Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Interactivity is standard for media files. That isn't anything new. Scrubbing is interactive. Switching to lyrics is interactive. Turning captions on/off is interactive. Bandersnatch was just a kind of interactivity that people were not as familiar with.
When does a media file go from being media to being an application?
 
When does a media file go from being media to being an application?
When it can't work as a media file. Dragon's Lair could potentially work as either a media file or an application. Grand Theft Auto can only work as an application.
 
As a developer, I don't see how creating separate apps would be any problem. Sure, it's more work than using a single app, but not that big of a deal especially for a big company like Microsoft.

They would have to write 99% of the code for each app once, the rest is just config for what game needs to be loading, image material, descriptions etc. They could automate updating the apps when the main code needs to be updated.

Nintendo does this as well. They stream some of the games you can buy for the Nintendo Switch.

And: "an incredibly negative experience for customers"? How so? I could search for Halo and get a bunch for xCloud games in the App Store like I'm used to with every other game. Reviews about the game right there. The only 'hurdle' is needing to login to be able to play. Big deal.

Loss for Microsoft if you ask me.
 
Apple needs to change it's tune, they are no longer an ethical business. The facts are this:

1 - there are only 2 mobile OS companies, in the USA apple has 52% marketshare and Google 48%. These 2 companies have what is known as a duopoly. Pretty much same as monopoly.

2 - I think we can all agree that mobile OS can be categorized as a critical utility such as we did with the Computer OS.

1. A duopoly of about equal size is very different from a monopoly. It makes Apple almost immune to anti-trust lawsuits. Also being a monopoly is legal.

2. It doesn't matter if a market is critical or essential. The law only works on legal entities like Apple. Is access to iOS App Store an essential facility? No, because you have several substitutes like Android Play Store and making your content available on other platforms like the web. The bar is pretty high for being an essential facility.
 
XCloud is just a streaming service, no different to Netflix. So by you logic Apple should kick Netflix out and only let people watch movies through iTunes.

Apple would certainly like it, but it wouldn't benefit Apple and its customers.

If xCloud became popular like Netflix, Apple would lose the power to ban it and control the iOS environment for games.

I don't see any benefit for Apple to allow relative small streaming gaming services when the owner of these services don't want to do revenue sharing.
 
What if MS had Windows locked down just like iOS, and every app had to list with the Windows app store and pay 30% fee.

Microsoft could have done that in the 80ties but it was too late when you reached 90+% market share.

They certainly did with Microsoft Windows 10 S and it wasn't illegal.
 
I know someone that works on Stadia and they said essentially the same thing; no Stadia for AppleTV or client applications; web only for systems with app stores.
 
I mean apple come on something other then Nintendo style/quality games would be nice ?
Nintendo style/quality games sell INCREDIBLY well, well enough for the software to sell the hardware. Any developer would LOVE to the “problem” of delivering Nintendo style/quality games. :)
 
Let's go back to Desktop OS. Right now, and since inception, if you wanted to download an app on your PC, you can goto a developer site, MS app store, retail store, online stores, etc. You have MANY options to distribute your app. WIth iOS, you have 1 option, AppStore (no sideloading, etc., less consumer choice).

What if MS had Windows locked down just like iOS, and every app had to list with the Windows app store and pay 30% fee.

That means, Apple prior to even the iPhone, would list iTunes on the Windows app store, and every song that was downloaded from iTunes would have 30% paid to MS, and even with launch of iPhone, every app download iTunes app store from your PC would pay 30% to MS. Crazy to think about it, right???

So basically a missed opportunity for Microsoft.

The lesson is to make up your business modell before you become a monopoly.
 
Apple’s argument is that each app being streamed has to be its own separate thing. They have to be able to review it.
It’s the same thing Nintendo’s doing, so there’s a precedent. There are multiple streaming games on the Switch, each one a discrete entity. And, each title has a separate review.

Microsoft very likely just ran the tests, determined that the difference between streaming via a native app and the web was negligible, and took the lower friction path of delivering via the web (with Apple’s help).
 
The problem is that xCloud is basically the same thing as netflix and it is allowed.

If they are the same, use Netflix then.

But we know they aren't the same. The experience of using them are completely different.
 
Last edited:
That’s absurd.

Apple’s argument is that each app being streamed has to be its own separate thing. They have to be able to review it.

So how can they allow me to use Jump Desktop and stream literally any app in existence without them being able to individually review them?

Like I said, it’s absurd. There’s literally no difference.

Yes there is. Jump Desktop is just remote desktop software to a computer you own or control with applications you have installed. xCloud is just a way to make money for Microsoft and avoid all the revenue sharing with Apple and devalue the App Store as the central and only place to get apps and games.
 
I kind of meant that Neflix and M$ appear to have similar requirements for a platform but Netflix don’t have to submit everything separately.
Would that not be a case of “rules for thee but not for me”?

Apple discriminate based on content type but they have done so since day one on the plattform.

If Microsoft wanted to sell a video streaming service like Netflix, they would be treated the same as Netflix.
 
As a developer, I don't see how creating separate apps would be any problem. Sure, it's more work than using a single app, but not that big of a deal especially for a big company like Microsoft.

They would have to write 99% of the code for each app once, the rest is just config for what game needs to be loading, image material, descriptions etc. They could automate updating the apps when the main code needs to be updated.

Nintendo does this as well. They stream some of the games you can buy for the Nintendo Switch.

And: "an incredibly negative experience for customers"? How so? I could search for Halo and get a bunch for xCloud games in the App Store like I'm used to with every other game. Reviews about the game right there. The only 'hurdle' is needing to login to be able to play. Big deal.

Loss for Microsoft if you ask me.
My point, too. Testing tens or hundreds of apps prior to release then pushing them out? Companies Microsoft’s size do this sort of stuff with automation multiple times a day. The streaming framework for each would be identical, so there’s economies of scale that factor in at that point.

And the logging in isn’t even that tough. I have Netflix and I don’t have to RE-log in every time I want to play one of the several Netflix downloadable games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krazzix
1. A duopoly of about equal size is very different from a monopoly. It makes Apple almost immune to anti-trust lawsuits. Also being a monopoly is legal.

2. It doesn't matter if a market is critical or essential. The law only works on legal entities like Apple. Is access to iOS App Store an essential facility? No, because you have several substitutes like Android Play Store and making your content available on other platforms like the web. The bar is pretty high for being an essential facility.
I loved that one. Two eggs is the same as one egg, soooo… can I have these 12 eggs for the half dozen price? :)
 
Aren't what? The service they wanted to get an exemption/exception for on the App Store is now available on iOS through the internet/browser.
They’re not selling games. It’s literally no different then Netflix. I don’t have an issue with Apple having policies for their App Store. The issue has to do with the policies being logically inconsistent. Why is Netflix or any other streaming service okay, but not a game streaming service?

These questions are rhetorical because I’m sure we all know the reason why.
 
The “applications” in question aren’t running on the iOS device.

Why doesn’t Netflix have to submit their interactive titles for individual review?

And that's the biggest problem.
Apple want games and applications to be local apps. They want developers to use Apple's developers tools and APIs. They want them to be Apple developers and not Xbox developers. In addition it undermines the whole games = apps which integrates tightly with the App Store and the operating system.

When I go to the App Store I expect to find every game which are playable on iOS in the App Store.
If I turn on parental control I epoxy it to work for every game.
If I turn on screen time I want to know how much time I spent on individual games.

I don't have any of these expectations of movies, music, podcasts or books.

Allowing xCloud only benefits Microsoft and xCloud users and Apple shouldn't care about them at all.
 
Which definitely means Apple should ban all of Netflix’s gamified, interactive content, right? Like Bandersnatch?

They certainly should if it's a game hiding in the Netflix app and it's not submitted for App Store review.

My understanding is that Bandersnatch is more like an interactive movie than a game thus it would probably be considered a movie.
 
Microsoft's subscription provides access to a library of individual games that were professionally developed and originally sold as stand-alone titles. Roblox provides access to an in-game editor that allows users of the app to create Roblox games...key word being "user". In other words, things that don't exist when the app is originally sold.
Netflix also provided access to a library of individual titles and movies that were professional developed and were originally sold as stand-alone titles. What you don’t seem to get is that the game (or application like you want to call it) is never streamed to the device. No application code is every streamed to the device. An application on a separate server creates a media stream that is sent to a device. This is both how Netflix and xCloud work. It is simply media being sent from a server running an application to a host receiving that media stream and displaying it to the user
 
If they are the same, use Netflix then.

But we know they aren't the same. The experience of using them is completely different.
Experience is relative to the viewer only though.
This how i think of it.

Both Netflix and Xcloud require a subscription, on both, so you dont own the actual product streaming, only have a license to stream said content. Both are viewed from a screen, and both require an input method to use (touchscreen hands) monitor/tv a controller or remote control). Both have fluctuating/rotating content that changes all the time. Both can be used through a web browser only, but both have apps as well. Both on Windows, only Netflix on iOS. Both are entertainment venues for consumption. And if apple wants to go with the each individual stream on xcloud needs to be a seperate app on iOS where all you would be doing is just downloading the wrapper app again and again to play a different game in each app instead of one app, that can view all and only streams and doesnt actually download the game/content, then how does netflix get away with all that and actually allows you to download individual movies to watch offline and yet it's ok for that to not be a seperate download each time with each movie being a seperate download in the ios store with the netflix app wrapper to view them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cayden
Executable stream = java for example.

That is because in Java you can send executable chunks of code (jars) down and up stream … and run it on delivery. There is nothing of such sort going on game streams. Don’t think iOS supports a tech similar this either.

Anyway Game streams are pretty much like interactive videos streams, The App works as interactive video player … the video game is processed in the servers … converted to a videos stream, not in the app.

PS: That technology is pretty much replaced … but hey have a look at Web Assemblies
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mousekiks
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.