Streaming apps arrives are a way to bypass the App Store.

That’s why they are banned unless the individual apps or games are submitted individually.

It’s not really surprising they don’t want other companies running storefronts on iOS.

The ‘consistency’ argument is just not valid.

> Streaming apps arrives are a way to bypass the App Store.

>

> That’s why they are banned unless the individual apps or games are submitted individually.

Spotify is a streaming app. Spotify didn't submit and Apple didn't approve every song.

Shadow is a remote game streaming app. Apple allowed them in the App Store when they removed the ability to launch directly into a game. [0] They won't allow Moonlight to do the same. [1]

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/6/21357771/apple-cloud-gamin...

[1] https://github.com/moonlight-stream/moonlight-ios/issues/417

Spotify is a streaming app, but Spotify doesn’t stream apps.

These are completely unrelated things.

isn't a website also a way to bypass the app store?

Yes. Not only is it a way, it is the way Apple recommends and supports.

They have explitly talked about their ‘two plaforms’ approach.

Approved and controlled stuff in the store. Everything else via the web.

Apple has always distinguished between interactive apps and read/view-only content.

Music/Movies are in all countries regulated by well established rules which govern what level of objectionable content is permitted i.e. you will never find porn on Netflix. Apps/Games have similar regulations in some countries but definitely not all. So Apple has opted to "fill in the blanks".

There’s as many exceptions to that rule as there are examples: Twitch, video conferencing (Zoom, Teams, etc), text chat (Slack, IRC, Telegram, WhatsApp), social media (Twitter, Facebook), web pages themselves.

I think the reason is Apple are making a stand here is simply because Xbox and Google have released subscriptions games streaming services after Apple released a subscription gaming service (albeit not streaming) whereas the other exceptions were released before Apple entered its own subscription services into those respective markets.

>There’s as many exceptions to that rule as there are examples: Twitch, video conferencing (Zoom, Teams, etc), text chat (Slack, IRC, Telegram, WhatsApp), social media (Twitter, Facebook), web pages themselves.

How are these exceptions to the rule? None of those platforms are the source of the content being provided. That's the primary reason why this distinction exists.

The point of the discussion was about gateways to other 3rd party content, which all of my examples fall in line with. But even Netflix, Spotify, Plex and Prime Video all have content produced by 3rd parties available via their apps.

Then what about shopping sites like eBay and Amazon? It’s not multimedia but it’s still an interactive process where you can access adult content.

There comes a point where a company’s position is so nuanced that you have to suspect it’s more to do with financial motivations than a moral stance.

Netflix isn't really the source of most of its content, either.

Why should me playing a game be more restricted than me watching someone else (and anything else their commentary/antics might entail) play the very same game on twitch?

Netflix has interactive movies that are like games.

Not many, and AFAIK none have in-app purchases that Apple is missing out on. If they do then it's not enough to be worth starting a fight over yet.

It is still a movie and so would be regulated under existing movie classification systems.

And since movies are over a century old every country has a similar regulatory framework.

Most countries do not have an equivalent for apps/games and so it is ultimately left to Apple to regulate.

What regulations are those? Netflix has Minecraft Story Mode now https://www.netflix.com/title/80227995 . What regulations are being applied, and how are those incompatible with video games?

Also aren't movie rating systems like the MPA self-regulated? Not required by law. There's already equivalent systems for video games with PEGI and ESRB.

The American MPA is self-regulated (probably simply to put it into legal territory, since legislating it would probably prevent freedom of expression and translates to censorship, especially if the authority is directly government-controlled) but some other systems are legislated (not just in countries you think as opressive, mind you: Britain has an independent organization that rates movies but are approved by the government).

Still a bit flawed though: I thought that there is already a ratings board in America for software?

Yeah. I don't think there's been any authority that Netflix has submitted all their films to, to be on Apple's devices. Why should Microsoft's Game Pass be any different.

You understand that there is more to the world than the US.

Every country has regulations for music/movies/TV. US and a handful of other countries have them for games and I am not aware of any for apps.

That's why I'm asking what regulations are there? I'm not claiming they don't exist. If something like Minecraft Story Mode is a movie on Netflix, what movie ratings does it have? For example, I can find it on ESRB's website rating, but it's not like it's on MPA's https://www.filmratings.com/

https://www.esrb.org/ratings/34178/Minecraft%3A+Story+Mode+-...

Meanwhile Netflix's own Bandersnatch is not ESRB rated, and isn't too different as a game. Yet Apple has supported both of these perfectly fine regardless of their lack of proper ratings.

> Most countries do not have an equivalent for apps/games and so it is ultimately left to Apple to regulate.

We literally have ESRB that's a whole lot less arbitrary than Apple's review system.

ESRB isn't for apps and is US only.

Hence my point that there isn't a global regulatory framework for apps/games like there is for music/movies.