Apple Rejects Steam Link App For iOS Devices

[bit_user]

Though back to the news at hand. Apple has the right to accept or refuse any software in it’s own store.

Doesn't sound so bad, until you realize they don't allow any other store on their devices.

I'm arguing that Apple's complete control of their platform gives them too much power. It's anti-consumer and anti-competitive.

The threat of withholding support is not justified, on a technical level, and is so drastic that it would have the effect of very little change from the status quo. Unlike MacOS, iOS isn't designed for self-service by users. It's not designed to be used without official support.

 

[cryoburner]

Apple only makes up for somewhere around 15% of smartphone and tablet sales worldwide, even if it may be somewhat higher than that in certain regions.

Perhaps by units, but not revenue or especially profit. Moreover, because Apple caters to the high-end of the market, their users spend more on apps. This market cannot be ignored by any serious player in mobile apps.

Perhaps the average iOS user spends more in Apple's app store, but does that equate to spending more on Steam? It may apply in some cases, but I suspect most of these users wouldn't even be particularly interested in streaming games from a PC to their device. It doesn't seem like Valve is interested in being a 'serious player' in apps, so much as they are interested in adding functionality to their own platform. Plus, the usefulness of streaming games to phones or tablets within one's house seems a bit questionable. I suspect they intend this more for streaming to connected TVs, as sort of an expansion of the original Steam Link concept, and in that market, Apple's market share is even lower.

And I'm not very convinced that Valve would take Apple to court over something like this. They have their own rules for what can be distributed through the Steam storefront, and they wouldn't want to end up with fingers being pointed back toward them. And if a Steam user really wants to make use of functionality like this, it may give them another reason to go with Android when buying their next mobile device, so the situation might arguably take care of itself over time.

 

[bit_user]

Apple only makes up for somewhere around 15% of smartphone and tablet sales worldwide, even if it may be somewhat higher than that in certain regions.

Perhaps by units, but not revenue or especially profit. Moreover, because Apple caters to the high-end of the market, their users spend more on apps. This market cannot be ignored by any serious player in mobile apps.

Perhaps the average iOS user spends more in Apple's app store, but does that equate to spending more on Steam? It may apply in some cases, but I suspect most of these users wouldn't even be particularly interested in streaming games from a PC to their device. It doesn't seem like Valve is interested in being a 'serious player' in apps, so much as they are interested in adding functionality to their own platform. Plus, the usefulness of streaming games to phones or tablets within one's house seems a bit questionable. I suspect they intend this more for streaming to connected TVs, as sort of an expansion of the original Steam Link concept, and in that market, Apple's market share is even lower.

I'm struggling to follow your line of reasoning, here. Are you saying it's okay for Apple to discriminate against Valve, because neither are really such big players and Valve doesn't really have that much at stake, anyhow?

And I'm not very convinced that Valve would take Apple to court over something like this. They have their own rules for what can be distributed through the Steam storefront, and they wouldn't want to end up with fingers being pointed back toward them.

Newsflash: Valve doesn't own a platform! Not a mobile OS, not a console (not since their abortive Steam Machines effort fizzled), and not a desktop OS. If they had a major platform and distribution network, now there'd be some level of parity.

BTW, most seem to agree that Valve never really wanted a platform, but Steam Machines was a hedge against getting locked out of the other major platforms. In that case, it's clear they're worried. And their continued work on the Linux graphics stacks suggests we might yet see a more concerted Steam Machines effort from them.

 

[cryoburner]

I'm struggling to follow your line of reasoning, here. Are you saying it's okay for Apple to discriminate against Valve, because neither are really such big players and Valve doesn't really have that much at stake, anyhow?

I'm responding to the suggestion that Valve somehow needs to have their app on iOS, when it's really probably not that important to them in the grand scheme of things. Will the lack of their PC game streaming app on iOS significantly hurt them? Probably not, as this is more of a side feature for Steam, and something that is still available for most mobile devices and smart TVs.

Newsflash: Valve doesn't own a platform! Not a mobile OS, not a console (not since their abortive Steam Machines effort fizzled), and not a desktop OS. If they had a major platform and distribution network, now there'd be some level of parity.

I'm referring to the Steam software distribution platform, rather than an OS or hardware platform. Imagine a company wanting Steam to distribute their own storefront for buying PC games, for example. Steam isn't going to distribute software that is directly competing with their own storefront, through their storefront. Steam Mobile allows users to purchase games through Apple's devices, however, that's a bit different, in that the games are not designed to run on the same device, and the functionality is only streamlining something that can already be done through a browser, so by itself, it's not really competing with the App Store. This new functionality effectively allows these games to be played on the same device though, which takes things to another level. Rather than someone buying a game from the app store to play on their device at home, they might purchase something from the Steam store instead, and in some cases, games are even available for both.

About the only difference here between the App Store and Steam is that Apple controls the OS as well. So, where you might be able to go elsewhere to download and install something like EA's Origin or Battle.net or GOG Galaxy on a PC, you can't really do that on iOS. However, it can't really be argued that Apple holds some monopoly over smartphones, because again, they only make up a relatively small portion of mobile devices sold. The majority of such devices run Android, an OS that does allow users to install applications from elsewhere, at least after toggling a switch in the settings. If people don't want to be limited by such strict controls over what they can do with their devices, then there are plenty of less-restrictive products for them to choose from.

And while I'm not much of a fan of restrictive hardware platforms that limit what can be installed on them, where does one draw the line about what restrictions a company can place on what's allowed on their devices? Should Playstation be required to let Microsoft sell games on their consoles with its own storefront? If someone really didn't want such limitations on a console, then they might be better off gaming on a PC instead. Likewise, the same could be said for Apple devices, even if Android isn't quite as open as PCs are.

 

[bit_user]

I'm struggling to follow your line of reasoning, here. Are you saying it's okay for Apple to discriminate against Valve, because neither are really such big players and Valve doesn't really have that much at stake, anyhow?

I'm responding to the suggestion that Valve somehow needs to have their app on iOS, when it's really probably not that important to them in the grand scheme of things.

Okay, so you're saying it's cool if Apple just arbitrarily bans any app it deems isn't really needed?

Newsflash: Valve doesn't own a platform! Not a mobile OS, not a console (not since their abortive Steam Machines effort fizzled), and not a desktop OS. If they had a major platform and distribution network, now there'd be some level of parity.

I'm referring to the Steam software distribution platform, rather than an OS or hardware platform. Imagine a company wanting Steam to distribute their own storefront for buying PC games, for example. Steam isn't going to distribute software that is directly competing with their own storefront, through their storefront.

That's not equivalent. The only way to get an app on people's iDevices is through Apple's store. If Steam had such a monopoly on people's devices, then you would have a point. But your case falls apart when people could just distribute their Steam-competitor the same way that Steam distributes its app.

About the only difference here between the App Store and Steam is that Apple controls the OS as well. So, where you might be able to go elsewhere to download and install something like EA's Origin or Battle.net or GOG Galaxy on a PC, you can't really do that on iOS.

That's not a small point. For the Nth time, my issue is with Apple exerting monopoly control over its devices. As long as Valve doesn't have any devices, then it can't be held to the same standard.

However, it can't really be argued that Apple holds some monopoly over smartphones, because again, they only make up a relatively small portion of mobile devices sold.

It doesn't need to dominate the entire smartphone market for their exercise of control to be unacceptable. Many people don't buy an iPhone with the knowledge that they're buying into a captive ecosystem. Even knowing this still doesn't make it okay, IMO.

Should Playstation be required to let Microsoft sell games on their consoles with its own storefront?

Yes, I think it could lead that far. Back when MS got slapped for bundling IE with Windows, part of the legal resolution was that they had to make it easier for people to find and install competing browsers. In the EU, I think there was a similar resolution for media players. So, courts can & have gone this far in pushing for users' rights and platform openness.