Billions for 86 Billions in profits.
So Apple is making 17 times more profits than Valve's complete revenue. I think Apple, who isn't in the Gaming business will be OK ^^

Great post, and you make a lot of good points that ring true to me. I have no doubt it would benefit Valve having the app on the AppleTV. Their dominance has to be shrinking with hit games available in competing stores.

Neither Apple nor Steam are saints, and the irony of Steam being rejected by what seems to be an inconsistent and arbitrary application of guidelines/rules isnt lost on me.

But on a purely selfish note, I'd still love to see the SteamLink app approved.

 

[Abazigal]

Which are not in forefront of a lot of people's thoughts. If the website experience is so good why is there a Facebook app for Windows? How many of the billions of Facebook users use a web browser for Facebook on phones? Are you a Facebook user? Do you use the App or a browser?

I don’t use Facebook, much less have the app installed on my phone. I do have an account, but it has been inactive for years. I do use twitter as a news feed, but I favour the tweetbot app over the stock twitter app. Way more respecting of permissions, incorporates the latest APIs, better designed and no ads.

My point being that Apple has leverage, and if Apple wanted to go head on with bad actors such as Facebook, Apple may not lose. Inconvenienced in the short run perhaps, but I believe that Facebook will ultimately come crawling back with the changes Apple wants them to make.

Which is why I wish Apple would be more gutsy in going after the big boys instead of smaller developers who clearly lack the resources to fight back.

Not sure if this answers your question though.

 

[alvindarkness]

Well, yes. Whether it also worked with iOS controllers was irrelevant for me.

Oh I know, it seemed obvious to me. I think the same way.

 

[cube]

Can you get hit with Antitrust if you’re not a monopoly?

Well, the AppStore is a monopoly within iOS.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

I don’t use Facebook, much less have the app installed on my phone. I do have an account, but it has been inactive for years. I do use twitter as a news feed, but I favour the tweetbot app over the stock twitter app. Way more respecting of permissions, incorporates the latest APIs, better designed and no ads.

My point being that Apple has leverage, and if Apple wanted to go head on with bad actors such as Facebook, Apple may not lose. Inconvenienced in the short run perhaps, but I believe that Facebook will ultimately come crawling back with the changes Apple wants them to make.

Which is why I wish Apple would be more gutsy in going after the big boys instead of smaller developers who clearly lack the resources to fight back.

Not sure if this answers your question though.

I thought you were a teacher? Using "will" instead of "would" is pretty poor ;-)

 

[Fly360]

The avg pc gamer is most likely not an iOS user like that. Ifl

 

[Radon87000]

Oh yeah, Uber does need to be kicked out. As does Facebook.

Are you being sarcastic or for real?
[doublepost=1527505360][/doublepost]

I don’t use Facebook, much less have the app installed on my phone. I do have an account, but it has been inactive for years. I do use twitter as a news feed, but I favour the tweetbot app over the stock twitter app. Way more respecting of permissions, incorporates the latest APIs, better designed and no ads.

My point being that Apple has leverage, and if Apple wanted to go head on with bad actors such as Facebook, Apple may not lose. Inconvenienced in the short run perhaps, but I believe that Facebook will ultimately come crawling back with the changes Apple wants them to make.

Which is why I wish Apple would be more gutsy in going after the big boys instead of smaller developers who clearly lack the resources to fight back.

Not sure if this answers your question though.

The reason Windows Phone lost was because it lacked apps like Facebook, and Google apps. In fact it was the main reason posted by news sites for its demise. If iOS lacks a Facebook app, there would be outrage.

 

[Abazigal]

I thought you were a teacher? Using "will" instead of "would" is pretty poor ;-)

“Will” sounds grammatically correct to me. What am I missing? We are talking about a hypothetical scenario which has not occurred yet.

 

[Mathias Denichi]

Which are not in forefront of a lot of people's thoughts. If the website experience is so good why is there a Facebook app for Windows? How many of the billions of Facebook users use a web browser for Facebook on phones? Are you a
Facebook user? Do you use the App or a browser?

Windows has a Facebook app due to windows tablets running Windows 10. Also, Microsoft and Facebook have a partnership. Microsoft provides BING for all of Facebooks’ search, and Facebook provides Microsoft with user data.

 

[arkitect]

I thought you were a teacher? Using "will" instead of "would" is pretty poor ;-)

I am curious… do explain why you prefer "would".
Will is definitely correct here.

 

[timber]

Apple usually doesn't give the convoluted talk that doesn't say anything but in this case that is exactly what Schiller did.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

“Will” sounds grammatically correct to me. What am I missing? We are talking about a hypothetical scenario which has not occurred yet.

It's not correct. You are speculating about a future event that has not happened and you do not know what Facebook's you use should "would".

I am curious… do explain why you prefer "would".
Will is definitely correct here.

I thought you were a teacher? Using "will" instead of "would" is pretty poor ;-)

You are speculating about a possible future event.
"indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation" by definition.
[doublepost=1527507299][/doublepost]

I am curious… do explain why you prefer "would".
Will is definitely correct here.

In the context this definition by Oxford English applies


"(expressing the conditional mood) indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation".

‘he would lose his job if he were identified’

 

[Abazigal]

It's not correct. You are speculating about a future event that has not happened and you do not know what Facebook's you use should "would".

https://ell.stackexchange.com/quest...ce=google_rich_qa&utm_campaign=google_rich_qa

“Will” for hypothetical, “would” for counterfactuals. Within the context of my earlier statement, “Will” is definitely correct here.

 

[LovingTeddy]

I can't answer that because i don't know what update they are on, or what phone is running what. I do know that the couple android devices i have owned had apps that just wouldn't run on them. That's the problem. Android is so fragmented that i can't tell you what version, flavor or revision any of them were running, or how up to date the manufacture was with current android os. It's a god damn mess. With iOS though. You know what you are getting.

The answers are depends on app developers and hkw the apps were designed.

There are some apps that developpers purposely exclude some devices. There are apps were developed by certain manufactures, so that apps would not run on phones not made by that manufacture. There are apps that not run on certain geographic location.

But in general, i have phones that runs from Android 4.4 to most current Android 8.1. Very few apps.won't run an I would say 90% apps runs just fine.

By the way, this kind issue happens with IOS as well. App developer can exclude some IOS devices from installing or running. If an app is not avilable, you simplely won't see it in app store, where in Android, you might see message indicating app not avilable on devices you run.

 

[warpdesign_]

It's funny they rejected Valve's app but did not reject this one which seems to bring the very same functionnality:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/kinoconsole-stream-pc-games/id965075144?mt=8

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

https://ell.stackexchange.com/quest...ce=google_rich_qa&utm_campaign=google_rich_qa

“Will” for hypothetical, “would” for counterfactuals. Within the context of my earlier statement, “Will” is definitely correct here.

Your original post was a counterfactual. If A occured, B would happen. Basically you opined, If Facebook were kicked they would come crawling back.

counterfactual
ˌkaʊntəˈfaktʃʊəl/
PHILOSOPHY
adjective

1. 1.
   relating to or expressing what has not happened or is not the case.

noun

1. 1.
   a counterfactual conditional statement (e.g. If kangaroos had no tails, they would topple over ).

 

[Abazigal]

Your original post was a counterfactual. If A occured, B would happen. Basically you opined, If Facebook were kicked they would come crawling back.

counterfactual
ˌkaʊntəˈfaktʃʊəl/
PHILOSOPHY
adjective

1. 1.
   relating to or expressing what has not happened or is not the case.

noun

1. 1.
   a counterfactual conditional statement (e.g. If kangaroos had no tails, they would topple over ).

Would that not prove my earlier statement as an opinion? It is by no means a certainty (as Facebook could very well decide to act tough and withdraw their app from iOS altogether), but I (very strongly) feel they have too much to lose from not being on iOS to play hardball.

 

[ChrisCW11]

I can see Apple being worried about this app as it can easily bypass the iOS/App store environment and allow users to start playing "mobile" like games through the link streaming. While Valve might be positioning it as a way to play full blown AAA PC games on your phone, it is also just as easy to have something like Candy Crush streaming through this service, and then users are purchasing in-game content through Steam and not iOS.

Obviously if the game violates the ToC of App Store content, then Apple has a right to refuse to offer it, but I think Apple is stretching this a bit to ensure this can't be used as a way for a 3rd party to bypass the walled garden and start distributing mobile like games with in-game content purchased outside of Apple's ecosystem.

 

[Bearxor]

I'm not the person that originally said it, but its not that weird a decision to make. I own both an AppleTV and SteamLink device. I've wanted another SteamLink for some time, but would now (very reluctantly) look at Android TV boxes so that I can have a device that covers the SteamLink duties and isnt just a one trick pony. That would be my first Android device, and my entry into the world of Android.

If SteamLink was out on AppleTV, then another AppleTV would obviously be my preference.

But to each their own!

You already own an AppleTV.

It wasn’t “I would buy more AppleTV’s to use as Steam Links” it was “I'd consider buying an Apple TV just for this.”

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

Would that not prove my earlier statement as an opinion? It is by no means a certainty (as Facebook could very well decide to act tough and withdraw their app from iOS altogether), but I (very strongly) feel they have too much to lose from not being on iOS to play hardball.

The op suggested that they kick Facebook out of iOS. Facebook have no need to act hardball
Apple will never kick Facebook out. Correct use of will

Edit
Btw - my initial post about this was tongue in cheek, as depicted by ;-) at the end of the post.

 

[arkitect]

It's not correct. You are speculating about a future event that has not happened and you do not know what Facebook's you use should "would".



You are speculating about a possible future event.
"indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation" by definition.
[doublepost=1527507299][/doublepost]
In the context this definition by Oxford English applies


"(expressing the conditional mood) indicating the consequence of an imagined event or situation".

‘he would lose his job if he were identified’

Thanks… but alas, I remain unconvinced.
Still, learn something new everyday.

 

[EdT]

Maybe if they were Apple Music subscribers and wanted to a quality speaker.

As of right now here is the total list of HomePod control devices:

1. iPhones.

Not iPads, not iMacs, not MacBooks. Certainly not any Windows device, and no Google, Samsung or other Android phones.

Perhaps they will open it up. Who knows, maybe at WWDC in June. Or maybe not, it’s a secret. The last thing you want to do before a new product release or upgrade is create customer excitement. Much better to have rumors, many of them false, so that a significant portion of potential customers are disappointed no matter what you finally announce.