Can no longer log into a Adult region on Mobile ?

[Love Zhaoying]

56 minutes ago, Kathlen Onyx said:

I don't see the mobile app as an all or nothing option but an enhancement. There will be value to it even if you can't access R rated regions.

I'm one of those exceptions, since I mostly spend time just on my land, which is Adult. 😞

But since I mostly spend time coding / testing functionality in a HUD + in-viewer browser - features that don't exist in Mobile yet, I wouldn't really be using Mobile anyway.

(Unless and until I start doing "other stuff" someday.)

[Kathlen Onyx]

10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I'm one of those exceptions, since I mostly spend time just on my land, which is Adult. 😞

But since I mostly spend time coding / testing functionality in a HUD + in-viewer browser - features that don't exist in Mobile yet, I wouldn't really be using Mobile anyway.

(Unless and until I start doing "other stuff" someday.)

Yeah I don't think the mobile app will become a fully functional app to do things like that. I just logged into the app on my IPad Pro and my avatar won't even render and is stuck in the flying mode.  So when I move I fly around way over to another region.  The mobile app surely is not there yet and I am a bit surprised that they think that it's functional enough to be put into public beta. 

[Love Zhaoying]

By the way, an example of how I am personally impacted testing Mobile:

- I created a ticket for an issue in Mobile.

- I was emailed "please provide more information".

- Now, I can't get to my own parcel to reproduce the issue (if that's even what they want), and would have to find a way to rez the same items elsewhere.  Of course, I can just login to to the normal client if the questions are about the specific items that I have rezzed.  I am honestly too disappointed to want to read their email asking for more information on the issue.

LL: "Please test this app for us. Upgrade to Premium+!"

Me: "Sure. Luckily, I was already Premium+".

LL: "Don't test it THERE.."

 

Edited May 17 by Love Zhaoying

[Sorciaa]

I was on Android so its not just an Apple thing but Play store as well.

  bout all i can see them doing is either scrapping it, going on with it as it is and it not getting much use, or 2 versions, on PG from apple/google and another from LL themselves.

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Sorciaa said:

I was on Android so its not just an Apple thing but Play store as well.

  bout all i can see them doing is either scrapping it, going on with it as it is and it not getting much use, or 2 versions, on PG from apple/google and another from LL themselves.

Yep, in another thread I saw the terms on the Android store.  Makes sense.

Some people have gotten stuck on the "Apple is going to ruin SL Mobile" idea. I don't know why.  I guess the Apple Store restrictions made the news more in the past.

 

[Katherine Heartsong]

12 hours ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

It's Apple store policy that they get their 30% cut of in-app purchases. This means cash transactions -- Apple doesn't get a cut of whatever you spend lindens on.

Yup. I was speaking specifically about purchasing Lindens through the app. Exchanging real money for $L. That's where Apple will take it's 30% cut.

"Your user just spent $20 buying your play money? Here's your $14, we take $6."

Unless buying Lindens via the app is not a function that's planned.

Edited May 18 by Katherine Heartsong

[Bree Giffen]

I'm not sure if LL/Thune can get away with in-app purchases and not pay Apple their 30%. Fortnite has v-bucks that is purchased with cash. V-bucks are used to purchase cosmetic items for Fortnite and Fortnite has been banned from the Apple store for the past three years. The European Union has a law called the DMA that will go into effect soon that will allow Fortnite back on the Apple app store in Europe but Apple is trying to stop it. The parent company of Fortnite, Epic Games, really doesn't want to pay to Apple 30% of in-game purchases.

Will  creators will see their profits from in-world purchases by mobile Apple users cut down by 30%?

[Istelathis]

My best guess is that the 30% will probably be absorbed by us all, unless it is a significant portion of apple mobile users most of us will not even notice it.  Still, we should rib them a little for supporting apple 😋🪿  Bad apple users, BAD!!! BAAAAAD!!!!

[Love Zhaoying]

I wonder if mobile users will be forced to see Ads, etc. unless they are Premium, to subsidize the Unity license cost. (AFAIK, the whole Unity license thing came up after Mobile was already deep in development).

Yeah, slightly off-topic but so is in-App purchases, etc.

[Kathlen Onyx]

15 minutes ago, Bree Giffen said:

I'm not sure if LL/Thune can get away with in-app purchases and not pay Apple their 30%. Fortnite has v-bucks that is purchased with cash. V-bucks are used to purchase cosmetic items for Fortnite and Fortnite has been banned from the Apple store for the past three years. The European Union has a law called the DMA that will go into effect soon that will allow Fortnite back on the Apple app store in Europe but Apple is trying to stop it. The parent company of Fortnite, Epic Games, really doesn't want to pay to Apple 30% of in-game purchases.

Will  creators will see their profits from in-world purchases by mobile Apple users cut down by 30%?

I agree. Which makes me think that if you use the mobile app you will need to make an account for it that can't link to your PC account.  They are allowing us to use our accounts now to test but my guess is they will wipe it before putting it out for final release.

Edited May 19 by Kathlen Onyx

[Kathlen Onyx]

14 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I wonder if mobile users will be forced to see Ads, etc. unless they are Premium, to subsidize the Unity license cost. (AFAIK, the whole Unity license thing came up after Mobile was already deep in development).

Yeah, slightly off-topic but so is in-App purchases, etc.

Not all apps have ads. I play lots of games on my IPad that have no ads that are free to play.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

On 5/17/2024 at 3:23 AM, Coffee Pancake said:

I am bemused a major SL policy shift has been hidden away on Canny behind the premium plus paywall.

Indeed.

Major stupid.

[Quistess Alpha]

On 5/17/2024 at 3:56 AM, Love Zhaoying said:

I am addicted to TikTok and can't find any graphic adult content on it.

https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-nsfw/

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Indeed.

Major stupid.

I don't get how it's "hidden behind a Premium-Plus paywall".

A few observations - for the sake of brevity, to me these are "facts":

1) Canny itself is not restricted to Premium Plus.

2) Current Mobile testing is still in "Beta".

3) Since Mobile is in Beta and still not "released", there's no "policy". It is not even accessible to users yet who aren't part of testing.

If I agree there's a "policy", and "policy shift", and presumably it's "access to Adult" Regions: it seems more to me that the "Policy" just hasn't been officially announced yet.

Where's the "shift"? Mobile doesn't even "exist" unless you're part of testing, except the pretty, exaggerated example videos.

Rather, I'd say it's a big "bungle": this was destined to be the policy all along (restriction of access to Adult regions). As such, it doesn't surprise me at all. LL should have just given hints at first, or earlier. Of course, then nobody (or far fewer) would have signed up for Premium Plus "just to see Mobile". (I signed up for Premium Plus earlier, so that wouldn't apply to me.)

The "nefarious" and/or "stupid" reasons I can think of for this bungle are:

1) They weren't sure. (Pretty dumb..) Maybe we'd somehow have Mobile with Adult access. I doubt they were that dumb. Unless they spent a lot of efforts looking for loopholes. We can't know.

2) Prevent negative buzz before Mobile got close to testing even. Plus, as a "test app only" ("Test Flight" on iOS, etc.) there was evidently some loophole.  So why tell us until they had too? I find this a little evil / ill-intentioned. Bait / switch.

3) Prevent disappointment from resulting in insufficient testing. They were already only letting Premium Plus test Mobile. If they told us "no Adult", then even less would have bothered testing.

I see 2 major mistakes: not being up-front about the likelihood of restricted access to Adult regions, and restricting testing to Premium Plus. If they didn't make those mistakes, they probably could have gotten plenty of testing, and overcome the bitter taste of the restricted access (no Adult region access).

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

I don't get how it's "hidden behind a Premium-Plus paywall".

A few observations - for the sake of brevity, to me these are "facts":

1) Canny itself is not restricted to Premium Plus.

2) Current Mobile testing is still in "Beta".

3) Since Mobile is in Beta and still not "released", there's no "policy". It is not even accessible to users yet who aren't part of testing.

If I agree there's a "policy", and "policy shift", and presumably it's "access to Adult" Regions: it seems more to me that the "Policy" just hasn't been officially announced yet.

Where's the "shift"? Mobile doesn't even "exist" unless you're part of testing, except the pretty, exaggerated example videos.

Rather, I'd say it's a big "bungle": this was destined to be the policy all along (restriction of access to Adult regions). As such, it doesn't surprise me at all. LL should have just given hints at first, or earlier. Of course, then nobody (or far fewer) would have signed up for Premium Plus "just to see Mobile". (I signed up for Premium Plus earlier, so that wouldn't apply to me.)

The "nefarious" and/or "stupid" reasons I can think of for this bungle are:

1) They weren't sure. (Pretty dumb..) Maybe we'd somehow have Mobile with Adult access. I doubt they were that dumb. Unless they spent a lot of efforts looking for loopholes. We can't know.

2) Prevent negative buzz before Mobile got close to testing even. Plus, as a "test app only" ("Test Flight" on iOS, etc.) there was evidently some loophole.  So why tell us until they had too? I find this a little evil / ill-intentioned. Bait / switch.

3) Prevent disappointment from resulting in insufficient testing. They were already only letting Premium Plus test Mobile. If they told us "no Adult", then even less would have bothered testing.

I see 2 major mistakes: not being up-front about the likelihood of restricted access to Adult regions, and restricting testing to Premium Plus. If they didn't make those mistakes, they probably could have gotten plenty of testing, and overcome the bitter taste of the restricted access (no Adult region access).

 

I suspect that this was fuzzy thinking on someone's part.

They are looking into this thing because of mobile, therefore, regardless of the possible implications for SL as a whole, they just dumped it into the "mobile" section of Canny, which is currently only available to Premium Plus users.

I imagine once enough noise is made, they'll fix that -- because even if a new ratings system applies only to mobile, it is still going to impact on everyone.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

the "mobile" section of Canny, which is currently only available to Premium Plus users.

Ah. Well, that makes sense since only Premium Plus users can test Mobile. Not the right place to put an "announcement"!

[Scylla Rhiadra]

2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Ah. Well, that makes sense since only Premium Plus users can test Mobile. Not the right place to put an "announcement"!

Not one of this probable scope, no!

Edited May 19 by Scylla Rhiadra
Honestly, Scylla . . .

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Scylla Rhiadra said:

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Ah. Well, that makes sense since only Premium Plus users can test Mobile. Not the right place to put an "announcement"!

Not one of this probably scope, no!

The reality of your answer, which I concur with, doesn't really invalidate much in my long post about the "bigger blunders" involved. IMO. 🙂 

I don't have  any concerns about "sub-ratings" though..assume they don't affect everyone just for the sake of it. Mobile, "child-presenting" avatars, and anyone that WANTS more granular ratings. Sure, people will freak out about that but ANY change is "sky is falling, LL is evil".

Agree? Disagree? To me, restricting Mobile is a bigger D'Oh than adding sub-ratings / ratings granularity changes.

[animats]

Can an unrestricted mobile viewer for Google be put on a non-Google app store?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

14 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I don't have  any concerns about "sub-ratings" though..assume they don't affect everyone just for the sake of it.

It's potentially going to impact, though, on creators, on landowners, and anyone who doesn't want to find themselves inadvertently "excluded" from the mobile market.

So not LL being "evil," for sure -- just not thinking it through, I would bet.

16 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

To me, restricting Mobile is a bigger D'Oh than adding sub-ratings / ratings granularity changes.

We really need a lot more context to know, I think.

[Istelathis]

1 minute ago, animats said:

Can an unrestricted mobile viewer for Google be put on a non-Google app store?

I'm still wondering if it will be open sourced, considering your work with viewers you may have a lot more insight into this.  Would a rehaul of the viewer be considered open source if it uses any of the original code?  If so, then definitely, we could be seeing ports of the Unity viewer everywhere that supports it, this would be glorious.  If it is closed off to all, who knows?

[animats]

3 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

I'm still wondering if it will be open sourced, considering your work with viewers you may have a lot more insight into this.  Would a rehaul of the viewer be considered open source if it uses any of the original code?  If so, then definitely, we could be seeing ports of the Unity viewer everywhere that supports it, this would be glorious.  If it is closed off to all, who knows?

The Linden viewer is LGPL-licensed, not GPL. Things which use some of its code do not have to be open source. Modified files of the original viewer do have to be open-sourced, though.

[Coffee Pancake]

this is the part that has me most concerned

Quote

In the longer term, we are working on finer-grained controls for content maturity in order to allow maximum freedom while complying with app store requirements.

That wont just be for the app. That will impact every single one of us. If it is in the least bit onerous or causes loss of content or access to content, the backlash will be staggering.

Likewise .. the 30% Apple Tax kills the creator economy dead. Overnight.

Stores will shutter in protest at a blanket 30% loss of income (or needing to raise prices by 30%). The whole party comes to a grinding shuddering halt and LL will face blind rage with no route to recovery. Trust will evaporate over night and there will be a push to migrate to other forms of payments, paypal, ko-fi and patreon subscriptions, even gumroad.

[Coffee Pancake]

2 hours ago, Istelathis said:

I'm still wondering if it will be open sourced

My impression is "hell will freeze over first".

[Qie Niangao]

2 hours ago, animats said:

Can an unrestricted mobile viewer for Google be put on a non-Google app store?

Technically of course it can be side-loaded from anywhere hosting the apk including a Linden website. As I understand Epic v Google, the current state of play has Epic allowed to put its own Fortnite store within the Google Play store. Per The Verge, "We’ll find out exactly how Android and the Google Play Store will change in a hearing that begins on May 23rd." So yeah, it's all getting interesting for Android.

The Apple Store is facing a (somewhat) similar fate in Europe—but not the US, the only part of the world where iOS much matters.