Microsoft's xCloud and Xbox Game Pass Not Coming to iOS Due to Apple's Restrictions [Updated]

trim said:
The big issue I see with using these services on mobile is the data usage must be through the roof.

I guess that lots of the "unlimited" data plans are not truly unlimited and as soon as you start streaming games for hours on end you'll end up going over fair usage policy.

Still a bad move on Apple's part.
Click to expand...

T-Mobile partnered to offer unlimited data optimized for xcloud.
 
Wanted797 said:
I’m an Apple fan through and through and like the tight knit nature of the App Store but this is getting silly.

They decline Microsoft because they can’t approve every game.... but approve Steam?

To me it sounds like the thing they don’t like is Game Pass which effectively creates another game/app store alternative to the Apple store and Apple Arcade.

But after the Hey app can’t Microsoft just offer a free trial in-app?
Click to expand...

Unpopular, because Apple is treat developer equally /s

Depending under the hood agreement between company, as consumer we never know why Apple allowed some services, but deliberately blocked some service with their App Store terms. Defending which profiting Apple, I assume.

Same things applied with Stadia, GeForce Now, App Store terms basically hurdle all streaming service like this.
 
anson42 said:
Out of curiosity, what is streamed to the device with this service? Is any part of an actual game app downloaded as part of the experience of playing a game or only the visual bits like streaming a movie and the entirety of the game engine runs on the server? I can see the MS app as being a generic graphics rendering engine working with some sort of gaming protocol over the network.

Apple Arcade is not a streaming service in that you do have to install each game locally; it just functions as a subscription service, to my knowledge.
Click to expand...

Nope, it is literally just low latency video streaming. There is no 3D rendering engine.
 
Abazigal said:
Well, technically speaking, a Netflix movie or a Kindle book or Spotify doesn’t run arbitrary code that’s being streamed to the device.

Apple’s POV is probably that the code that you submit for review should be the code that’s in the app, without having code pulled in from elsewhere and run. Games kind of stretch the boundaries of this - when you pull in a new set of levels, is that new code, just new graphics/content? It’s a bit murky.

I believe this is why, for instance, they shut down emulators (like Apple II emulators or NES emulators) - because they involve pulling in and running code that’s not part of your submission. They do have a point here. Sandboxing does a LOT in terms of the safety of iOS devices. However, Apple does a lot of automated code review when you submit your app through review. That really does do quite a bit in terms of catching private API usage or anything that might be sketchy.

So I disagree that this is being done for anticompetitive purposes. It stems from, like so many other moves, Apple’s maniacal obsession to control every aspect of the user experience.
Click to expand...

You don’t understand how this works. No part of the game ever makes it to the device. It is purely streaming video.

They don’t reject emulators for that since it can be added as on-demand resources in the app bundle. They reject them since they have a rule that apps can’t contain multiple apps written by different parties.

Apple takes the approach to allow as many apps (that fit in to the rules) over controlling the experience for the store. Apps are never rejected for not complying with human interface guidelines. The explicit rejection of game streaming in App Store rules are almost certainly over fear of competition much like was in the internal Apple emails contained in the anti-trust documents for Apple Books.
 
Last edited:
I hope Microsoft makes a big stink about it. Say what you will about Apple (and there's a lot to say...), they have started to listen to users and developers when it comes to the App Store. Whether said stink will make a difference, who knows, but I think it's worth the fight. If Apple is going to continue to be the gatekeeper (which I personally think is OK), they need to treat 3rd party apps with the same treatment of their first party apps, less monopoly charges get laid against them (despite their recent protestations to the contrary).
 
xWhiplash said:
And while I don't personally agree, a lot of people think Office 365 is anti-competitive by bundling OneDrive which hurts Dropbox.
Click to expand...
One can definitely argue about that, and the fact that One Drive is pre installed on Windows 10. I mean hearing anti competitive complaints from the likes of Microsoft feels... empty. It's just a game of lawyers with no real genuine intent.
 
gnipgnop said:
Are you familiar with auto racing? Formula One? NASCAR? Level playing field in those competitive sports = same rules apply to everyone. So with the App Store, one of the rules is that the app you're selling needs to be reviewed by the App Store. If you're trying to selling something without it being reviewed, that's not a level playing field.

A remote desktop app isn't selling anything other than access to a computer desktop. All the apps that are on the desktop are not included. A game streaming app that provides access to games that you already purchased on your console or PC is the same thing. Those kinds of streaming apps are already available on the App Store.

MS isn't just providing a game streaming app, they're also providing a game library within the app and none of those games have been reviewed. That's not a level playing field.
Click to expand...

Stop. Just stop. Your argument has been torn to shreds already and you keep digging yourself deeper.

Some people really are attached to Tim Cook at the hip these days.
 
While Apple might be able to avoid government intervention for a little while longer their customers might abandon them sooner than that. Keep in mind that people who are defending Apple here are AAPL shareholders first (and some might be Apple customers but that's secondary). Actual customers can't be happy with the fact that Android users get more and more features and services that are not available on iOS devices.
 
falainber said:
While Apple might be able to avoid government intervention for a little while longer their customers might abandon them sooner than that. Keep in mind that people who are defending Apple here are AAPL shareholders first (and some might be Apple customers but that's secondary). Actual customers can't be happy with the fact that Android users get more and more features and services that are not available on iOS devices.
Click to expand...

The backlash seems to be getting noticed. When I read articles on this on regular tech sites today they were mentioning this blowing up. Normally when I am here I see non-stop apple apologists .... like people telling me the 3 keyboards I replaced on a single MBP wasn't representative of anything and that I must be making it up...... but there are only 2 people in this thread that are putting an effort in carrying water for Apple. Its a good sign that change may finally have to start coming.
 
Why are Apple worried about gaming?

To this day they’ve never even attempted to compete.

They should be forging an alliance with Microsoft to get xbox gaming on their platforms.
 
Pman17 said:
The only thing that's downloaded is the video stream and the only thing that's uploaded is your controller commands. You need a fast connection with low latency if you wanna play multiplayer with little lag otherwise the experience can suck.
Click to expand...
4nNtt said:
Nope, it is literally just low latency video streaming. There is no 3D rendering engine.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the responses. This cloud service is actually more primitive than I was expecting and really is comparable to a Netflix stream.
 
imnotthewalrus said:
With all the "thumbs down" on your post (and soon to be mine) I will say how shocked I am that people don't know the difference between an app and a movie, and the slap in the face it would be to Apple developers to let an outside business slide on through with no testing when they (the Apple developers) have all of their their app/game submissions tested.
Click to expand...
I’m a developer — not a game developer, but a developer nonetheless. I don’t feel that allowing this service on the App Store is an affront to me at all, and I’m not sure where you get the feeling that it would be.

I can tell you that Apple’s App Store policies have significantly impacted my business model decisions, though. That’s an affront to both me and my customers.
 
genovelle said:
You can stream games in any browser on iOS too. Just do that and be happy. Why should Apple open their door to a competitor that is basically trying to undermine their platform from the inside. I wonder if Microsoft is willing to allow Apple Arcade or other Apple Games to be sold and promoted on XBox? Not likely.
Click to expand...

you can subscribe to the independent EA store on Xbox just fine. There r quite a few game store besides Xbox live u can subscribe to actually
 
Every time i hear "Apple's restriction" as to the reason why some app developers can't make it on iOS,, usually falls in line with Microsoft has code that Apple doesn't like. Maybe that's not always true.??

2nd would be guidelines.
 
hot-gril said:
From what I've seen working for Big Tech™, there's a lot less control than you'd think. Technical barriers are a real problem all the way to the end user. Startups focused on a particular area can often perform better than a tech giant.

I genuinely think they don't know how to handle this kind of app properly. There are plenty of ways in which I believe the App Store review process or Apple in general has malicious intent, and this isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
How is this (game pass) any different than Netflix though?
 
td2243 said:
Thanks. That makes sense. I guess the question is, where is that line drawn of how they have to “play with others”?

The government is hardly the outside voice of reason. Haha. But I get what you are saying.
Click to expand...
The line is drawn where competition begins. If Apple is setting the rules for apps and services in the App Store while also offering their own apps and services in the App Store, you’ll inevitably see situations where the playing field is not level for apps and services with which Apple directly competes.

Take Apple Music and Spotify, for example, two directly competing services offered at the same price for an individual subscription. When you pay $9.99 for Apple Music as an in-app purchase, Apple gets $9.99, minus credit card processing fees (probably roughly $0.25). Spotify has discontinued signups with IAP, but when you could, you could pay $9.99, at which point Spotify would receive only $7.00 for the first year, which is a substantial enough difference that it places Spotify at a competitive disadvantage. Apple would see $2.99, minus the same ~$0.25 in processing fees. This is a slightly oversimplified picture, but the point stands.

So, enter “reader” apps, a category of apps that have received Apple’s blessing to not use IAP if they so choose. In the App Store Review Guidelines, Apple lists several categories that count as “reader” apps: “magazines, newspapers, books, audio, music, video, access to professional databases, VoIP, cloud storage, and approved services such as classroom management apps.” You’ll notice that basically all of these categories are ones in which Apple directly competes, and the last one gives them wiggle room to arbitrarily decide whether or not an app is an “approved service.” Problem is, if an app chooses not to use IAP, they are forbidden from even mentioning, let alone linking to or offering in the app, any other options to create an account — they must be sign-in-only.

That introduces a phenomenon known as signup friction, where new users get frustrated with too much work and/or confusion when trying to create an account and just take their business elsewhere, which places these “reader” apps at a competitive disadvantage. We could go down that rabbit hole for hours, really, but at the end of the day, the winner is Apple and the loser is its users.
 
Last edited:
If anyone cares, you can and have been able to stream PS4 games to your iPhone. Just download the PlayStation Remote Play App.

I’m surprised so many people are annoyed about the Xbox thing, didn’t know many people even had one.
 
I am truly and deeply saddened by the speed in which people get pitchforks and torches ready to take down Apple
Guys calm down!!!
As the reason for any one of these applications not being on the App Store still involves information that is not available to anyone other than the parties involved
And to all That say this is because of Apple Arcade please remember a key difference between them other then streaming the games on both are kinda different to say the least...

I get it, it @&$* a lot but this isn’t something to go screaming monopoly about it is however something to petition, advocate and yes if you must scream for a change in policies Apple does a fair job of creating a safe, good, welcoming platform
Please don’t ruin it with bitterness over something that can very well be resolved by conversation between these giants
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top