Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Cloud Software Apple Games

Apple Confirms Cloud Gaming Services Like xCloud and Stadia Violate App Store Guidelines (theverge.com) 68

Posted by BeauHD from the time-to-update-the-app-store dept.
Apple won't allow Microsoft xCloud or Google Stadia on iOS because of strict App Store guidelines that make cloud services effectively impossible to operate on the iPhone. In a statement to Business Insider, Apple finally came out and explained why these cloud services cannot exist on its platform. The Verge reports: The primary reason: they offer access to apps Apple can't individually review. Here's the official Apple statement: "The App Store was created to be a safe and trusted place for customers to discover and download apps, and a great business opportunity for all developers. Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers.

Our customers enjoy great apps and games from millions of developers, and gaming services can absolutely launch on the App Store as long as they follow the same set of guidelines applicable to all developers, including submitting games individually for review, and appearing in charts and search. In addition to the App Store, developers can choose to reach all iPhone and iPad users over the web through Safari and other browsers on the App Store." In other words, unless it's a full remote desktop app, a cloud gaming service is not allowed as these guidelines are written today -- even though very narrowly tailored LAN services like Steam Link and Sony's PS4 Remote Play are.

Google and Microsoft probably don't want to offer signup options within the apps themselves because that would mean giving Apple a 30 percent cut of subscription revenue, but apps without "account creation" options violate section (c). Abiding by section (a) is also impossible considering these cloud servers on which the games are running are not owned by and located in the homes of consumers, but placed in data centers far away. And section (e) just flat out says this type of thing -- a "thin client for cloud-based app" -- can't exist in the App Store at all; it's not "appropriate," Apple says. [...] What does all this mean? Well, for now, iOS users are going to be missing out on the mobile-centric cloud gaming wave that's set to arrive with xCloud's launch. There is conceivably a way Google, Microsoft, and Nvidia could find ways around this by changing the core functionality of their respective apps.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Confirms Cloud Gaming Services Like xCloud and Stadia Violate App Store Guidelines More

Apple Confirms Cloud Gaming Services Like xCloud and Stadia Violate App Store Guidelines

Comments Filter:

  • So ban Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Thursday August 06, 2020 @07:49PM (#60375181)
    and Prime Video, and Kindle, and Spotify, and .... all of these services contain content which Apple can't review and can't control. We all know the real reason, they don't want competition and the earlier services got in before Apple was trying to compete in the space.

    • Why stop there? They should ban the web browser. HTML/JS applications are not reviewed by Apple either.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        but they can be sandboxed.

        But apps can be sandboxed too. Isn't it about time? What's Apple doing with all that "leadership" processing power they have in the iPhone?

      • They already have effectively banned any browser other than their own. Non-Apple browsers on iOS are really just reskins of Safari -- in most cases, an out of date version of Safari at that.

    • To be fair to Apple here, they have applied some serious restrictions on the services you listed and even outright banned Kindle at one point for the same reasons.

      I say being fair to Apple as acknowledging that the don't have a double standard, not that this standard is in any way good.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by teg ( 97890 )

        To be fair to Apple here, they have applied some serious restrictions on the services you listed and even outright banned Kindle at one point for the same reasons.

        I say being fair to Apple as acknowledging that the don't have a double standard, not that this standard is in any way good.

        They didn't ban Kindle for the same reason. Kindle - as a way of accessing content bought elsewhere - has always been OK. Checking my email, I "bought" the app more than a decade ago, in early 2010. What did get them into trouble was when they tried to add the ability to purchase new content from the app without adding Apple into the loop [computerworld.com].

        One interesting thing from the above reference is the following quote from Steve Jobs: "Our philosophy is simple -- when Apple brings a new subscriber to the app, Apple

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      "...all of these services contain content..."

      It's. not CONTENT, it's APPLICATIONS. Also, you know this and you're making a bad faith argument.

      Apple controls what applications can run on the platform for obvious reasons. Netflix content does not fall into this category of problem.

      One can argue that the platform has outgrown this solution, and so has the processing capability, but the justification is real.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Luthair ( 847766 )

        It's. not CONTENT, it's APPLICATIONS. Also, you know this and you're making a bad faith argument.

        They don't run on the device, its a movie streamed to the device.

    • Netflix, prime, Kindle, and Spotify are apps submitted for review.

      Anyhow, my phone is too important to me for all sorts of things. What I want is a safe device. I'm very happy apple is trying hard to keep it so. I'm fine with fewer probably safer apps even if I lose some access.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Luthair ( 847766 )

        Netflix, prime, Kindle, and Spotify are apps submitted for review.

        So is xcloud, all it does is send inputs to the cloud and gets a video stream back.

  • Meh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kryptonut ( 1006779 ) on Thursday August 06, 2020 @07:56PM (#60375203)
    Let the consumers vote with their wallets. If they want the gaming services and flexibility, they'll get something Android based. If they don't care, they'll buy whatever they prefer.

    • >vote with your wallet.

      Sadly, as much as i hate apple, i ended buying an ipad, simply because i got tired of throwing my money away on android tablets (nexus 9, 10 and a samsung).

      Give me an android tablet thats bloatfree and updated for 5 years and i will jump back.

      • >vote with your wallet.

        Sadly, as much as i hate apple, i ended buying an ipad, simply because i got tired of throwing my money away on android tablets (nexus 9, 10 and a samsung).

        Give me an android tablet thats bloatfree and updated for 5 years and i will jump back.

        I agree with you on the iPad side of things. Android tablets aren't in the same league software wise - and I prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio for reading. Apple got my money in that case because they made something I saw value in at the time - I voted with my wallet. iPhones on the other hand, overrated, I like my Pixel XL far better.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dfghjk ( 711126 )

          Sounds like you got an Android phone because it's what you prefer, not because of "gaming services and flexibility".

      • Give me an android tablet thats bloatfree and updated for 5 years and i will jump back.

        Then avoid buying:

        - extremely cheap by no-name asian company that have long gone belly up by the time you unbox the tablet. (you won't see any upstream support from those).
        Even big brands like Google's nexus and Samsung's Notes tend to be poorly supported, in a strategy to push you to replace your hardware more often.

        - not unlockable tablets (if you cannot unlock the boot loader, you cannot replace the OS with an opensource community one (e.g.: LinieageOS. Or even full blown GNU/Linux like UBTouch, Sailfish

      • It's unfortunate but true.

        The only tablet worth picking up and using, much less spending money on, is the iPad. I've tried a few Android tablets and they are universally shit because Google doesn't seem to give a damn about Android tablets anymore. The best one was probably the Nvidia Shield, but Nvidia turned it into a set-top box and abandoned the tablet game altogether.

        They are usually year+ old phone hardware with a big screen, and half-baked phone software that doesn't work properly on simple concept

      • I have a 2013 model Nexus 7 that I easily loaded LineageOS onto after Google stopped updating it. It is running a fully updated Android 10 and actually works very well. No bloatware, it only has the apps that I want installed and running. I use it mostly to read (Kindle) and keep all my travel apps (airline and hotel apps). It's also handy for using Skymap when I'm out star gazing in the back yard at night.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sd4f ( 1891894 )

      It's true, and while it's a gamble, I suspect Apple is betting on game streaming not taking off. I'm sceptical about it as well, but it doesn't really matter what I think. Point is, they're not going to open up their app store to game streaming I suppose because they want to keep their 30% cut and have decided that they're better off without it.

      If game streaming does take off, then I guess it's a big opportunity missed, but, they still have their install base as a security, and I doubt very many gamers will

      • This is a no-lose situation for Apple. They can sit back and watch to see if these services are just incredibly expensive flops and take notes. If they start becoming popular and they get an inkling that they may lose sales due to not having them available, they can always allow them at a future date, or even launch one themselves and act like they invented the whole idea (which their fanboys will lap up and regurgitate all over the Internet) - nothing is set in stone yet. At this time very few people gi

    • "Flexibility" is overrated. What people want is something that works. If you give people a choice of 2 things or 50 things (not just software, just about any consumer good), most people are actually happier just having the smaller choice (there are plenty of psychological studies on the bad-effects of too much choice).

      Part of the reason people go with Apple is because they actually like having someone else police the store. It gets tiring to pay attention all the time, even if you are technically capable of

      • Exactly. I'm technically capable of it, but you know what, I spend all day worrying about security, I don't want to have to think about it with my phone too (or tablet or TV streaming device).

        I honestly believe even that if Apple is forced to allow 3rd party app stores, they will get so few actual users, especially paying ones, that they will likely struggle to stay in business.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      Right, because the only difference is "gaming services and flexibility", there would be no reason other than "preference" to choose something other than Android.

      It's a good thing you've given permission for consumers to buy what they like though. Where would we be without that?

  • Roblox? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Chewbacon ( 797801 ) on Thursday August 06, 2020 @07:58PM (#60375207)

    My sons play that and there is a seemingly endless amount of user-created games there. Another case of Apple's thirst to wet their beak.

  • lol (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Before they go on our store, all apps are reviewed against the same set of guidelines that are intended to protect customers and provide a fair and level playing field to developers.

    Really? Since when?

  • Riiiiiight (Score:3)

    by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Thursday August 06, 2020 @08:08PM (#60375239) Journal

    So there's no room for a "thin client for cloud-based app", but plenty of room for over 500 fart apps? Got it.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by xlsior ( 524145 )

      So there's no room for a "thin client for cloud-based app", but plenty of room for over 500 fart apps? Got it.

      The availability of million fart apps don't threaten Apple's absolute control over the platform -- enabling 3rd party external content does.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by c-A-d ( 77980 )

        Or the money they get from the fees to get the app into the app store, and a 30% cut of any subscriptions.

      • But it ensures that iPhone stays firmly within the Lowest Common Denominator.

        I still remember when the iPhone was announced and I thought to myself "Awesome! A pocket computer with cellular data that is not as clunky as PalmOS or Windows Mobile!". I thought it was going to be developer/geek heaven, being able to run DosBOX and MAME, and all that other good stuff.

        The soon announced restrictions sure killed that fast!

        • As a developer, you absolutely can... you are however not allowed to let other non-developers into the party. It’s a simple knowledge checkpoint on whether they know how to sign a pre-existing executable with their own Apple ID. Anyone can side load but the hoops are just inconvenient, and you need to install updates yourself.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        It might backfire. A Chromecast that can play Stadia games is only $35, and once they are pushed into the Google ecosystem for that...

    • Actually not (Score:3, Informative)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 )

      So there's no room for a "thin client for cloud-based app", but plenty of room for over 500 fart apps?

      I'm not defending Apple over blocking streaming services as I think their argument is kind of absurd given what already exists on the App Store...

      However your particular argument is based on misunderstanding of the App Store and what it holds, as indeed there is NOT room for 500 fart apps on the App Store. Apple can and has blocked many apps that were too similar to other apps like it on the store - fart a

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        So you're argument isn't with the content of the post, it's whether 500 is the correct number? Classic SuperKendall insight.

        • This issue is not the exact number - just correcting the statement there is no limit for any category of app.

          I think it's important people be accurate, I know you prefer to just let people lie about whatever to maintain your own freedom to mislead, but I find the truth and accuracy important things to fight for, so I will continue to do so. I improve the world wherever I go; you should try that approach sometime.

      • hyperbole /hprbl/

        noun: hyperbole; plural noun: hyperboles

                exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
                "he vowed revenge with oaths and hyperboles"

    • So there's no room for a "thin client for cloud-based app", but plenty of room for over 500 fart apps? Got it.

      This is called high quality. Remember Quality means the ability for something to meet it's spec. It doesn't mean that spec isn't one big fart joke.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      That's The Verge editorializing, and they aren't known for technical rigor. A web browser is a "thin client for cloud-based apps" and it is allowed.

      It's easy to determine if a "fart app" is malware.

  • Yeah sure. By that logic, they'd better take down every VNC/RDP Remote Desktop app and kick TeamViewer off the store as well. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that they launched Apple Arcade. For fucks sake Apple, They bought the damn hardware, let them play steam games that they already own.
    • you can play your steam games with steam link on ios.
      • The difference there is “using your own hardware”, whereas cloud streaming is “somebody else’s hardware”. It’s really, crazily, absurdly stupid, but they did explain it in the above article.
  • These shenanigans are just going to make Apple products less appealing to consumers than less-restricted competitors.

  • Stories like this make me wax nostalgic. I remember the time back in the 90's when I was in the checkout line at CompUSA and a little boy behind me was crying. His mom was telling him 'we have a Mac' which I was pretty certain meant that something fun the boy wanted wouldn't work on their computer.

  • And This Is Why They Are Being Investigated (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Thursday August 06, 2020 @08:43PM (#60375299) Homepage Journal

    And this, right here, is why Apple is being investigated for antitrust abuse. Apple creates a streaming gaming platform, and immediately says that no other streaming gaming platform is allowed to launch on their hardware.

    It's almost as if Apple is being run by a two-year-old child who is deliberately daring the government to do something about the company's behavior, all while the public facing leadership is thumbing their noses and shouting "Nah-nah-na-nah-nah!" at the top of their lungs. SMH.

    • apple has a game streaming service? you might have your wires crossed there

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        Okay, yeah, sorry, subscription gaming service. Not streaming. Either, way, it's pretty clearly designed to compete with those other services.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Apple creates a streaming gaming platform, and immediately says that no other streaming gaming platform is allowed to launch on their hardware.

      Apple Arcade [apple.com] is not a game streaming solution. You have to download and install the games, some of which can be played online, some offline.

      Any developer that remembers pre-iOS 10 days of GameCenter and GameKit should shun it. Apple is a bit like Google Labs when it comes to gaming - it likes to create gaming/lobbying/ranking environments every now and again, encourage developers to use them, and then dump them when they realize they can't make enough money out of them.

  • ban gsuit and office 365 control of ios as well as.

  • Yep, I fixed the headline there.

    I understand (but not like) they don't want other stores on their hardware. There is some value to the user (making sure everything is vetted to a reasonable degree), and developers (no easy pirating of software).

    But I don't understand not allowing the user access to already purchased content on other platforms. And their "reader" rules are a bit arbitrary.

    You can access your PC or Mac using Remote Desktop apps. You can play the games on our PC using Steam Link. But you canno

    • Not to defend this, but from your post I see a pattern: If you own the computer at the other end, Apple does not interfere with you connecting to it, but if it is a service you are connecting to they don't allow it. So from this point of view they are not inconsistent and in fact reinforces your headline that you do not own Stadia or xCloud (neither hardware nor software).

      Not that it matters for me as I am uninterested these cloud services. I own my own PC and gaming consoles, and prefer that it stays that

      • They also don't control the content you see in your mail app (such as Outlook or GMail). They don't control the content you can browse with the web browser (though I realise they force everyone to use their engine). If there's a web app, you can use it - they don't control those apps either. Taking those points into account, the "reviewing the content/apps" line falls very flat.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dfghjk ( 711126 )

          "Taking those points into account, the "reviewing the content/apps" line falls very flat."

          Does it? That conclusion is based on the idea that Apple is concerned with any content and not specifically what runs on the device. It's a straw man.

          In the beginning, Apple allowed no 3rd party apps because they insisted the risk was too great. That was, of course, Steve Jobs bullshit but when apps were introduced it was with an App Store and 100% vetting of all apps by Apple, at least theoretically. This has alwa

    • (Androd is only slightly better. Try rooting your phone and see what happens).

      My Androd device can be rooted without loss of functon, you nsenstve clod.

      I did make a conscious decision to buy one which could be, of course. But then, any product is similar. I won't buy a modern German car because of how bitchy they are about diagnostic data. (You need special fancy scanners to get access to all the data, let alone to change anything.)

  • probably not such a bad thing - no way Apple can get to carbon net zero allowing stadia or any form of cloud based game streaming. Simply not possible yet these kinds of services quite frankly shouldnt even be a consideration at this juncture in the climate emergency.

    • Bitcoin makes all of those services put together look like peanuts.

    • Okay, all else aside, how exactly would someone else's server farms impact Apple's net carbon emissions? Aren't those owned by Google and Microsoft, who each have their own renewable power goals?
  • https://shadow.tech/ [shadow.tech] has an iOS app that lets you run whatever games you want on a remote W10 instance, and streams them to you. https://apps.apple.com/gb/app/... [apple.com]
  • Apple takes 30% of every sale on the App Store. Their rules also include this tax on subscriptions and "in-app" purchases, as you're only allowed to use Apple's payment system.
    Netflix actually stopped paying this 2 years ago when it forwarded their iOS users to the webbrowser instead of the App, bypassing these rules all together (Apple made almost a million $ a day from the 30% on Netflix App).
    xCloud and Google Stadia probably can't do this (Also, there might be a rule that you can't have an App that's b
  • Why does it allow other remotedesktop services which don't connect to your own network/computer but a remote computer in the cloud which is what xCloud and Stadia are..
  • Given that whatever game would be played would be running remotely, not on the device, and would have all the access restrictions of the client, how exactly do they think they can justify their claims? What possible justification can there be for their assertion that it would be "inappropriate" to allow thin clients?

  • is also impossible considering these cloud servers on which the games are running are not owned by and located in the homes of consumers

    Um... so give the consumer "ownership" of the cloud server OS and/or hardware instance in the form of a lease ?

    It may be one chip-sized SBC in a blade chassis full of millions, but it will be "their property" until the lease agreement runs out, so it becomes just like any other Remote Application Publishing app -- like the ones used by Companies (VMware View, Citrix [citrix.com]

  • Pretty anti-consumer.
    Taking Stadia for example. The consumer will have already been paying Google a monthly fee. And games such as Destiny wouldn't have even had an iOS app version anytime soon, so there was no alternative.

    I'm not surprised Apple is doing this, since they want their cut. But they should say that instead of the bullshit reason given above since Stadia is barely different than Windows Remote Desktop app (constant user input being forwarded to a remote server, get video in return).

  • If people have not already realized that Aople is your king, and "Apple knows best" when buying an iPhone, they deserve what they get.

      Apple can lock the iPhone down to death, and change the interface to an image of a dictator sitting at a very high desk, where you have to ask permission to do as much as make a phone call, and I will just go "meh".

Slashdot Top Deals

1 Mole = 007 Secret Agents

Close