But you don't lose that ability even though Epic has their own payment system built in alongside Apple's.
Sure you do. In fact, I believe they’re counting on it. Think consumer psychology (my field), not technology. With two competing payment systems in one app, Epic will have every ability to push theirs over Apples, including discounts, incentives, and even exclusive benefits. They can also tie Epic payment to your avatar and use peer pressure to drive customers to their system (they’ve shown that they have no problem weaponizing their fan base). Pretty quickly, players will feel like second class citizens if they use Apple instead of Epic for payment. And trust me, many parents will choose to enter their CC with Epic to end the whining. Once that happens, the Apple system might as well not exist. Keep in mind, too, that Tim Sweeney’s goal is to get Apple out of the payment processing business (hence the antitrust angle). If they win the lawsuit, you can be sure that they eventually remove Apple IAP from the app entirely.
Apple won’t need to block it because it doesn’t work anyway. You follow the setup instructions precisely, and all you get is the exact same error message you would get if you went to the Stadia site using Safari.
You are making A LOT of assumptions here. This is like extreme whataboutism. Everything you've just said is true currently, too. If Epic wanted to "weaponize" their fan base to make… paying through Apple seem uncool, I guess is what you're saying? Then they could be doing that already. I don't need Apple to be my nanny. Imagine if on the Mac, the ONLY way you could pay for anything or buy anything online was through Apple Pay. Are you on iOS 14? I've just recently found out it requires iOS 14 but it's working perfectly fine for me.
While I don’t know about this app, it sounds like the user agent is wrong. Did you copy the user agent exactly as the instruction states? Nothing missing, or no extra space?
1) they already have, by giving a discount for v-bucks bought from other sources but Apple. Keep in mind that Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo all take a 30% cut of IAPs, but only Apple customers were paying extra. 2) Tim Sweeney is on record encouraging Fortnite fans to make noise about this issue — essentially weaponizing them. 3) Tim Sweeney is also on record that his goal is to kill Apple’s ability to run this kind of transactions — and, in fact, that’s at the core of Epic’s antitrust suit. I recommend listening to Hoeg Law’s podcasts on the matter. 4) FOMO and peer pressure are central to the Fortnite business model — there’s no “whataboutism” or “slipperyslopeism” about it. That’s how they get teenagers to shell out money for a free product. And Tim Sweeney is also on record stating that he will use “every weapon” against Apple. You may think that’s a far leap, but then again so is a federal antitrust lawsuit — and here we are. I get it that you don’t want Apple as your nanny. And, of course, you have the option of not being an Apple customer at all. But there’s no question that many customers (including me) find value in the current system and many developers are profiting handsomely off the platform, even under the current terms. The moment that’s not the case, Apple will change its business model. BTW, I was able to get Stadia working on my iPhone — all it took was to sign in on my Mac using Chrome. It should be noted that there are no touch controls available: you have to use a controller (my DualShock works just fine).
"Just leave if you don't like it!" is such a troubling solution that people love to offer up far too frequently. Anyway, the entire point I am trying to make is that this is a problem that has already been solved by Apple themselves a long time ago. On the Mac there is the Mac App Store. Apple approves every app on it, and developers have to follow Apple's guidelines in order to sell their products on it, and Apple takes 30% of everything sold through the Mac App Store. If I want the benefits of the Mac App Store (Apple's green light that apps are safe, a central place to find updates, Apple's IAP mechanisms including things like Face/Touch ID, etc) then I can choose to buy an app through the Mac App Store. However, a developer can also offer that very same app through their own website, and me as the owner of my computer can choose to install that app from outside the Mac App Store's boundaries. There is ZERO fundamental difference between a personal computer and a mobile computing device like the iPhone, so why are they treated differently? There are a multitude of apps including games available both through the MAS and by other means, and as far as I know none of the issues you mentioned above have been a problem by that being the case. Giving developers an additional avenue to selling their software to customers can only be a positive thing for developers, no? Arguing that the iPhone should be treated the same as dedicated gaming consoles is like saying you consider the iPhone a game-playing device first and foremost. Is that the case? Do people do other things other than play games on their iPhones or iPads? Obviously that is rhetorical because of course they do. In fact, despite being the largest grossing category on mobile, I'd argue that the time people spend actually playing games on their mobile device vastly pales in comparison to the amount of time they spend doing all manner of non-gaming things. Like I don't even think it would be close. Yes, Epic's tactics surrounding this whole thing have been a total clown show, and I know their intentions are selfish despite how altruistic they're trying to make it all seem. But I believe at what they're trying to get at at a fundamental level for general computing devices like the iPhone. Apple should not be the sole dictator of the software I use and how I use it. I think back to the days just prior to smartphones, where if I wanted to download something on my Verizon phone I had to go through Verizon's proprietary web browser. If I wanted a new ringtone it was only from the proprietary one's Verizon made available in their store. If I wanted to download a game it was only the ones that Verizon offered in their own store, nothing else. Sure, Apple seems pretty chill about that sort of thing, but it wouldn't take much for that to change and I never want to go back to how things were. Apple simply allowing users to dictate what is downloaded to their devices solves everyone's problems. There would be a Fortnite on the App Store that follows all guidelines and has Apple's IAP mechanism built in, and your kid would still be adherent to the restrictions you've put in place. Then there'd be a Fortnite you could download from Epic's site and sideload onto your iPhone if you wanted, and it could have whatever payment methods they wanted in it. This is the way it already works for thousands upon thousands of apps on desktop and there's no reason it should be any different just because the size and shape of the general computing device you're using is different.
Are there any f2p games on here so I can give it a test run without splashing any cash? Edit: Oops. Missed the free trial bit. Impressive; hint of lag but not too bad. Destiny seemed playable so more chilled stuff would be perfect I’m sure. Need XCloud! Edit2: I see the dev is working on GeForceNow support. It’s in the new version but no input support yet. https://reddit.com/r/GeForceNOW/comments/j1o1x8/apparently_this_is_working_for_stadia_possible_we/
How does your kid have your CC #? I'm a father of 2. My kids have zero access to my CC besides literally stealing it out of my wallet and if they did they know that the repercussions would be far worse than the iap they would momentarily gain. I use the app store parental controls as well out of convenience but if the parental controls are the only thing stopping your kids from maxing out your CC then I think you might need to adjust your parenting tactics...
How I parent is, of course, none of your business and certainly not something I’m going to discuss in a gaming forum. That said, family accounts and parental controls exist because they are valuable to many, many families. For some it’s about convenience, for others, it’s about managing freedoms and responsibilities for folks with underdeveloped prefrontal cortices (i.e. teenagers). As someone who has developed strategy for state ad campaigns on adolescent problem gambling, I can tell you that anyone who thinks “good parenting” is proof against teenaged stupidity or obsessive behavior is really fooling themselves. Now, Boardumb, I agree with you that iPhones are computing devices. But you what else is? My TV. And my refrigerator. And my Blue-Ray player. There are different approaches to computing devices and different expectations from users. You may want your phone to behave like a Mac/PC. I think that would be horrible. As good (and easy to use) as my Mac is, it demands a tremendous amount of attention from me to keep in decent working order. Just yesterday it stopped sending sound to my AirPods for no good reason, and I’ve spent a fair amount of time doing research to figure out what’s going on (it may be a Zoom conflict). I reboot my Mac at least once a day — that’s a rare occurrence on my iPhone. They used to say that Mac’s “just work,” but, of course, we all know that that was more aspiration than reality. In fact, the closest that Apple has to achieving that goal is with their iOS devices. That’s what I want the company to focus on, not giving me more choices for app stores or what have you. Ultimately, the point is that you are right to want what you want and so am I. Clearly, there’s a big market for people who want a “nanny,” and that market has as much a right to exist as the power user one. When I say that you can find what you want in a different platform, I’m not trying being a jerk. I mean it literally: the wonderful thing about capitalism is that where there is a market, a player usually steps in. To me, killing what I (and hundreds of millions of other people) like about iPhones in order to meet your needs is not about expanding choice or freedom, but exactly the opposite. One final thing: I’ve made handheld gaming kind of a serious hobby in the last year and now own two Switches (including a Switch Lite), a beloved PSP-Go, and an RG 350M for serious retro gaming. The Switch Lite is my “nanny” device, but I love playing with side loading, multiple emulators, ISO files, and all that stuff on my Go and 350M — in fact, it’s part of the fun. I may even buy an Android gaming device that can emulate GameCube games (would love to play Beyond Good & Evil on a handheld). I think it’s great to get different experiences from different devices.
That's an incredibly specious argument and I think you know that. Those are purpose-built devices and any computing technology in them is additive to what its main purpose is. You buy a refrigerator to keep your food cold. If technology adds features onto that purpose like letting you know when you're running low on milk or giving you the ability to see inside your fridge from an exterior monitor, those are just advancements in the "appliance that keeps my food cold" market. Nobody is buying a fridge and thinking "This is great! It'll keep my food cold AND I'll use it to pay my bills online, and write book reports for school, and play games on, and keep track of my blood pressure, and use as my public transit pass, and use it to pay for things at a restaurant, and call all my friends and family on, etc!" It's the very same reason the comparisons to game consoles fall apart. Game consoles are built specifically to play games. Blu Ray players are for playing Blu Ray discs. TVs are for watching TV. Anything they do in addition to those core functions are just additive features. What is the core purpose of an iPhone? Like a computer it doesn't have one. It is a general computing device. But in the case of the iPhone, ONLY Apple can dictate what you do with it. That goes against the ethos of the entire history of computing. It even goes against Apple's own ethos from their early days. Fortnite's 1984 parody is grounded in truth, and you can't argue that the Apple of today isn't hypocritical based on their stated core beliefs for the majority of their existence. They are no longer the scrappy little company saying that computers should be for everyone, they are one of the largest companies on the planet who are now saying WE will tell YOU what computing is alright for you to do. I don't see how anyone in good faith can argue FOR that. Even the poster child of tech monopolies Microsoft agrees. Like I said before, it's not an either/or situation. Apple opening up their platform even just a little bit does not magically take away the features they've built into their devices that you rely on. Your problems with your Mac, well, those are exactly that, YOUR problems. I don't have those problems with my Mac, or my Windows PC for that matter. I just don't really know what to tell you there, and I'm also not really sure how that relates to anything we're talking about. Anyway, the government has already labeled Apple a monopoly. It's only a matter of time before their practices will have to change.
The ironic thing is that parental controls were one of the first things that Apple limited. Before the Epic battle one of the first industries to take issue with the way Apple runs their system was screen time tracking and parental control developers that made parental control apps via MDM profiles. Apple changed their policies involving allowing those types of apps just as they conveniently released an ios version that added similar functions albeit less usefully. Many of those app developers went out of business and some have joined the fight with Epic. So again Apple's primary interest is in control, not in providing useful tools to the users as these tools existed before Apple "invented" them.
Board, I don’t know what to tell ya: my argument can’t be specious because it’s not an argument. I’m not trying to convince you that iPhones are different than computers. I’m telling you that that’s how I see it. Now, you can say that I’m wrong, but you can’t tell me that that I don’t believe what I believe (I mean, you can, but then my only response is have a good day and go to hell). And I can tell you that many, many people agree with me: that’s one reason why there’s over a billion iPhones in use. People shop experiences, and the experience they’re getting from iPhones must be worth it, otherwise they would not pay a premium. To be clear: Apple is not telling me (or anyone else) anything. They are offering me a product that I can choose to buy. The moment that product stops meeting my needs or desires, I will stop buying it. You seem to be arguing that Apple has no right to offer me what I want to buy. Perhaps there is a good reason why you think that’s the case, but that has nothing to do with consumer rights. Again, there is product in the market that meets your needs as you describe them — in fact, it’s the dominant phone platform worldwide. On the 1984 ad, your take is silly. Back then, Apple wasn’t saying that the Mac was more open than the IBM PC. They were saying that consumers now have a choice. In 1983, we were at a crossroads. It was a real possibility that IBM and their clones could become the only personal computers in the market: Tandy was dead, Commodore was dying, and Apple was fast becoming irrelevant. With the Mac, you had a viable option that was different. Say what you want about Apple now, but they are still only a minority choice compared to Android. And, obviously, consumers can play Fortnite anywhere they want. Mind you: all of this is specifically about Epic’s IAP suit against Apple. I think that Microsoft (with X Play), Google (with Stadia), Spotify, and Tile all make good arguments business arguments against Apple practices. BTW: the “government” has done no such thing. The House Democrats released a report saying that what the big tech companies are doing should be considered monopolistic practices — but current law is simply not adequate to address them. Monopoly law as it stands is very consumer focused; they want to expand it to bring competitor interests into the equation. Whether that’s a wise move or not is arguable.
Well, to be clear: Adding the ability to download apps from outside the App Store does not change the device for you in any way, shape, or form. You have the choice to not do that. It is no different than the Mac. And you're wrong about Apple playing gatekeeper and telling you what you are allowed to do and not to do. Just go download Fortnite on your iPhone right now to prove it. I'm not saying the congressional report is anything other than that right now, a report with their opinions on the state of tech after their antitrust hearings. And I'm actually not onboard with a lot of those opinions, specifically them calling out Apple using security as a shield from competition. To me, that says they want to use that to strip Apple of their stringent security practices which sucks because that is one of the number one reasons I'm an Apple customer. But I think you're crazy if you don't think this will result in changes down the road. The bottom line is that you are not able to offer a single good reason why allowing downloads outside the App Store is a bad thing.
Dude, it’s complexity that I don’t need. I see an app I like, I know where to get it. As much as I like Game Club and Apple Arcade, if I didn’t pay for membership I’d find those annoying, too. There’s already plenty of competition in the one App Store — it’s not like multiple ones are going to make games any cheaper. I didn’t mean to imply that the House report won’t make a difference. It could very well lead to new legislation, which could change the way we define monopolies in the United States. That could very well be a good thing, but who knows.
It's complexity that you can totally ignore, and never even need to know it exists if you want. That is what I'm saying. The ability to download outside of the App Store could be an option for those that want it, and it doesn't have to change anything for you or how you currently use your device. And I wouldn't exactly call it competition on the current App Store. At least not healthy competition. Tons of developers have already abandoned iOS, and I can't count how many I know who don't even make enough to cover the $100 annual developer fee. Not to mention the 30% cut that Apple takes for… just giving them the privilege of having their software on iOS? Think of how many awesome games we could have if the indie developers out there who are creating unbelievably cool shit could simply offer an iOS version alongside other platform versions on their Itch.io page. It's not about making games cheaper, it's about being able to reach as many people as possible.
Since this topic rages on, I though it was relevant that Microsoft is now pursing a browser-based method for GamePass/xCloud to get around Apple like Luna will. https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-xbox-game-pass-apple-iphone-ipad-2020-10
Yeah, I saw that. Good for them. I actually have a Series S on preorder, and if they get it right, that would be a nice bonus.
