Microsoft Says Apple's 30% Fee Makes Xbox Cloud Gaming iOS App 'Impossible'

[mrochester]

Apple simply wants to be compensated for any bit of software that runs on their platform, other than for exceptions that they themselves have decided.

I am not aware of any law, anywhere in the world, that disallows that, or even attempts to disallow that. It would effectively be nationalisation of private property if such a law came into existence.

This is why I think many people disagree with those who think Apple shouldn’t be permitted to charge a commission on software that runs on iOS, because they disagree that private property for non-essential services should be nationalised.

I agree that essential services such as water, electricity, gas and public transportation should be nationalised. I do not agree that smartphone app stores should be nationalised. We might as well nationalise the Sony PlayStation too with how absurd that idea is.

 

[Atomicow]

If that were the case then why are Xbox sales completely flat lining? If Microsoft as a name is such a big pull in all markets, especially gaming why is the PS5 so far ahead in sales and user base?

Microsoft is the 3rd largest gaming company in the world by revenue behind Sony and Tencent. They publish a number of very popular games across all platforms, and sell a crazy amount of gamepass subscriptions. Xbox sales are irrelevant.

 

[spazzcat]

Yep. They‘ve achieved design perfection. No need for any further innovation from the world’s richest company. They should just sit back and do next to nothing for half a decade…

I am talking design, not insides which they update every year.

 

[spazzcat]

Link me to an article from apple on how to do this!

Maybe I can get some use out of my iPad 2 yet.

Tell me why Apple needs to tell you how to do this ...

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Tell me why Apple needs to tell you how to do this ...

Because an outside company is controlling how I use my personal property.

Meijer doesn't tell me how to use my carrots. VW doesn't tell me what I can do with my car, where I have it serviced, what brands of parts I use, or where to get fuel. They don't even tell me what I can with my Mac; I can blow away macOS if I want and install Linux.

For some reason iOS/ipadOS devices are "special", even after they completely lose support from apple, such as my iPad 2.

 

[mrochester]

Because an outside company is controlling how I use my personal property.

Meijer doesn't tell me how to use my carrots. VW doesn't tell me what I can do with my car, where I have it serviced, what brands of parts I use, or where to get fuel. They don't even tell me what I can with my Mac; I can blow away macOS if I want and install Linux.

For some reason iOS/ipadOS devices are "special", even after they completely lose support from apple, such as my iPad 2.

Because Apple decided to operate them that way. It’s as simple as that.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Because Apple decided to operate them that way. It’s as simple as that.

I'm aware of what they did. I'm saying it's unethical.

 

[mrochester]

I'm aware of what they did. I'm saying it's unethical.

And there’s a way for you to signal to the market your displeasure. Use it.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

And there’s a way for you to signal to the market your displeasure. Use it.

I am, by pushing for legislation that makes such unethical choices illegal, and that allows us to use our property as we wish, without interference.

No one can explain to me why it's okay for a company to control something that they don't own. I don't control, or get royalties, for stuff I have personally built and sold, and anyone and everyone would say it's unreasonable/laughable to even ask for it.

 

[mrochester]

I am, pushing for legislation that makes such unethical choices illegal, and allows us to use our property as we wish, without interference.

I don’t think you’ll ever get legislation that allows that, precisely because the maker of the product also has a right to make the product that it wants to make.

Your recourse is to use the power you have to not give your money to those companies.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

I don’t think you’ll ever get legislation that allows that.

You're probably right, but that has never stopped me from trying before.

 

[mrochester]

I am, by pushing for legislation that makes such unethical choices illegal, and that allows us to use our property as we wish, without interference.

No one can explain to me why it's okay for a company to control something that they don't own. I don't control, or get royalties, for stuff I have personally built and sold, and anyone and everyone would say it's unreasonable/laughable to even ask for it.

It’s ok because it’s not illegal. You’re trying to apply grey areas of nuance as justification for enacting laws to force your preferences on everyone.

It’s ok for there to be products you don’t like/don’t buy, not everything has to be legislated into something you’d be happy to buy.

 

[Zest28]

So I guess you don't have to pay taxes anymore if you open up a Store in the EU? The EU is a bigger gatekeeper than Apple.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

So I guess you don't have to pay taxes anymore if you open up a Store in the EU? The EU is a bigger gatekeeper than Apple.

Taxes are irrelevant to the discussion. Every country has them, and in the US, every state has them.

 

[I7guy]

I am, by pushing for legislation that makes such unethical choices illegal, and that allows us to use our property as we wish, without interference.

No one can explain to me why it's okay for a company to control something that they don't own. I don't control, or get royalties, for stuff I have personally built and sold, and anyone and everyone would say it's unreasonable/laughable to even ask for it.

If you don’t like the way a company that produces consumer discretionary products in a competitive market which is legal, acts, buy another product that suits you.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

If you don’t like the way a company that produces consumer discretionary products in a competitive market which is legal, acts, buy another product that suits you.

As I said before, but will repeat, I think it's unethical and shouldn't be legal in the first place.

Companies should not be able to impose their will on hardware they don't own.

 

[Ctrlos]

In this case Microsoft don't have a leg to stand on. Things may change in the future but currently XCloud remains a 'nice to have' on top of a 'Game Pass Ultimate' all-you-can-download subscription. These subscriptions will be from existing Xbox and PC owners who have taken out their payments either through their console or via the web. Either way the revenue taken does not pass through Apple's payment systems and they don't pay them anything. XCloud on Android is just a way to access something you have already paid for elsewhere.

Now it may be that Microsoft is planning a streaming-only tier of Game Pass and wants to push it through the app. Fair enough. But as of the present day 4th September 2024 the only barrier to Game Pass streaming not being on iOS is Microsoft themselves not submitting their app to Apple.

 

[koil]

Microsoft's 30% fee makes releasing games on Xbox "impossible". They should allow people to install other stores and not pay any fees.

To be honest I don't even disagree with statements like these, even if they are ridiculous (a purpose-specific device being compared to a general-purpose computing device), but the whole business model of designing a product and cornering a market by purposely taking a loss on hardware that you know you're big enough to make back on software sales later is predatory and should be highly regulated to be honest.

 

[I7guy]

As I said before, but will repeat, I think it's unethical and shouldn't be legal in the first place.

Unethical is a subjective call and why vote with your $$$ is important.

Companies should not be able to impose their will on hardware they don't own.

It’s been legal for a while even if you don’t like it.

 

[chrono1081]

Nothing Apple does is any different than is Linux. Unless and until Apple can prove they have not used any (and I mean any) publicly available software (that means they completely invent everything they use in their OS from scratch, with no evolution from any code that is open source), they should not even have copyright on that software (because it is not completely unique) and should have no patent rights on that software (because they didn't invent it). Given that nothing about Mac OS is wholly, totally and completely unique to them (not based on any inventions or software developed by anyone else), no, they should have no rights provided by any government to lock down their software, mandating fees be paid if someone wants to install what they want on this platform that the owner; and the term needs to become owner; if you buy it, you are not licensing, you OWN and have a right to do what you want with that software including install anything you like on the platform without paying a single fee. Apple only gets away with being a "gatekeeper" because of patent and copyright protection. It's time for the EU to withdraw all of that protection from all software permanently as nothing in software is "unique" (i.e., not derived from any other invention)

Again, thank you for letting everyone know you know nothing about the OS.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Dude right....! My Landlord's rent seeking behavior has to stop too..! Who are they to charge me for using the apartment they built and maintain!

Plus, Microsoft's cloud segment had 111.6 billion in revenue for 2023, i think they will be fine...

First, they buy land in a location that I like, with access to shopping and services I like, then, on that land, build apartments that have all the amenities I like, so, I’m like, you know, FORCED to live there, see? Then, after literally FORCING me to live there (I had no choice!), they want me to PAY them for the privilege? There’s so many people living here already, they could let me live here for free!

 

[macfacts]

Do you and others seriously not know what it costs to host an App Store with all the features apples App Store has? Why isn't anyone going after Google or Steam that charge the *exact* same amount? 30% is actually incredibly reasonable if you knew what people paid in the past. (It was around 95% by the way to a publisher, sometimes even higher).

Want to know who else charges 30%? Microsoft. For Xbox games.

Google doesn't take anything from Amazon's app store.

 

[spazzcat]

I'm aware of what they did. I'm saying it's unethical.

Any you agreed upon when you turned on the device.

 

[spazzcat]

Nothing Apple does is any different than is Linux. Unless and until Apple can prove they have not used any (and I mean any) publicly available software (that means they completely invent everything they use in their OS from scratch, with no evolution from any code that is open source), they should not even have copyright on that software (because it is not completely unique) and should have no patent rights on that software (because they didn't invent it). Given that nothing about Mac OS is wholly, totally and completely unique to them (not based on any inventions or software developed by anyone else), no, they should have no rights provided by any government to lock down their software, mandating fees be paid if someone wants to install what they want on this platform that the owner; and the term needs to become owner; if you buy it, you are not licensing, you OWN and have a right to do what you want with that software including install anything you like on the platform without paying a single fee. Apple only gets away with being a "gatekeeper" because of patent and copyright protection. It's time for the EU to withdraw all of that protection from all software permanently as nothing in software is "unique" (i.e., not derived from any other invention)

Apple spends millions every year on their software. And you clearly have no idea what goes into creating and maintaining software.

 

[Maclver]

First, they buy land in a location that I like, with access to shopping and services I like, then, on that land, build apartments that have all the amenities I like, so, I’m like, you know, FORCED to live there, see? Then, after literally FORCING me to live there (I had no choice!), they want me to PAY them for the privilege? There’s so many people living here already, they could let me live here for free!

I have no idea what any of that means... everyone needs to chill LOL. I am of the opinion that people should be able to download what they want from where they want, but also Apple has the right the charge developers for use of their resources to build apps, host them, provide payment processing, etc.

Lets just face it, all these corporations are greedy and don't care about their customer. At the end of the day, they are in business to make money and make thier overlords (shareholders) happy. There are more important things to "be up in arms" about and Apple charging 30% and Microsoft worried they aren't going to make billions and billions of dollars isn't something I am losing sleep over.