Can only lock it down so much before you run afoul of stuff like this, tech companies run into this kinda barrier all the time, but it's usually with pre-installed apps and whatnot
Do you ever think of anything else
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Apple is being sued for its App Store walled garden; ruling could have severe implications for gaming consoles
- Thread starter Deleted member 249
- Start date
Can only lock it down so much before you run afoul of stuff like this, tech companies run into this kinda barrier all the time, but it's usually with pre-installed apps and whatnot
Do you ever think of anything else
People download from the App Store because on an iPhone they're forced to.
I agree there are a lot of benefits that people aren't discussing here, but people download from the app store because it's literally the only option.
Perhaps people buy an iPhone for the reasons you listed above, but the app store isn't a choice in and of itself.
What I meant was they're more eager to use the App Store because it's so well regulated. Casuals tend to download less apps on the Play Store than on the App Store.
Because the Play Store isn't literally the only option on Android stuff.
I meant stuff like Spotify where the subscription is more expensive on iOS but users can just sub outside the iPhone for the normal price and still use it on the iPhone. Altought the fact they don't let Spotify advertise that is not alright (I think Spotify's case is much better in the EU)
No one's stopping you from continuing to use the App Store if you want in the hypothetical situation where Apple is forced to allow other store fronts.
It's not so much that PC isn't open platform. That was probably a bad answer.
The difference is because you can buy steam products from a number of different retailers and trade them privately.
Meanwhile epic is making efforts to be the only destination for some products. Driving up the prices, stifling competition.
The same thing could have been said about Microsoft and Internet Explorer yet they still got fined.
Here comes iPhone owners getting viruses downloading from nefarious stores. The nice thing about apples walled garden is it prevents my in-laws from installing malware on their iOS devices.
You should probably start, this isn't healthy, it also has literally nothing to do with this topic right now lol
Windows has run afoul of stuff like this before, mainly preinstalled apps (I recall there being a big thing about Internet Explorer in the EU)
Admittedly not that simple, this was a thing years ago with Cydia/etc but that has stopped
I really hope Apple win this. I'd rather pay a bit extra and avoid the shovelware that developers will start abusing this.
When you become so large and integrated, it doesn't matter if it's their platform. Amazon for instance has 50+% of all online business. The next closest is 6% on eBay. Are you saying they are out of reach for monopolistic related charges because it was their own platform? Scale matters.
In the absolute worst case for Apple, people will probably still use the apple store, because of the well curated store.
He says while browsing through the 1000 fart apps on the iOS store.
While that's true it's a lot easier to Google "fortnite android" on a cellphone and get to the page you need compared to whatever hoops you would need to do to get the game launcher on playstation. Even if it's just downloading the epic launcher from the playstation store it still seems like it would cause a lot of confuaion.
It clearly worked out for fortnite on android though so maybe I'm not giving people enough credit.
I believe the comparison isn't really apt given how differently the platforms have grown. Expectations are clearly very different. But regardless, as I said, users may or may not find these reasons compelling. There's ultimately a reason Apple owns almost 45% of the smartphone market in the US, and these are some of the factors they advertise as a positive.
I don't find them compelling reason myself; I don't use an iPhone. Then again, I'm quite tech savvy, so I'm probably not the target audience for those factors.
Can you explain how this will lead to more shovel ware? If the platform opens, the only way you'll see shovelware is if you go looking for it outside the app store.
I know, but it's the easiest way out of this scenario. Allow people to sideload apps, and then you'd have companies willing to sell their apps outside of the app store like they do on Android. And then you'd still have a shit ton of people using the App Store because it's curated and everything is there, just like they still do on Android.
Consoles will be fine so long as third party sites can sell codes for PSN and XBL. I know that there was some talk about Sony eliminating these at Gamestop, and overall but Apple's big problem is that apps tend to cost more on their app store vs Amazon or Google Play, and you can't get them anywhere else. Currently if you don't like the price of a game on the PSN, you can find a cheaper alternative.
The court did not rule in favour of a closed garden in the Tengen suit back in the 80s. Tengen lost because they stole the code Nintendo had made, so they could bypass the lockout chip.
So Tengen didn't lose the case to release their own cartridges, they lost the case because how they did it and used copyrighted materials.
I'm not sure you understand what walled garden means. By your definition here ANY retail store is a walled garden, including Amazon, Best Buy, Walmart, etc.
Last edited:
Random, and how is that responsive to my point that if they see a decline in profits because of the end of this model, they will find a way to recoup their losses elsewhere?
I know right?! You'd think people that deserving of shame would keep a low-profile. Emboldened, shameless and guilt as fuck GOP sickens me to no end.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of "services" charge for every key. I'm not a Dev there, so I wouldn't know, but that sounds sensible.
Lol, I wouldn't worry about it. My posts have been largely EGS-centric for like, a week or two, and I've got my reasons for it. It's no more indicative of my health than when I've spent a week or two's worth of posting activity focused on things that don't stoke the cynical part of my brain as hard.
I'll keep it to topics that are directly related, though, so I don't shitpost myself out the door
Last edited:
I honestly would love this. This would open a whole market of competing digital storefronts instead of the central planning that these companies do at the moment. I kinda get the possible security implications, but I have no knowledge of the field so I cant really comment on that.
Interesting to see how it pans out.
Interesting to see how it pans out.
It is possible. But there's solutions that can easily prevent those even on semi-closed platforms.
Basically games wouldn't be allowed to touch OS, expect with APIs (and permissions stuff). This is how Windows Store games work.
And Windows 10 apps on Xbox.
There isn't. Keys are 100% free.
This is the Android model.
It is also how dev mode works (tho there is a cost there) on XBO.
Enable dev mode on Android or Xbox and you can install your own binaries, without ever touching the store.
That is surprising, but they must figure whatever sales they do make will balance the cost they incur.
I think the most obvious result would be a larger piracy hardware scene.
If this passes, it would be kind of amazing.
How would this work? would Valve be able to put Steam on PS4, Switch, and Xbox One? Would Microsoft be able to put Xbox Live and the Microsoft store on Switch and PS4 and vice versa? I think it would blow open the market in a positive way. I just hope it doesn't take away the drive for console makers to fund large exclusives, and to subsidize consoles.
How would this work? would Valve be able to put Steam on PS4, Switch, and Xbox One? Would Microsoft be able to put Xbox Live and the Microsoft store on Switch and PS4 and vice versa? I think it would blow open the market in a positive way. I just hope it doesn't take away the drive for console makers to fund large exclusives, and to subsidize consoles.
No offense, but you might be overpaying if you want your data to be protected (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-08/is-apple-really-your-privacy-hero.)
Besides, you wouldnt need to buy from anywhere other than the Appstore, you would just have the option to.
Yeah, this makes sense, now I have a clearer picture of what they're trying to accomplish. Thank you!
From what I recall how they reversed engineered the lockout chip was one portion of it, but they also ruled that Nintendo's licensing rules were legal and rules against Atari on the Anti-Trust portion.
So the takeaway of the article is "they should be doing more". As opposed you Google actively viewing your data as their biggest commodity and not giving a single fuck about data rights.
But yeah, fuck apple and their pricing b/c even though they technically do have a huge privacy focus compared to competing mobile OS's, "they could be doing more".
Being a registered Apple Developer myself, it sounds like whoever is behind this suit is just mad that they have to pay $99 a year to put Apps on the App Store, and are pissy that Apple has the gall to charge a fee for using their distribution infrastructure. The 30% charge hasn't changed in the eight-ish years I have been a developer, and they also recently rolled back that percentage on In-App Purchases for Apps that have been on the store for at least so many years.
Personally, I don't care about either fee. Their dev tools and platform are top notch, and I like that it isn't open so people can pirate Apps like what's possible on Google Play.
Personally, I don't care about either fee. Their dev tools and platform are top notch, and I like that it isn't open so people can pirate Apps like what's possible on Google Play.
It would make having a garden at all pointless (for the gardener). Since the beginning of game machines with swappable media that's been where most of the money comes from. The machines themselves rarely turn a profit and often are a net loss, and 1st party games and accessories only go so far.
Fuck Apple? That is really your take away from the quote..?
This in essence is Spotify's argument in the EU. It's legitimate.
"No offense, but you might be overpaying if you want your data to be protected" is just a direct implication that they're no better than Google or Android, and more expensive on top of that. Yeah, it's not as aggressive as the way I rephrased it but it's still an irrational drag. Even if you don't like Apple, data rights are the one thing they objectively have going for them.
Another problem is how closed the 'ecosystem' is. Apple is always talking about it and about how much money people spend on the App Store and on iTunes. Once people become a part of the echosystem it's harder to drop it and move on to another like Google Play or the Amazon App Store. If anything I think a fair resolution for consumers would be to allow competing storefronts on iOS.
Completely valid observation. You can just buy or rent used games on the current current consoles (except for the discless xbox one). That's something that cant be done with App Stores.
No it is not a direct implication and doesnt logically follow at all...
From the article:
"In July, Apple added a rule to its contract with app makers banning the storage and sale of such data. It was done with little fanfare, probably because it won't make much of a difference.
When developers get our information, and that of the acquaintances in our contacts list, it's theirs to use and move around unseen by Apple. It can be sold to data brokers, shared with political campaigns, or posted on the internet. The new rule forbids that, but Apple does nothing to make it technically difficult for developers to harvest the information."
Hence someone willing to pay big bucks for "added security" might want to think about their position. I honestly have no idea what % someone is willing to pay for what the article describes, but from the looks of it, 30% seems a bit too much for me.
This lawsuit at the moment has nothing to do with Google so its kinda useless to talk about it for me. Also I was never comparing Apple to other companies.