Top
560°

Microsoft condemns Apple’s App Store policies

Microsoft wants xCloud on the App Store, but Apple won’t allow it.

Read Full Story >>
theverge.com
The story is too old to be commented.
jonny89741d ago (Edited 41d ago )

It is business. Just like how Microsoft won't allow their games to be streamed on Nividia's GeForce Now.

stevej33641d ago ShowReplies(3)
roadkillers41d ago

This is why Amazon, Alphabet, Apple, and Facebook have been in court. Monopoly practices like this, just so they can keep their product #1

Rude-ro41d ago

So has Microsoft... plus dirty tactics through their media partnerships/properties...
I do not see where you are going with this big Dan😂🤔

HannibalLecter41d ago

Microsoft has had more monopoly cases against them than most. It's like they don't like others doing to them as they have done to others. Pot calling the kettle black.

DarXyde41d ago

To be fair, lads, the different branches of a company can have radically different philosophies. Not always, but they can. For example, I would not compare Sony's TV strategy to their phone strategy, and neither are comparable to Playstation. I think Xbox is fine and can coexist in the gaming space. No issues there. But Microsoft as a company is wholly problematic in my view and for the reasons y'all mention. The worst part to me is their push for subscriptions.

What we're seeing here is a push for market supremacy between two companies that probably want a monopoly: Microsoft wants in on Apple's market to monopolize, Apple is prohibitive to that goal, likely in an effort to push people to buy Apple products for their own monopoly.

There are no heroes in this story. Make no mistake.

porkChop41d ago

That's... not the same thing. At all.

gamer780441d ago (Edited 41d ago )

Uhh. That’s a direct completion, not even close to a similar analogy, nice try with the fanboy wars though, Apple should get a cut but 30% is steep

KwietStorm41d ago

Google and Microsoft apps and services are available everywhere. Apple buys one of the most popular weather apps, Dark Sky, removes it from Android, even if you had an active subscription. People who says its just business every time, ignore the point, every time.

Zeref41d ago

This is a smartphone. A general purpose device. The equivalent would be Microsoft not allowing GeForce Now on Windows PC's

RazzerRedux41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

Not really. Windows is an open platform. Microsoft can't stop anyone from releasing an application on Windows. iPhone is closed and Apple can do just that as a result.

@jonny897

"Just like how Microsoft won't allow their games to be streamed on Nividia's GeForce Now."

Ok....but that's a competing service with xCloud. Not really comparable at all.

Zeref41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

They actually can block or significantly hinder applications. They just don't. Due to anticompetition lawsuits. Same thing that's going to happen to Apple if they keep this up. When a platform gets big enough. They have to open up. Consoles aren't general purpose devices.

With that said I don't think MS has a problem with a GeForce or Stadia app on Xbox at all. I'm sure they'd welcome that. That just means more features for Xbox.

RazzerRedux41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

If Microsoft tried to block applications on open versions of Windows (not S mode) then they would rocked with massive class action lawsuits. There is an license agreement in place and Microsoft cannot simply negate their own terms after the sale. It is illegal.

Where does this theory that platforms have to "open up" once they get "big enough" come from? General purpose or otherwise. Are you talking about anti-trust legislation? Those laws govern anti-competitive actions. They don't kick in automatically when a platform is "big enough".

If Stadia or Geforce Now were welcome on Xbox then they would be on Xbox. Microsoft isn't going to allow competition on their closed ecosystem anymore than Sony would allow xCloud on PlayStation.

rainslacker41d ago

If MS wanted to make windows a closed system, they could do so. Even if you paid for the OS, they could change that because they can require you to agree to new terms of service agreements which allow it.

MS isnt at that point, and I doubt they will go that route.

But nothing says that any platform has to open up because it gets too big. It just can't actively or maliciously try to lessen the competition through its actions. Something they also cant do on closed platforms.

Assuming this went to court, or came up for review by the FTC, apple would have to prove that their reasons were based on policies not related to limiting competition.

Zeref41d ago

@razzerredux

Apple is already dealing with a bunch of anticompetition lawsuits. It's only a matter of time before the EU forces their hand

XiNatsuDragnel41d ago

Nii san go to marvis ( off topic) but I think you're missing the pt Microsoft are as monopolistic as Apple here simple.

RazzerRedux41d ago

Well, if the point here is that companies *can* do illegal things but will get slammed by the government for doing them, then yes, I agree. Microsoft *can* close Windows and then they will get rocked on multiple fronts by the US and the EU. Apple could very well be facing similar actions as Zeref points out.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 41d ago
NotoriousWhiz41d ago

As far as I'm aware GeForce Now is a service and not a device. Someone can feel free to correct me though.

Sophisticated_Chap41d ago

This would be like Microsoft not allowing Safari to run on Windows. Bad move by Apple, and it won't do them any good. This sends a message that their platform is not open for business, making Android the place where developers and large corporations will make their investments, making Apple somewhat irrelevant.

badz14941d ago

Hahaha and they should care why? Their business has been thriving. Apple has a cult following and a unique status in the market. You think just because you can't play xbox on iphones will somehow make Apple irrelevant? How clueless can you get?

Christopher41d ago

While not directly comparable, the purpose of both decisions is the exact same: to stop a competitor from providing something using your IP or service.

Microsoft wants people to use XCloud to play their games, not a third party service where they wouldn't get a cut of the service.

Apple wants people to buy games on their service and not stream them without any cut going to Apple.

If Microsoft charged a fee on iOS for this specifically and did it through the iOS store, this would not be a problem. Apple would be perfectly fine getting that 30% cut of the subscription service every month.

RauLeCreuset41d ago

This is an example of why I find their pro-consumer and options marketing to be disingenuous and often weaponized for passive aggressive attacks on their competitors. It's about giving options and being pro-consumer when they stand to gain, like when they want to get a competitor to open up their ecosystem to them. Apple should have thrown their comment back at them by saying, "Xbox stands alone as the only popular home gaming console platform to deny consumers from playing free to play games if they haven't paid to play online.” Followed by a reminder of all the free to play titles on the app store that can be played and aren't hidden behind a paywall.

41d ago
NeoGamer23240d ago

All AppStores are monopolies and the current models should be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.

The reason I call them monopolies is that many people cannot afford to re-buy all their apps in another appstore if they choose to change therefore the "switching costs" make this a monopoly. This rationale was established by the USA department of justice in their anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft in the late 1990's. And all appstores are the biggest offenders of it.

I think that there should be a central appstore for all technology platforms like playstation, xbox, apple, android, microsoft, etc. That appstore should just be a place to purchase digital only products such as games, subscriptions, movies, music, and apps. There should be an amount paid to the store to keep it running as a non-profit organization, and when I buy something at the store I should own it on every platform it is sold on. That way I only ever need to buy something once and I would have it no matter what device I own.

People have to stop using "its just business" an excuse. This is not just business. It is companies using their power to limit choices of consumers.

DarXyde40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

So one centralized hub for apps?

Ok, so who runs it? Who do you trust to host this app store that will, in fact, need to be global given the content you expect to be available?

NeoGamer23239d ago

@DarXyde
Like I said, it would be a non-profit organization probably setup for just being the store (How it starts could be open-source, could be government, or a consortium of companies like MS, Apple, Google, and Sony, etc.). All these companies have setup their stores globally, that would not be hard. And then everyone buys digital content in one place. Never have t worry again about buying apps, music, movies, and games multiple times on multiple platforms and would allow the content makers to control their content not hardware/platform vendors charging a toll. The store would only charge what is necessary to keep it running.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 39d ago
RazzerRedux41d ago

I'd bet this is all about who controls the revenue. Apple wants Game Pass subscription handled through Apple services which means they get a cut. Microsoft isn't going to share 30% of their revenue with Apple. Game streaming opens a whole slew of games on iPhone that Apple doesn't control or profit from. That is why Apple wants games submitted individually, not as a collection.

'... gaming services can absolutely launch on the App Store as long as they follow the same set of guidelines applicable to all developers, including submitting games individually for review, and appearing in charts and search. "

stuna141d ago

IMO I don't disagree with Apple wanting a cut, maybe not as big a cut, but seriously what company wants another competitor on their platform that in all likelihood would foremost take away from their revenue stream? Not only that everyone knows this is coming off the back of Microsoft and Facebook teaming up. This seems more like bully tactics, under the guise that it's oh so detrimental to the Industry.

Microsoft is trying to gain a presence on all OS's to try gain a monopoly nothing more, nothing less. Of couse there are those who'll disagree, but with a little research they'll see Microsoft has always had monopolistic tendencies.

Books have been written on Microsoft monopolistic behavior, and Facebook is not without their faults either.

morganfell41d ago

An absolutely on point post. As you stated look at the history of these companies. In addition there is a sideline to the revenue dispute as regards Apple. One thing they do that android cannot or does not is they make a decent attempt to protect their customers and a pipe going through their ecosystem that they do not control prevents this to any impactful degree.

RazzerRedux41d ago

I don't disagree. Ultimately, Apple has every right to do this. It is their ecosystem after all. Apple has taken a sizeable chunk of the market away from Microsoft's streaming strategy. This could get ugly.

Atom66641d ago

Wanting a cut of what? In-app sign ups? Sure, they could ask for that, and it wouldn't be entirely unfair to do so. With that said, I'd personally expect MS to do exactly what Netflix did last year, and simply circumvent Apple by redirecting you to sign up through Netflix directly. I've yet to see anything that suggests in-app sign up royalties wouldn't be coming to Apple for xcloud, though.

Understanding those books you mentioned, how exactly is MS demonstrating monopolistic behavior here? Wouldn't that be Apple? Afterall, Apple is the one blocking an app that certainly seems to be in direct competition with its own offerings under the guise of it not meeting its review requirements. The Netscape defenders from those books would certainly understand what that behavior looks like. But who believes that ESRB rated games couldn't easily meet whatever standards required by Apple? Have you seen the games on its own store and services?

That's not to even mention that Microsoft already has its Xbox app on ios, where you can buy full games to play on your system. They also have the full Office suite on ios.

So what OS "presence" are they suddenly seeking with their game streaming app?

stuna141d ago (Edited 41d ago )

@Atom666

Why would Microsoft and Facebook be boo hoo crying because Apple want's to keep their platform intact!? Like I said Apple doesn't have to allow Microsoft on their platform, just like Sony doesn't have to allow Microsoft on their platform.

This would be no difference than Apple being on Xbox platforms, Microsoft shouldn't have to relinquish control of their platform
If Microsoft has a presence on every OS out there and then requires you to sign in directly through Xbox Live App....is that not a monopoly!?!?!?

crazyCoconuts41d ago

It's funny that you're allowed to control your platform as long as you're not TOO successful. Once you're deemed a monopoly, you gotta open your doors and let other people control your destiny. Microsoft knows that all too well

NotoriousWhiz41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

"If Microsoft has a presence on every OS out there and then requires you to sign in directly through Xbox Live App....is that not a monopoly!?!?!?"

@stuna, Isn't that exactly what Netflix does? Or spotify? Please tell me what the difference is. Would you call Netflix a monopoly? How about Spotfiy?

Atom66641d ago (Edited 41d ago )

"If Microsoft has a presence on every OS out there and then requires you to sign in directly through Xbox Live App....is that not a monopoly!?!?!?"

No, it's not a monopoly. Not by any stretch of the definition. Maybe you should explain how or why you think that makes it a monopoly?

PS Now could be available on iOS. Nvidia, stadia, etc. too. Just like ^ pointed out, Netflix is on multiple OS's. Not a monopoly. Microsoft isn't preventing others from also having a presence on iOS.

So again, explain how that is MS trying to have a monopoly? By putting their service out onto as many platforms as possible?

Christopher41d ago

***I'd personally expect MS to do exactly what Netflix did last year, and simply circumvent Apple by redirecting you to sign up through Netflix directly.***

And similarly get them removed from the store then.

Atom66641d ago

@christopher

Oh, they'd definitely get booted right now if that would happen. But those suits in the EU are heating up.

Maybe they'd make a "premium" program like they did for Amazon, or maybe the Spotify action (where they filed an antitrust claim against Apple) convinces them to allow it.

pinkcrocodile7541d ago

Agreed, apple has every right to do this. If it's important enough for Apple customers to use xcloud, they can vote with their feet.

morganfell41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

If you are supporting Microsoft, do not forget to purchase a copy, and I mean purchase and not use gamepass, of every single game that comes out, even if you do not want to play it at that time.

Part of Microsoft's plan is to kill off used games in addition to physical copies. So the day will come when you want to play a game you missed last year and it will not be available. It isn't on their digital store nor does a disc copy exist. When that happens, remember...you did this. This is what you wanted.

Do not pretend for a second Microsoft will always have it available. We have already seen that isn't the case. And while I do not sell my used games some people do so be aware that is a thing of the past as well. You can also tell yourself Microsoft will let you sell your used digital games (at a price they set...and take a cut of...) if it helps you sleep better at night. Yeah that's consumer freedom. I remember when they were going to allow that along with the sale of user created digital items and even real clothing. Good luck. You will need it. But always keep in mind that blind allegiance, the unwillingness to see the larger picture, and wanting everything cheap right now has its penance to pay.

Atom66641d ago (Edited 41d ago )

@ morgan

You want me to copy your post and put it into any review, article, or discussion regarding PC, PS5 digital edition, Geforce Now, and PS Now, or are you taking care of it? We've got to get the word out about all of this DOOM! you're predicting.

Did you see where 3/4 of PS game sales were digital last quarter? Might want to post your comment on those articles too.

I will reflect on this dire situation the next time I gaze upon my decade old Steam library.

morganfell41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

Do what you want. But you are being disingenuous with your remark. There is a chasm that lies between a company offering various choices and one dead set on a particular path. One of these companies even opened last gen with this idea. Hint: it wasn't Sony. Were you not one of those stating that PS Now was nothing like gamepass and xcloud. Please yourself but at the end of the day you lose if Microsoft succeeds.

Atom66640d ago (Edited 40d ago )

@morgan

"Were you not one of those stating that PS Now was nothing like gamepass and xcloud."

Don't think so. You got me confused with somebody else? I think they're very similar. And I'll put money on Sony dumping a whole lot of $$ into Now this coming gen. They know how small the dedicated console/physical market is in comparison to others.

It's why they have a streaming service available on console and PC.

It's why you can use remote play on your iPhone right now.

It's why they have an all digital PS5 launching.

Quit with the dramatics already. Look around at the gaming industry. Microsoft is going in the same direction as everyone else.

By all means, go running for safety because they want to put a game streaming app on ios, but save me on the hyperbolic nonsense.

morganfell40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

The very problem exists because you cannot see that what Redmond is doing is different than Sony. Having a streaming service or offering an all digital version as does Sony is not even remotely in line with the aims or the intent being exhibited by MS. All streaming services are not equal. All aims and offerings of companies are not equal. Attempting to equate them is absurd. No one is exaggerating. The fact you cannot understand what is occurring makes you an easy sell for them and in fact one of their cheerleaders. They love people such as yourself. In the end consumer freedom is lessened by their actions. It will not happen tomorrow but that is how they boil the consumer frog. They sell the easy targets with cheap offerings and terms such as convenience. Yet what you get in the end is less. Its worthless. You can't see it then any discussion on this point null and void.

Atom66640d ago

I've spent decades listening to the end is nigh rhetoric. As I look around, gaming has never been stronger.

We can cling to these fallacies that holding a license to software on a disk is this last bastian of consumer rights, but that's asinine.

You know what else is asinine? This mentality that the market is so small that it can be directed by Microsoft. Their goal is absolutely to get me subscribed and locked into their ecosystem. From your perspective, this sets me and the industry up for disaster. From the perspective of me, somebody that has put thousands upon thousands of dollars into this industry, that's fearmongering ignorance.

Good thing I can turn off the Xbox and fire up the Switch, PS4 or PC if my GP sub runs out. Good thing there are now 1000s of games being made each year, only 1% of which might appear on xcloud.

But yes, 20, 30 years from now physical games will be a niche market. Somehow you credit MS with as being the harbinger of doom here, but not Steam?

How about Sony? Were they not the first to mandate digital versions available day one as physical? Remember our little PSPGo too? Or how about PS Now. You say it's different for some undefined reason, but it sure seems like the same goal. Actually worse, right? Now came first and initially attempted to skip right to smart tvs. No downloads, no false sense of ownership.

Let me guess, you believe Sony's goals aren't to make the Playstation service a leader in the clear-as-day future where local, singularly dedicated hardware is a no longer the norm? Got news for you...

How about our good friends at Nintendo. They put their big IPs on mobile afterall. Let's throw some blame at them too.

You again use hyperbole and vague accusations to make no real point other than Xbox = bad. Either articulate your point or keep the doomsday nonsense to yourself. And keep confusing me with other people too if you think it helps your arguments (you should know that I'm extra sinful and sub to PSNow too).

The future is heading in a direction everyone but a select few recognize. At the same time, gaming is too large to succumb to whatever awfulness you foresee.

Just remember some truths. Games are intended to entertain us and make money for those who create them. The used market is dying because it makes zero financial sense to the devs and pubs. Of course they don't want to support it. Hardware agnostism is the future. Always online is the future. PS making the bulk of its money through MTX, digital games, and subs is the future. MS can dip out right now and that's not changing.

Yet as long as there is a market for something else, it will be there. So speak with your wallet, and remember that all of your grandstanding was brought on because somebody wanted to put a streaming app on an iPhone. FFS.

morganfell40d ago (Edited 40d ago )

The strength of gaming has nothing to do with consumer choice and freedom. Where did anyone suggest that Sony does not want to be the preeminent company in the gamespace. There is nothing quite like creating an imaginary supposition that was never uttered by those with whom you disagree then arguing against the misperception in your head. It is at best a popcorn moment for those watching.

In addition, the conclusion that because Sony was first to mandate digital availability means they are pushing the digital only agenda in the same vein as Redmond is absurd in the least. If I offer in store ordering and pickup of groceries but also mandate to my stores that they must also offer online ordering for pickup of groceries does it mean I am attempting to force online only ordering of groceries? Of course not. Another erred deduction made to support a false hypothesis and quite the point of humor. It is about consumer choice rather than attempting to railroad the consumer. A chasm lies between attempting to force the consumer down a particular trail and that of leaving consumers no option but to travel on a certain road.

Do I see the day when it becomes a 99% digital era? Absolutely. And pretending those that dislike Redmond's direction cannot perceive this future is another case of misrepresentation and false assumption. Arrogant ego boosting built on distorted accounting of the viewpoints of others is quite honestly shameful.

Finally, attempting any repartee with those that result to insults is not something in which I care to engage. Asinine? Insults are the last line of the defeated.

+ Show (14) more repliesLast reply 40d ago
porkChop41d ago

That rule doesn't make much sense though. Music and film streaming don't have to adhere to that, so why should gaming platforms? Netflix Originals are only available through Netflix, for example. You can't buy or watch them individually through the iOS store, yet Apple has no problem there.

Saigon41d ago

Maybe because it has to do with Apple Arcade?

stuna141d ago

Maybe because Microsoft wants to operate outside of Apple's Istore parameters and be directly downloadable outside the restrictions of having to be verified by Apple.

What I'm trying to say is Microsoft want's the handshake directly through the Xbox app not Apple.

Shikoku41d ago

Is Vudu or Amazon prime on the apple store? I'm actually asking cause I don't know I don't use apple crap.

RazzerRedux41d ago

Apple has no problem with game streaming in other ways either, such as:

https://shadow.tech/usen/

If it is your closed ecosystem I guess you don't have to necessarily be consistent.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 41d ago
Shikoku41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

That's exactly what it is just follow the money that's why on the PS app the PS store is a separate part and not included in the app because if it's included in the app apple won't allow it on there store because purchase on the Istore are handled by apple and it also boosts their number of users because you have to have an apple ID to make purchases with apple.

rainslacker41d ago

While that could be part of it, maybe even the main reason, from what I gather, they're being denied because they cant curate or moderate the content that will appear on the service. At least that's the official statement.

It's not unlike how neither console maker allows content to be distributed to its customers from 3rd party servers, all all such content has to be delivered by properly signed code that goes through their compliance standards. In fact, it's the exact same thing.

If MS were streaming games that were on the apple store and curated by apple, like we see with game pass games on xbox, or each access, then it may be allowed, assuming that apple gor some cut which they would for a game pass type service.

DarXyde41d ago

Don't know about the specifics, and I can totally see Apple wanting a sizable cut—neither Jobs nor Cook are/were known for their charity (or pro- consumer tendencies for that matter).

I'm conflicted on this. The principled side of me says this is a bad move on Apple's part because it effectively restricts access to gaming people otherwise may not have; for instance, gaming is outlandishly costly in Brazil, but this would make it much more accessible to the masses.
...But on the other hand, I have a genuine loathing for the digital subscription model Microsoft keeps pushing, and impeding forces to that end are quite ideologically aligned with me. Options are great, so long as they remain just that. Sadly, I'm not convinced they will. If anyone is familiar with SPSS, I use that very regularly for my work (that, and STATA). IBM has removed the perpetual license option, meaning you need to pay monthly or annually, indefinitely (i.e., a subscription service). Just not a future I want to partake in. I get that I'm being selfish, but I'm just being candid.

Until this is resolved however, Microsoft's only chance in Japan is, like, mega-dead. They never did well historically, but a subscription model people can apply to a portable was genuinely their best shot, specifically because Apple devices are extremely popular in Japan.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 40d ago
41d ago Replies(1)
SpaceRanger41d ago

I mean isn’t this the same as if Sony, Apple or Google wanted to release streaming platforms on an Xbox?

Every platform is a closed platform at some point. Knowing Apple and MS’ history, I’d say that this won’t be changing anytime soon.

caddytrek41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

Typical Microsoft hypocrisy. Why are they criticizing anyone, why can't they just sell their own product with out constantly trying to bring everyone else down?

What about xbox live or UWP which are both heavily controlled platforms.

stevej33641d ago ShowReplies(1)
KRUSSIDULL41d ago

Microsoft isn't blocking publishers from releasing their software outside Microsoft Store. Apple is a control freak and wants to control what you use your iOS devices for.

Christopher41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

But it would only be downloadable via the Apple store, which is the equivalent of being on the Windows store. Microsoft won't stop it outside Windows store, but they will on that specifically.

I think your argument here is weak in that regard

KRUSSIDULL41d ago

What I wanted to say is that Apple should allow people to download APK-files on iOS like you can on Android bypassing the store. Equivalent to downloading an exe or msi-file on PC. Besides they allow Spotify and Netflix to use streaming why not let games stream as well?

aconnellan41d ago

@Christopher

“ But it would only be downloadable via the Apple store, which is the equivalent of being on the Windows store”

I don’t think it’s apples for apples here - using your example, MS has released a slew of their 1st party games outside the Windows Store in the last year or so (MCC, Sea of Thieves, Grounded, etc all released on Steam).

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, just adding more context

Christopher41d ago

@aconnellan: That's an apples to oranges comparison.

KRUSSIDULL was talking about MS forcing publishers where to publish, not Microsoft determining where they put their games.

Apple isn't telling people to not publish outside of iOS or even to not publish on iOS, only that in doing so each game has to be done so they can "quality" check it. Yes, that's a BS reason, but it is in their ToU. But, if you want it on an iPhone, much like if you want a game on Xbox One, you have to go through their store. And they have full right of what's on their store.

If you want an apples to apples comparison, then explain why Microsoft blocked their games from being streamed on NVidia's service even though the owners have to own a game to stream it and they utilize their license keys to stream the game, not a different one. If Microsoft truly disagreed with Apple here, they would also disagree with their own decision to block NVidia from streaming their games to owners who own said games.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 41d ago
Kavorklestein41d ago (Edited 41d ago )

Apple is the problem here, not MS.
Apple is overpriced trendy garbage for brainless casuals and the only thing I like them for is simple things like Garageband and very few other little tools.

nowitzki200441d ago

Apple is overpriced, but they can say what goes on their platform and what doesnt.. Thats why I prefer Android.

Kavorklestein41d ago

@Nowitzki
Yeah way overpriced. I definitely prefer Android as well. I respect the fact that there are a lot of Apple users, but I just can't and won't ever care for apple products. It defies my know-betters.

JustTheFax41d ago

Maybe if Microsoft didn't completely fuck up on the windows phone, they wouldn't have to worry about this. They could have been a true competitor when the iphone came out but they dicked around for years instead, not taking it seriously.