Question: if Epic released "Fortnite Lite", comprising of Fortnite`s current lobby/friends/locker/store but no "gameplay", would you define that as a "game" or "app"? If so, how is that meaningfully different to a Zoom call with custom backgrounds/avatars?
Its an comparison transparently about defending the indefensible.
Well, if youre right, Apple will pay the price when users switch to Android for the richer web app experience.
One whose success is built in no small part on the web. The web lifted all the technology boats. It made a business tool (computing) into the central focus of all our lives. And no one benefitted more from than than apple.
But thats apples argument for not allowing other web engines which is what the argument is here.
@gruber Reality is, the App Store is highly opinionated (which limits innovation), forces rent-seeking payment terms, etc. Apple says "build a web app if you don`t like it", then offers up a sub-par iOS Safari. This one-sidedness feels so unbalanced/unhealthy for a 1.5B user ecosystem.
There *are* more security issues with Android and Mac because of the fact that they allow more attack surfaces for arbitrary code to be executed.
I think if you buy a device you own it you should be able to install whatever Software you want on it. The level of control Apple exerts to milk the iSheep on devices that you`re borderline renting at this point is crazy. Stop giving Apple money and rewarding their bad behavior.
Yeah I dont think the you know it when you see it definition works well for games. What about gamification fitness apps? Learning games? Accessory apps like the Fortnite Lite idea, where there are chat or auctions or whatever that support a different game. Countless genres
If youre correct, then Apple will pay the price and consumers will go elsewhere.
I disagree. I think every Mac browser other than Safari is a pretty crap experience from an idiomatic Mac UI perspective.
Do you think Sony and Microsoft and Nintendo are going to allow streaming games over the web on PlayStation, Xbox, and Switch?
Saying theyre just a sequential sequence of video frames is technical. Better example is the choose your own adventure episode of that Netflix show, Black Mirror.
@benthompson Just read today`s Daily Update. I appreciate you articulating your macro position and I think you framing these views using Cook`s California statements was brilliant.
@gruber Apple`s ability to rollout say content blockers is an easy item to point to as a positive of iOS`s WebKit rules. In truth these innovations are few & far between, could be achieved by adding a review guideline for web renderers, and IMO don`t justify stifling web innovation over.
I need to write about 2 (disallowing third party browser engines) one of these days. Im with Apple on this, dont think its about holding web apps back vs. native.
This might be why Sweeney gave such an awkward answer to Can you define a game? on the stand. I also think Apple, of all companies, has tried its best to take a treat all apps the same stance from the get-go, for these blurred lines reasons.
I have been very clear in both posts and podcasts that I would prefer an open ecosystem Because theyre not going to do that
I absolutely hear you, and philosophically agree. I was writing (and podcasting) though from a perspective of what is possible. Unfortunately that is something distinct
Yeah, it`s a fair point I regretted how it came across on the podcast when I listened back.
@benthompson it`s clear the Metaverse blurs the lines between "games" & "apps". Ben, your "I`m not worried about Epic paying 30%" POV hamstrings Epic`s ability to innovate purely because part of its software is a "game". I don`t think this position will age well.
