Apple Blocks Steam's Plan To Extend Its Video Games To iPhones (reuters.com)

Citing "business conflicts," Apple has blocked Steam's plans to distribute PC-based video games to iPhones. It's "a sign that Apple is serious about protecting its ability to take a cut of digital purchases made inside games on its mobile devices," reports Reuters. From the report: Steam, the dominant online store for downloaded games played on Windows PCs, had planned to release a free mobile phone app called Steam Link so that gamers could continue playing on their mobile phones while away from their desktop machines. But Apple has rejected the app, blocking its release, according to a statement from Steam's parent company, the Bellevue, Washington-based Valve. Steam did not give a precise reason for the App Store denials, saying only that Apple cited "business conflicts with app guidelines." But the conflict likely centers on what are known as in-app purchases or micro-transactions, in which gamers can spend small sums of money inside games to buy tokens, extra lives or others so-called digital goods. Lombardi said Steam disabled purchasing its iOS app but did not elaborate on how the change was made. Many analysts believe Apple could lose revenue if they allow Steam's app, which is essentially a store-within-a-store. "Apple takes a 30 percent cut of such purchases made within apps distributed through its App Store," Reuters notes. "[T]hose purchases are among the primary drivers of revenue in Apple's services business."

Comments

Anti competitive

[jwymanm]

This is the real reason Apple is so locked down. To keep the money funnel going. You can't fault a company for doing this but it is seriously anti competitive in nature. It's the only reason I stick with Android too since you can still side load (for how much longer don't know).

Re: Anti competitive

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is which do you choose? A company that locks you in to their platform, but generally respects your privacy (at least to our knowledge), or a company that's far less locked down, but pisses all over your privacy. I'm currently on Android, but Google is seriously pissing me off and I start wondering if Apple might be better.

Re: Anti competitive

[phantomfive]

A company that locks you in to their platform, but generally respects your privacy (at least to our knowledge), or a company that's far less locked down, but pisses all over your privacy.

You can do something about the privacy problem. You can't do much about the lockdown problem.

Re:Anti competitive

[jwymanm]

It blocks customers from using another provider outside Apple's ecosystem while providing no alternative for regular PC gaming on their line of smartphone devices. It's anti fair use, anti open source/technology, anti open market, and anti competition. I said you can't fault Apple for doing so since it is more profitable this way and I've argued in the past about slippery slope (once they allow Steam everyone will want to do it). But please spare me questions on how this is anti competition. It's the equivalent of Microsoft or Google blocking other search engines on their phones because they want ad revenue.

Re: Anti competitive

[ilsaloving]

Or maybe... just maybe... us techies arn't one-issue-voters. Maybe we bought Apple because we looked at all the options and variables, compared them to our needs, and decided that an Apple device was the best choice for what we needed.

The unescapable fact is that, despite being a bunch of obnoxious, money-grubbing control-freaks who seem to have completely lost their marbles in recent years, their devices are still vastly superior to Android in many critical aspects:

-They actually support their devices, on average of about 5 years. Android? You're *lucky* if you get two. Most give you the finger as soon as they have your money.
-Overwhelmingly lower incidents of malware. While not perfect, they've done a significantly better job of keeping malware out than Google has.
-I don't have to put my sysadmin hat on just to use a freaking phone. The idea that I need to worry about resource management, for example, is offensive to me. It's a f__king *phone*.
-Overwhelmingly better privacy features than Android. Again, not perfect, but lightyears ahead of Androids, "This flashlight app requires access to your entire contact list and you can't do anything about if you didn't notice that permission during install."

For me personally: Siri. I use this a lot. I use it for making music selections, sending text messages, making phone calls, etc. The last time I used the Google equivalent, it was effectively useless, and from what people have told me recently, it hasn't gotten any better. Maybe they saved all the good stuff for their home device products? Don't know, don't care.

There are some aspects, in fact a lot, of aspects to iOS and the way Apple carries themselves that frustrate me. But when taken in aggregate, Apple is still the superior device to use than anything the Android ecosystem has to offer.

Google has made great strides in improve Android. They've improved privacy, introduced deep sleep features, and most recently, Project Treble. But I'm the kind of person who does not rely on a company's future promises, so I am waiting to see if all these new features actually live up to expectations before I even consider jumping ship.

Re:Anti competitive

[vux984]

" Steam is free to release their own SteamPhone"

And what does that have to do with anything?

That's like saying GM can block you from getting your oil changed at minute lube, and its not anti-competitive because minute-lube can produce its own cars and perform oil changes on those.

That's fucking idiotic.

And its the main reason i don't own an apple ios device. I want multiple store fronts. For example, I want stuff i buy on humblebundle to work on all my compatible devices.

I have no objection ot the apple store existing, but buying an apple phone shouldn't amount to consent to only purchasing from the apple store, because apple actively blocks other stores from existing. That's anti-competitive.

Should your teleco get a cut of all your telephone and online purchases because they built the platform you are using to make those purchases too. Never mind your shiny little phone that's peanutes here; what about all the telephone and internet infrastructure you use? Why does Apple get a 30 cents of every dollar you spend while holding your phone, but ATT, Comcast, Verizon, etc etc don't get 30 cents on every dollar you spend on Amazon, or ordering Pizza, or on Apple Store purchases etc. Your piddly little phone is useless without the network, why shouldn't they get 30% of every dollar you spend using the network?

"They spent a lot of money on the infrastructure you use, and there's no reason to let others profit from it for free." Right?

Re: Anti competitive

[reanjr]

Sideload with XCode? So you have to buy a Macbook to load open source software onto the phone? Yeah, that's not a closed ecosystem at all...

Re:Confusing

[BronsCon]

Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, using Steam Link?

Because Steam Link only works in scenarios where you could just as easily be sitting in front of your PC. When you're not in one of those scenarios, you "settle" for an iOS (or Android) game, because the PC games aren't an option. When you are in one of those scenarios, well... Think about it. Why would you settle for an iOS game when you could use your mobile to play a "real" game, sitting in front of your PC?

I see Steam Link decreasing game sales in the Apple platform.

Only because people who want it will have to leave iOS in favor of Android. If Apple allowed it on their platform, this wouldn't be an issue, for the reason stated above.

At first it doesn't seem as a competitor, but indirectly it is.

No, for the reason stated above, it really is not.

Re:Anti-Trust!

[Khashishi]

Apple doesn't have a monopoly on phones. Apple customers deserve what they get.