daring-rss

Apple Sports exemplifies why it’s a better idea to design smaller, more focused apps.

Apple Newsroom:

“We created Apple Sports to give sports fans what they want — an
app that delivers incredibly fast access to scores and stats,”
said Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of Services. “Apple
Sports is available for free in the App Store, and makes it easy
for users to stay up to date with their favorite teams and
leagues.”

Observations:

Apple Sports is indeed incredibly fast to load and update. Nearly instantaneous. You might think, “So what, it’s just loading scores and stats, of course it’s fast”, but the truth is ad tech, combined with poor programming, has made most sports apps slow to load. Most apps, period, really. Just being very fast to load ought not be a hugely differentiating factor in 2024, but it is. (ESPN’s app, for example, is incredibly slow to show anything useful after launching.)

Apple isn’t listing several major sports leagues — including MLB, WNBA, and the king of all leagues, the NFL — but that’s simply because they’re not in season. They’re only listing leagues currently playing. MLB, WNBA, and NFL will be included once they start playing.

Apple is including betting odds in game listings by default, with data from DraftKings. If you don’t want to see gambling odds, you need to turn them off in Settings → Sports. I like DraftKings, and have an account there, but I generally find that their odds are outliers and fluctuate more from the consensus odds. FanDuel and BetMGM are both more in line with the consensus, at least for the NFL. (I have no idea if either FanDuel or BetMGM offer odds as an API service for an app like Sports, though.) Anyway, I’m just glad the odds are there.

Live activities for your lock screen are available, but Sports doesn’t — yet — offer any Home Screen widgets.

Just like Apple’s new Journal app, Sports is iPhone-only. There’s no compatible version for Mac, Vision, TV, or Watch. The difference from Journal is that Journal is built-into iOS 17 (17.2 and later), but Sports is a download from the App Store — not built into the OS (yet?) — and can be installed on an iPad. But on iPad, it just runs in an iPhone layout. Does Apple think this Sports app is only relevant on iPhone (and perhaps, eventually, Apple Watch), or is this just the platform they targeted first and it’ll be available as a proper iPad and Vision app eventually? (I’m thinking it might never be a Mac app. Once Sports offers Home Screen widgets, you’ll be able to get those widgets on your Mac desktop via the feature that lets you put iPhone app widgets on your Mac.)

I generally have a good sense of why Apple does things the way it does, but it’s not clear to me at all why Journal, say, is now built into iOS 17 but Sports is only available from the App Store. I sort of think Sports will be included by default in iOS 18, but maybe I’m missing something here.

Sports syncs your favorite teams (and leagues?) between the Apple TV and Apple News apps, so if you’ve already set favorite teams in either of those apps, Sports already knows them. Sports also integrates with the TV for “watch now” — not just for sports that Apple itself broadcasts (like MLS soccer and Friday Night Baseball), but for any live sporting events available through any available streaming apps. That’s a killer feature. (ESPN, unsurprisingly, only has “where to watch” links for games broadcast on ESPN or ABC.)

The app this most sherlocks for me is Sports Alerts. I’ve been a big fan of Sports Alerts for years, and they’ve been great about adopting new features like Lock Screen Live Activities very quickly. But Apple Sports looks far better and offers far more clarity; Sports Alerts looks like what it is: a cross-platform app with an Android look-alike companion. Yahoo Sports has been sitting in my App Library, mostly unused, for years — I’ll probably delete it now.

The design language of Apple Sports is new. I wouldn’t say Sports looks much like Journal, but they’re similar insofar as they both are using a new, very simple, very focused UI design language. Sports is closest aesthetically, perhaps, to Apple Weather. But Sports shares with Journal a sort of fundamental “Here’s a scrollable feed of events, and there’s a menu at the top right of the list” gestalt. Sports’s simple layout and design is such that you don’t need to drill down or hunt for what you want. You get three main utterly self-explanatory tabs at the top — Yesterday, Today, Upcoming — and within each tab is a list of sporting events. Tap any event to open a card for that event with all the details, and from that card view, you can either swipe side-to-side to switch between different different events, or swipe down to dismiss the card and go back to the main list. It’s so simple and intuitive that it doesn’t seem designed at all, but that’s the sort of design that takes the most work and most iteration.

One question I’ve already seen asked is why make this a standalone app? Why not build it into the TV app or News app? The answer is speed, focus, and simplicity. There’s a natural tendency in our industry — especially from big companies — to keep adding more and more features to existing apps and services. A big part of what made the iPhone so revolutionary was that the iPhone reset the thinking on that. The iPhone way of thinking is to have more apps that are smaller and more focused, not fewer apps that are bigger and more monolithic. Apple Sports exemplifies why it’s a better idea to design smaller, more focused apps.

It’s very rare for a new iPhone app, immediately upon debut, to land a spot on my first iPhone Home Screen. But Journal did, and so now has Sports.

Read More 

Malcom Owen, writing for AppleInsider:

Owners of the Apple Vision Pro may get a lot more
basketball content to watch using the headset, with the NBA Slam
Dunk Contest offering a close look at a camera used to capture the
immersive video. […]

In a clip of the first-round highlights from the 2024 NBA
Slam Dunk Contest tipped by @lujahehe on X, an unusual
camera is displayed next to the judges. The camera isn’t
mentioned or used at all during the broadcast nor particularly
highlighted by the camera, but it happens to appear fairly
prominently in the frame.

It seems very likely that is a stereoscopic camera, but I wouldn’t assume that’s it’s specifically Apple’s. Could just as well be the NBA’s. But if I had to bet, I’d bet it was Apple’s, or is part of an exclusive deal between Apple and the NBA.

And surely, they had cameras in other locations too. Watching the dunk contest from right behind the backboard must be astonishing.

 ★ 

Malcom Owen, writing for AppleInsider:

Owners of the Apple Vision Pro may get a lot more
basketball content to watch using the headset, with the NBA Slam
Dunk Contest offering a close look at a camera used to capture the
immersive video. […]

In a clip of the first-round highlights from the 2024 NBA
Slam Dunk Contest tipped by @lujahehe on X, an unusual
camera is displayed next to the judges. The camera isn’t
mentioned or used at all during the broadcast nor particularly
highlighted by the camera, but it happens to appear fairly
prominently in the frame.

It seems very likely that is a stereoscopic camera, but I wouldn’t assume that’s it’s specifically Apple’s. Could just as well be the NBA’s. But if I had to bet, I’d bet it was Apple’s, or is part of an exclusive deal between Apple and the NBA.

And surely, they had cameras in other locations too. Watching the dunk contest from right behind the backboard must be astonishing.

Read More 

Epic Games, in their 2023 year in review:

We’ve received our Apple Developer Account and will start
developing the Epic Games Store on iOS soon thanks to the new
Digital Markets Act. We plan to launch in 2024. Epic Games Sweden
AB will operate the mobile Epic Games Store and Fortnite in
Europe, with the Store team leading development.

Epic Games Sweden has 3 studios and 60+ employees.

Tim Sweeney, on Twitter/X:

I’ll be the first to acknowledge a good faith move by Apple amidst
our cataclysmic antitrust battle, in granting Epic Games Sweden AB
a developer account for operating Epic Games Store and Fortnite in
Europe under the Digital Markets Act.

This is the first serious announcement of an iOS EU app marketplace I’ve seen, and a seeming refutation of the notion that “no one” would accept Apple’s proposed terms.

Make the iOS Epic Games Store a hit. Make Epic lots of money. Make Apple a reasonable €0.50 per game installed. Bring Fortnite back to iOS. If Fortnite only comes back to iOS for EU users, then that’s a clear win for the DMA.

Apple plays hardball, for sure. And Apple has a long institutional memory and knows how to hold a grudge. But Apple is not a spiteful company. Apple likes its corporate nose right where it is — on its face. They play hardball strategically — to their own advantage first, to their users’ advantage second. That’s something Apple’s most vehement critics just don’t get. Setting up Epic to be a winner under their DMA compliance also sets Apple up to be a winner.

Who better to get on their side than Epic? This isn’t exactly what we wanted but it’s better than before, and so thanks to the DMA and the European Commission, Fortnite is back on iPhone and iPhone users in the EU have a great new game store that isn’t available anywhere else in the world. That would make the EC beam with pride. The fact that Epic (and Sweeney personally) still aren’t entirely happily would just make the EC more certain they did a good job. If no one’s quite happy, it must be fair, goes the thinking of all lazy referees.

It would be quite the public relations coup for Apple to get Epic and Tim Sweeney on their side. And game stores in particular seem like a perfect fit for Apple’s marketplaces, because games primarily monetize by getting players to pay, not just be tracked to be shown ads. Strange times make for strange bedfellows.

 ★ 

Epic Games, in their 2023 year in review:

We’ve received our Apple Developer Account and will start
developing the Epic Games Store on iOS soon thanks to the new
Digital Markets Act. We plan to launch in 2024. Epic Games Sweden
AB will operate the mobile Epic Games Store and Fortnite in
Europe, with the Store team leading development.

Epic Games Sweden has 3 studios and 60+ employees.

Tim Sweeney, on Twitter/X:

I’ll be the first to acknowledge a good faith move by Apple amidst
our cataclysmic antitrust battle, in granting Epic Games Sweden AB
a developer account for operating Epic Games Store and Fortnite in
Europe under the Digital Markets Act.

This is the first serious announcement of an iOS EU app marketplace I’ve seen, and a seeming refutation of the notion that “no one” would accept Apple’s proposed terms.

Make the iOS Epic Games Store a hit. Make Epic lots of money. Make Apple a reasonable €0.50 per game installed. Bring Fortnite back to iOS. If Fortnite only comes back to iOS for EU users, then that’s a clear win for the DMA.

Apple plays hardball, for sure. And Apple has a long institutional memory and knows how to hold a grudge. But Apple is not a spiteful company. Apple likes its corporate nose right where it is — on its face. They play hardball strategically — to their own advantage first, to their users’ advantage second. That’s something Apple’s most vehement critics just don’t get. Setting up Epic to be a winner under their DMA compliance also sets Apple up to be a winner.

Who better to get on their side than Epic? This isn’t exactly what we wanted but it’s better than before, and so thanks to the DMA and the European Commission, Fortnite is back on iPhone and iPhone users in the EU have a great new game store that isn’t available anywhere else in the world. That would make the EC beam with pride. The fact that Epic (and Sweeney personally) still aren’t entirely happily would just make the EC more certain they did a good job. If no one’s quite happy, it must be fair, goes the thinking of all lazy referees.

It would be quite the public relations coup for Apple to get Epic and Tim Sweeney on their side. And game stores in particular seem like a perfect fit for Apple’s marketplaces, because games primarily monetize by getting players to pay, not just be tracked to be shown ads. Strange times make for strange bedfellows.

Read More 

When the CCP says device makers must jump to sell their products in China, Apple asks “How high?”

The European Commission, earlier this week:

Yesterday, the Commission has adopted decisions closing four
market investigations that were launched on 5 September 2023 under
the Digital Markets Act (DMA), finding that Apple and Microsoft
should not be designated as gatekeepers for the following core
platform services: Apple’s messaging service iMessage, Microsoft’s
online search engine Bing, web browser Edge and online advertising
service Microsoft Advertising.

The decisions conclude the Commission’s investigations opened
following the notification by Apple and Microsoft in July 2023 of
the core platform services that met the quantitative thresholds.
Among these notified services were also the four services
concerned by today’s decisions. Together with the notifications,
Apple and Microsoft also submitted so-called ‘rebuttal’ arguments,
explaining why despite meeting the quantitative thresholds, these
four core platform services should not, in their view, qualify as
gateways.

We’ve had pretty obvious hints since early September that iMessage and Bing would be considered exempt from “gatekeeper” status, and thus exempt from the DMA. Now that’s official.

But in November, when Apple changed course and announced that it would support the RCS messaging standard, many Apple critics/EC cheerleaders simply presumed that Apple’s change of mind on RCS was somehow the result of the EU’s regulatory muscle. This made zero sense, other than revealing an irrational, dare I say fanatical, belief in the righteousness of overzealous government regulation versus natural market forces. For one thing, it made no sense timing-wise: word leaked from the EU in September that iMessage was not going to be considered a gatekeeper — a decision made official this week — but somehow Apple announced “coming next year” support for RCS in November?

Second, the DMA makes no mention of “RCS” anywhere. It’s just not mentioned. There are provisions in the DMA regarding messaging platform “interoperability”, but that’s about some sort of fantasy world where disparate platforms like iMessage, WhatsApp, Instagram DMs, and Facebook Messenger could be forced to allow the interchange of messages between platforms while maintaining end-to-end encryption, and open themselves to interop with upstarts like Signal. RCS isn’t an interop protocol between messaging platforms. RCS is a messaging platform itself — one that offers no encryption in its standard, and which is controlled by cell phone carriers. RCS is just a slightly better replacement for SMS.

The surprisingly-commonly-held assumption that the EC forced Apple’s change of mind on RCS is just lazy thinking: Apple said, for years, they didn’t want to support RCS (true); the DMA is imposing new regulations on Apple that will force it to do some things Apple doesn’t want to do (true); therefore it was the DMA that forced Apple to change its mind on RCS (fallacious conclusion). It also belies an ignorance of what iMessage is. iMessage is not SMS with blue bubbles and higher-resolution attachments. iMessage is a wholly independent messaging platform that is offered as a free-of-charge service for Apple device owners, with full-featured clients for Mac, iPad, and Vision. You can — and most people do — use your phone number as your primary unique identifier for iMessage, but you can also use any email address attached to your iCloud account. Other platforms that have nothing to do with carrier-based SMS or RCS messaging use phone numbers for identifiers too — e.g. Signal and WhatsApp — but iMessage stands alone among popular services for allowing you to use it without even having a phone or phone number.

RCS is like SMS in that you must have a phone, must have an active SIM card with a cellular carrier, and can only use that phone to use RCS. You might say, “Hey, wait a minute, I send and receive SMS messages in the Messages app on my iPad and Mac — not just my iPhone.” But that’s just clever programming on Apple’s part. Every single green SMS message you send or receive on your iPad, Mac, or Vision Pro is being sent and received through your iPhone. Messages simply handles the “it just works” magic between your multiple devices to make it seem like other devices can act as true SMS client devices. Power your iPhone off and try to send or receive an SMS message from another Apple device. It doesn’t work, because it can’t work, because SMS is a phone carrier protocol. RCS is exactly the same in that regard. You need a phone to use RCS. You don’t need a phone to use iMessage.

So even if iMessage had been deemed a “gatekeeper” messaging platform by the European Commission — which it was not — adding RCS support to the iPhone Messages app would not have mattered a whit when it came to DMA compliance. The Messages app is a client for multiple messaging platforms — SMS and iMessage. It’s the iMessage platform that the DMA might have applied to. And adding support for RCS to the Messages app on iPhones wouldn’t have made any difference at all regarding interoperability with non-cellular “gatekeeping” messaging platforms like WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger.

But then why did Apple do a 180° turn on RCS? I can’t say for certain, alas, but after spending the last few months periodically poking around the trees inhabited by little birdies, I do have good news for fans of coercive government regulation. Apple’s hand was effectively forced. But by China, not the EU.

Chinese carriers have been proponents of RCS for years, and last year, the Chinese government began the process of codifying into law that to achieve certification, new 5G devices will be required to support RCS. (Here’s a good English translation on Reddit of the parts relevant to Apple.) Shockingly, the Chinese government seemingly isn’t concerned that the RCS standard has no provisions for encryption. The little birdies I’ve spoken to all said the same thing: iOS support for RCS is all about China.

Apple would prefer simply to continue ignoring RCS, on the grounds that they want to support neither any new non-E2EE protocols, nor any new carrier-controlled protocols (whether encrypted or not). But when the CCP says device makers must jump to sell their products in China, Apple asks “How high?”

China, unlike the EU, seemingly knows how to draft effective regulations to achieve specific goals.

Read More 

Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess, reporting for The New York Times:

The decision by Justice Arthur F. Engoron caps a chaotic,
yearslong case in which New York’s attorney general put Mr.
Trump’s fantastical claims of wealth on trial. With no jury, the
power was in Justice Engoron’s hands alone, and he came down hard:
The judge delivered a sweeping array of punishments that threatens
the former president’s business empire as he simultaneously
contends with four criminal prosecutions and seeks to regain the
White House.

Not only did Justice Engoron impose a three-year ban preventing
Mr. Trump from serving in top roles at any New York company,
including his own, but the judge also applied that punishment to
the former president’s adult sons for two years and ordered that
they pay more than $4 million each. One of the sons, Eric Trump,
is the Trump Organization’s de facto chief executive, and the
ruling throws into doubt whether any member of the family can run
the business in the near term.

In his unconventional style, Justice Engoron criticized Mr. Trump
and the other defendants for refusing to admit errors for years.
“Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on
pathological,” he said.

Trump’s social media feed today is chock full of dozens of (totally sane, rational, well-reasoned) comments on this court decision, without a single word regarding Russian political prisoner and Putin critic/rival Alexei Navalny’s death in a Siberian prison. But he did make time to mention that he’ll be at Sneakercon here in Philly tomorrow.

 ★ 

Jonah E. Bromwich and Ben Protess, reporting for The New York Times:

The decision by Justice Arthur F. Engoron caps a chaotic,
yearslong case in which New York’s attorney general put Mr.
Trump’s fantastical claims of wealth on trial. With no jury, the
power was in Justice Engoron’s hands alone, and he came down hard:
The judge delivered a sweeping array of punishments that threatens
the former president’s business empire as he simultaneously
contends with four criminal prosecutions and seeks to regain the
White House.

Not only did Justice Engoron impose a three-year ban preventing
Mr. Trump from serving in top roles at any New York company,
including his own, but the judge also applied that punishment to
the former president’s adult sons for two years and ordered that
they pay more than $4 million each. One of the sons, Eric Trump,
is the Trump Organization’s de facto chief executive, and the
ruling throws into doubt whether any member of the family can run
the business in the near term.

In his unconventional style, Justice Engoron criticized Mr. Trump
and the other defendants for refusing to admit errors for years.
“Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on
pathological,” he said.

Trump’s social media feed today is chock full of dozens of (totally sane, rational, well-reasoned) comments on this court decision, without a single word regarding Russian political prisoner and Putin critic/rival Alexei Navalny’s death in a Siberian prison. But he did make time to mention that he’ll be at Sneakercon here in Philly tomorrow.

Read More 

Robyn Dixon, David M. Herszenhorn, and Catherine Belton, reporting for The Washington Post:

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, the defiant
anti-corruption crusader and democracy champion who was President
Vladimir Putin’s despised nemesis, died suddenly in an Arctic
Russian prison colony on Friday, penitentiary officials said,
removing the most prominent figure inside Russia willing to
challenge the Kremlin’s rule.

Referring to Navalny as Putin’s “nemesis” — which description the Post also uses in its headline — whitewashes just how despicable his attempted assassination, yearslong imprisonment, and now (presumed) actual assassination were. It’s a dysphemism — the opposite of a euphemism. Navalny was a political rival and staunch proponent of democracy. Putin was Navalny’s nemesis, but not the other way around.

His death — foretold as almost inevitable, including by
Navalny himself — sent shock waves across Russia and was
quickly condemned by global leaders, some of whom joined
Russian opposition figures in calling it a state-sponsored
murder. Navalny, 47, had appeared a court hearing by video link
the day before, seemingly in good health and with his trademark
humor intact.

Navalny’s family and his team, who continued to run his political
operation in exile, had warned that his life was in danger since
his arrest in January 2021, when he returned to Russia after
recovering in Germany from being poisoned with a banned
nerve agent. An investigation led by Navalny and Bellingcat, an
investigative journalism organization, had identified a team of
Russian federal security agents as responsible for the
assassination attempt, and his supporters noted that in prison he
was in the clutches of the very government that had already tried
to kill him several times.

Until 2017, Navalny’s death would have been met with bipartisan, near-universal condemnation here in the United States. No more. But it shouldn’t be surprising that a political party that has turned against fair democratic elections — a party whose undisputed leader has, just weeks ago, argued in court that the president of the United States could not be prosecuted in court for ordering the assassination of his political rivals — sees Vladimir Putin’s Russia as a model to follow, not an enemy to defeat.

Nearly 250 years after the founding of our nation, genuine democracy remains a radical — and alas, fragile — idea.

 ★ 

Robyn Dixon, David M. Herszenhorn, and Catherine Belton, reporting for The Washington Post:

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, the defiant
anti-corruption crusader and democracy champion who was President
Vladimir Putin’s despised nemesis, died suddenly in an Arctic
Russian prison colony on Friday, penitentiary officials said,
removing the most prominent figure inside Russia willing to
challenge the Kremlin’s rule.

Referring to Navalny as Putin’s “nemesis” — which description the Post also uses in its headline — whitewashes just how despicable his attempted assassination, yearslong imprisonment, and now (presumed) actual assassination were. It’s a dysphemism — the opposite of a euphemism. Navalny was a political rival and staunch proponent of democracy. Putin was Navalny’s nemesis, but not the other way around.

His death — foretold as almost inevitable, including by
Navalny himself — sent shock waves across Russia and was
quickly condemned by global leaders, some of whom joined
Russian opposition figures in calling it a state-sponsored
murder. Navalny, 47, had appeared a court hearing by video link
the day before, seemingly in good health and with his trademark
humor intact.

Navalny’s family and his team, who continued to run his political
operation in exile, had warned that his life was in danger since
his arrest in January 2021, when he returned to Russia after
recovering in Germany from being poisoned with a banned
nerve agent. An investigation led by Navalny and Bellingcat, an
investigative journalism organization, had identified a team of
Russian federal security agents as responsible for the
assassination attempt, and his supporters noted that in prison he
was in the clutches of the very government that had already tried
to kill him several times.

Until 2017, Navalny’s death would have been met with bipartisan, near-universal condemnation here in the United States. No more. But it shouldn’t be surprising that a political party that has turned against fair democratic elections — a party whose undisputed leader has, just weeks ago, argued in court that the president of the United States could not be prosecuted in court for ordering the assassination of his political rivals — sees Vladimir Putin’s Russia as a model to follow, not an enemy to defeat.

Nearly 250 years after the founding of our nation, genuine democracy remains a radical — and alas, fragile — idea.

Read More 

So I found an answer to my intrigue regarding Mark Zuckerberg’s off-handed quip about “neural interfaces”, but I’m still at a loss to understand his positioning of Quest as the “open” alternative to Apple’s “closed” Vision. One friend sent me a pointer to Meta’s “App Lab”, which they announced in February 2021:

Whether the goal is to build a business, create a community, test
and experiment with new apps, or get feedback on new ideas, you
control how your app is distributed. App Lab supports both free
and paid apps, which are shareable via a URL or Oculus Keys. While
App Lab is distinct from the Oculus Store and App Lab apps won’t
appear in the Oculus Store, customers who install apps from App
Lab will find them in their Quest library. App Lab apps can also
be searched by exact name and found in the “App Lab” section of
results. App Lab apps can access the majority of standard platform
features, including automatic update distribution, platform
integration and SDKs, app analytics, release channels, and more.

We’ve taken steps to reduce the technical requirements and Virtual
Reality Checks (VRCs) to make submission as simple as possible. In
order to promote a safe, secure and positive experience, App Lab
apps are required to comply with our App Lab Policies,
including our Oculus Content Guidelines, Data Use
Policy, and App Policies.

Follow that link to “App Policies” and you’ll see that this doesn’t sound very different from Apple’s iOS-derived platforms:

Apps hosted on the platform may not contain, use, or make
available commerce solutions — including for app payment
processing, in-app purchases, or in-app advertising — except as
provided in the platform SDK, or otherwise expressly agreed by you
and Meta Platforms Technologies in writing. For example, if your
app has in-app purchases, and your app is distributed through any
Meta Platforms Technologies distribution channel, including the
Meta Quest Store, you must use the Platform In-App Purchases to
handle such payment processing.

There’s also a third-party thing called SideQuest that ostensibly lets you “sideload” apps on a Quest, but it requires both desktop software on a Mac or PC and a Meta developer account. I can definitely see how Quest is at least slightly more open than Vision, but on the grand scale of open-vs.-closed platforms, it seems pretty closed. What am I missing?

 ★ 

So I found an answer to my intrigue regarding Mark Zuckerberg’s off-handed quip about “neural interfaces”, but I’m still at a loss to understand his positioning of Quest as the “open” alternative to Apple’s “closed” Vision. One friend sent me a pointer to Meta’s “App Lab”, which they announced in February 2021:

Whether the goal is to build a business, create a community, test
and experiment with new apps, or get feedback on new ideas, you
control how your app is distributed. App Lab supports both free
and paid apps, which are shareable via a URL or Oculus Keys. While
App Lab is distinct from the Oculus Store and App Lab apps won’t
appear in the Oculus Store, customers who install apps from App
Lab will find them in their Quest library. App Lab apps can also
be searched by exact name and found in the “App Lab” section of
results. App Lab apps can access the majority of standard platform
features, including automatic update distribution, platform
integration and SDKs, app analytics, release channels, and more.

We’ve taken steps to reduce the technical requirements and Virtual
Reality Checks (VRCs) to make submission as simple as possible. In
order to promote a safe, secure and positive experience, App Lab
apps are required to comply with our App Lab Policies,
including our Oculus Content Guidelines, Data Use
Policy, and App Policies.

Follow that link to “App Policies” and you’ll see that this doesn’t sound very different from Apple’s iOS-derived platforms:

Apps hosted on the platform may not contain, use, or make
available commerce solutions — including for app payment
processing, in-app purchases, or in-app advertising — except as
provided in the platform SDK, or otherwise expressly agreed by you
and Meta Platforms Technologies in writing. For example, if your
app has in-app purchases, and your app is distributed through any
Meta Platforms Technologies distribution channel, including the
Meta Quest Store, you must use the Platform In-App Purchases to
handle such payment processing.

There’s also a third-party thing called SideQuest that ostensibly lets you “sideload” apps on a Quest, but it requires both desktop software on a Mac or PC and a Meta developer account. I can definitely see how Quest is at least slightly more open than Vision, but on the grand scale of open-vs.-closed platforms, it seems pretty closed. What am I missing?

Read More 

Nick Statt, reporting for The Verge in September 2019:

Facebook today announced that it will acquire neural interface
startup CTRL-Labs, a company that makes a wristband
capable of transmitting electrical signals from the brain into
computer input.

The deal, which Bloomberg reports is worth somewhere
between $500 million and $1 billion, is the most substantial
acquisition Facebook has made in the last half decade, since it
paid $2 billion to acquire virtual reality company Oculus VR in
2014.

I don’t remember noting this acquisition at the time, but a friend reminded me of it the other day after my sort-of “Whoa, what?!” reaction to Mark Zuckerberg just casually suggesting that hand-tracking might be merely a stopgap interface for XR headsets until we have “neural interfaces”.

From that same Verge report:

Bosworth says CTRL-Labs, which was co-founded by Internet Explorer
creator and neuroscientist Thomas Reardon, “will be joining our
Facebook Reality Labs team where we hope to build this kind of
technology, at scale, and get it into consumer products faster.”

Patrick Kaifosh is CTRL-Labs’ other co-founder, and he is also a
neuroscientist. Reardon, the company’s CEO, left his career in
software engineering to study neuroscience and received his PhD
in 2016.

That’s quite the second career for Reardon.

 ★ 

Nick Statt, reporting for The Verge in September 2019:

Facebook today announced that it will acquire neural interface
startup CTRL-Labs, a company that makes a wristband
capable of transmitting electrical signals from the brain into
computer input.

The deal, which Bloomberg reports is worth somewhere
between $500 million and $1 billion, is the most substantial
acquisition Facebook has made in the last half decade, since it
paid $2 billion to acquire virtual reality company Oculus VR in
2014.

I don’t remember noting this acquisition at the time, but a friend reminded me of it the other day after my sort-of “Whoa, what?!” reaction to Mark Zuckerberg just casually suggesting that hand-tracking might be merely a stopgap interface for XR headsets until we have “neural interfaces”.

From that same Verge report:

Bosworth says CTRL-Labs, which was co-founded by Internet Explorer
creator and neuroscientist Thomas Reardon, “will be joining our
Facebook Reality Labs team where we hope to build this kind of
technology, at scale, and get it into consumer products faster.”

Patrick Kaifosh is CTRL-Labs’ other co-founder, and he is also a
neuroscientist. Reardon, the company’s CEO, left his career in
software engineering to study neuroscience and received his PhD
in 2016.

That’s quite the second career for Reardon.

Read More 

It’s ridiculous for the CEO of Xbox to argue that iOS should have similar rules and policies to Windows, when Xbox — another platform from the same company — has rules that are, if anything, *more* restrictive and exclusive than iOS.

The Verge’s Tom Warren landed an interview with Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s Xbox CEO, regarding their (sort of) announcement that four previously-exclusive Xbox games are going cross-platform to PlayStation and Switch:

Launching a few Xbox exclusives on rival consoles feels like the
natural next step in Microsoft’s grand plan, but it’s also a risky
one: it could undermine the Xbox hardware sales that support
Microsoft’s Xbox Game Pass subscription effort and its Xbox
ecosystem, forcing Microsoft to go fully multiplatform and become
a software-only games company like Sega.

Spencer is all too aware of the risks, but he sees an opportunity
to make more money on rival consoles to support Microsoft’s game
creation, and ultimately bring games to more players.

One weird aspect of this announcement — hence my “sort of” parenthetical above — is that Microsoft hasn’t actually named any of the four formerly exclusive titles they’re porting to PS5 and Switch.

The whole interview is interesting, and it sure sounds like Microsoft is working on a Steamdeck-like handheld. The strategy sounds a little bit like Warner Bros Discovery putting some of their library content on Netflix. Netflix is to PlayStation what Max is Xbox? Second-fiddle bends to the market leader. You don’t see rumors of Sony putting PlayStation exclusives on Xbox, and you don’t see Netflix putting any of their original content — no matter how old — on Max.

Toward the end of the interview Warren asks Spencer about Apple and the DMA:

Warren: Some of that regulatory work isn’t done like you
mentioned, so what do you think about Apple’s changes for the DMA?
And is there room for Xbox Cloud Gaming now on iOS?

Spencer: There’s not room for us to monetize Xbox Cloud Gaming on
iOS. I think the proposal that Apple put forward — and I thought
Sarah Bond’s comments on this were right on — doesn’t go far
enough to open up. In fact, you might even say they go the
opposite direction in some way, but they definitely don’t go far
enough to open up competition on the world’s largest gaming
platform.

We will continue to work with regulators, and Apple and Google,
to create a space for alternative storefronts. I’m a big fan of
how Windows works, and you’ve got a Microsoft Store on Windows,
you’ve got Steam, you’ve got the Epic Games Store, you’ve got
GOG. You have alternatives, and I think alternative ways for
people to buy things creates goodness for consumers and creators.
I think the largest platform for gamers, which is mobile, should
have the same.

Sarah Bond is Xbox’s president, and I believe her only comment on Apple’s DMA compliance plans was this tweet:

We believe constructive conversations drive change and progress
towards open platforms and greater competition. Apple’s new policy
is a step in the wrong direction. We hope they listen to feedback
on their proposed plan and work towards a more inclusive future
for all.

More than any of the words in her own tweet, what conveyed Microsoft’s actual stance towards Apple’s proposals is the fact that her tweet was a retweet of Spotify CEO Daniel Elk’s diatribe lambasting the whole proposal.

But I don’t understand how Warren let this answer slide. If Spencer thinks Apple’s proposed DMA compliance is a “step in the wrong direction”, and he’s “a big fan of how Windows works”, then why doesn’t Xbox work like Windows works? There’s no Steam or Epic Games Store or GOG on iOS. But there’s no Steam or Epic Games Store or GOG on Xbox. So how in the world does Spencer think Apple should be forced by government regulators to open their platform to these alternative stores when he could snap his fingers and open his company’s own platform, Xbox, to these same stores?

He says “I think the largest platform for gamers, which is mobile, should have the same” rules as Windows, so I think he’s trying to make an argument that different rules should apply to iOS than Xbox because iOS is more popular. But iOS became this popular with all of these rules. It’s not like iOS used to be open, became popular under more open rules for software distribution and digital content purchases, and then Apple closed it down. iOS is more closed than open, but it’s only become more open over time.

If the CEO of Xbox were able to say, “iOS should have the same rules and policies for alternative stores and payments as Xbox”, that would be a credible argument. But it’s ridiculous for the CEO of Xbox to argue that iOS should have similar rules and policies to Windows, when Xbox — another platform from the same company — has rules that are, if anything, more restrictive and exclusive than iOS. It would be ludicrous for Tim Cook or Eddy Cue or Phil Schiller to argue that Xbox should have the same rules as Windows — but they’re not making that argument. Spencer is. And he’s in charge of Xbox!

If he thinks iOS should open up to zero-royalty, zero-fee native app distribution, open up Xbox first. Put your money where your mouth is.

Read More 

I really found this interesting for a few reasons. First, it’s just incredibly down-to-earth. Most of the video was shot in a single take, using a Quest 3. Just very casual — but it’s the CEO of a $1 trillion company reviewing and critiquing the rival product from a $3 trillion company. I can’t imagine Tim Cook (or Sundar Pichai) making a video like this. It would just be so out of character for Cook and for Apple itself. But this felt very natural coming from Zuckerberg. Apple is clearly better at making computers, but Meta is just as clearly better at social media. And I really would love to hear Tim Cook’s thoughts on the Quest 3 and how it compares to Vision Pro.

Zuck makes the case that Quest 3 isn’t just good for its price — he goes all-in and argues that it’s a better headset, period. Whether you agree with him or not, he does a good job delineating the very different trade-offs Meta and Apple chose to make.

At the end, he makes the case that each new generation of computing devices has an open alternative and a closed one from Apple. (It’s interesting to think that these rivalries might be best thought of not as closed-vs.-open, but as Apple-vs.-the-rest-of-the-industry.) I’m not quite sure where he’s going with that, though, because I don’t really see how my Quest 3 is any more “open” than my Vision Pro. Are they going to license the OS to other headset makers?

Lastly, Zuckerberg, discussing Apple’s decision to use hand-tracking for control of the interface, just casually mentions that hand-tracking is effectively a stop-gap until we get a “neural interface”.

 ★ 

I really found this interesting for a few reasons. First, it’s just incredibly down-to-earth. Most of the video was shot in a single take, using a Quest 3. Just very casual — but it’s the CEO of a $1 trillion company reviewing and critiquing the rival product from a $3 trillion company. I can’t imagine Tim Cook (or Sundar Pichai) making a video like this. It would just be so out of character for Cook and for Apple itself. But this felt very natural coming from Zuckerberg. Apple is clearly better at making computers, but Meta is just as clearly better at social media. And I really would love to hear Tim Cook’s thoughts on the Quest 3 and how it compares to Vision Pro.

Zuck makes the case that Quest 3 isn’t just good for its price — he goes all-in and argues that it’s a better headset, period. Whether you agree with him or not, he does a good job delineating the very different trade-offs Meta and Apple chose to make.

At the end, he makes the case that each new generation of computing devices has an open alternative and a closed one from Apple. (It’s interesting to think that these rivalries might be best thought of not as closed-vs.-open, but as Apple-vs.-the-rest-of-the-industry.) I’m not quite sure where he’s going with that, though, because I don’t really see how my Quest 3 is any more “open” than my Vision Pro. Are they going to license the OS to other headset makers?

Lastly, Zuckerberg, discussing Apple’s decision to use hand-tracking for control of the interface, just casually mentions that hand-tracking is effectively a stop-gap until we get a “neural interface”.

Read More