Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Apple To Developers: Fuck You

145791029

Posts

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Well, the fact that being a monopoly isn't actually bad PR is sort of a thing. It reflects badly on the all-rational consumer.

    It's not an entirely surprising development that when you sell consumers a product that they don't fully understand, they'll all sort of latch on to the same product, because everyone else has. Brand recognition works for a reason.

    The problem is when players who should be expected to provide more of a rational informational role go in on drinking the koolaid too. Over time, the media should be informing consumers over differences between products so that they can make educated decisions, not whoring themselves out on TV so that Apple will send them a free iPod.

    georgersig.jpg
  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    3.3.1: Apple is using their lead position in the smartphone application market as leverage to place roadblocks in the way of developers seeking to develop cross-platform. By saying "you can only use these specific languages to develop for us, and you must write the code yourself", Apple makes it harder for developers to maintain their codebase to implement their application for other platforms. And for a lot of smaller developers, they may just decide the pain isn't worth it.

    For the life of me I can't see what your point is.

    The FCC should take action against Apple because their market share is so large it makes developers have to spend more to develop if they want to produce products for Apple AND a third party?

    This can't seriously be what you're asking. This is ludicrous. This is goosery.
    3.3.9: This one's even more blatant - Apple's pretty much crippled all third party ad streaming services, granting their own first party ad streaming service a clear advantage.

    So the FCC should pull iPhone OS under the umbrella of what, public radio?

    Advertisements do not fall under the category of free speech. Total goosery.

  • gearngearn __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Have you ever considered that maybe people actually like Apple by their own free will?

    Do you think people would give a shit if a company like Dell suddenly went down and never made another computer again? No, no one gives a shit about Dell. How about lesser brands? Alienware? Motorola? Samsung? Palm? Would you give a shit if any of these companies collapsed? Maybe if you hold stock in them.

    But no, no one would give a shit because these companies don't mean shit to anyone. Even if Microsoft went down and said they aren't making any more OSes ever again, people probably wouldn't care too much, except perhaps maybe wonder when the next time they upgrade their OS would be and to what. The only people who truly care about Microsoft are probably Xbox gamers.


    Of course, if Apple went down tomorrow and totally collapsed and died, do you think it would just be a little quiet death? Fuck no, you'd see people up in arms. The media would probably explode, who is gonna make iPhones and iPads and Macs now? People would question if any company out there could really replace Apple. What's going to happen to Apple stores? And iTunes? And our iPods? God damn! etc...


    The fact of the matter is, no one does what Apple does. Maybe you'd prefer a cheap product with a shitload more features, but if you want something simple, environmentally friendly, and that performs well and feels fun and cool to use, there's only one place you're going to get that. And it turns out, that's what the majority of people want anyway. And they're willing to pay more for that, because they find value in it.


    Remember even Apple wasn't always like this. There was a time when Apple sucked, that was before the second round of Steve Jobs.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Have you ever considered that maybe people actually like Apple by their own free will?
    That and the power of brand name combined with factors like peer pressure aren't mutually exclusive. A person does not decide what he likes in a vacuum and those factors play a huge role in deciding what he thinks of a company.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Over time, the media should be informing consumers over differences between products so that they can make educated decisions, not whoring themselves out on TV so that Apple will send them a free iPod.

    It couldn't possibly be because Apple makes a product that squarely fits their demographics, right?

    MP3 players were around almost a decade before the iPod hit the market, back when Apple has less than 10% of the home computing share.

    People like their products because they work consistently and they're easy to use. Yes, there's Kool-Aid drinking to be had, but it's not like Linux hasn't been serving it up just as much . . . for free.


    Apple makes good products, and at a comparable value to what you get with just about any PC. I smell haterade.

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    gearn wrote: »
    Have you ever considered that maybe people actually like Apple by their own free will?

    Who said there wasn't free will involved?

    People like Apple. People also believe false notions about apple and it's competition. People also believe that Apple is something other than the for-profit corporation that it currently is.



    To pretend that Apple's marketing has nothing to do with their marketshare is absurd.

    georgersig.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Apple makes good products, and at a comparable value to what you get with just about any PC.

    Oh?

    Because when I take a look out there at prices...

    georgersig.jpg
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    For the record, Apple makes some quality products. I have nothing against that. There are plenty of informed consumers who find Apple to be the best choice for them.

    There are ALSO plenty of uninformed consumers, though, who buy an iPhone because they saw a commercial about how it can tell what song is playing, not realizing that they have PLENTY of cheaper options that will do the same exact thing.

    georgersig.jpg
  • edited April 2010
    The Apple product'll do ir more classy.

  • gearngearn __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Apple makes good products, and at a comparable value to what you get with just about any PC.

    Oh?

    Because when I take a look out there at prices...

    If shittier cheaper products worked as well as Apple products and were just as sleek then they'd probably be worth that much too.




    And stop pulling out your shtick about uniformed consumers. Uninformed consumers buy cheaper, crappier products too, and in fact, they do so in numbers much greater than the amount of uninformed Apple consumers, simply because everyone wants to spend as little money as possible.

    And for a long time, uninformed consumers were a problem to Apple, and still are today. There are people out there who would buy a Mac but don't want to because they feel it would be too complicated to "switch over" and would rather just maintain their status quo with Windows.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Apple makes good products, and at a comparable value to what you get with just about any PC.

    Oh?

    Because when I take a look out there at prices...

    HP and Dell's similarly configured all-in-ones are about as much, if not more, than the iMac.

    I will agree that Apple probably charges waaaay too much for their super high-end gear (the Pro alone can set you back a dozen grand), but who buys that shit anyway?

    As far as warranty, customer service, and ease of use go, you can't really beat Apple.

    And the MacBook Pro is a bit pricey, but where else are you going to get a half-gig SSD and gestural touchpad?

    Apple has some proprietary shit that just doesn't exist anywhere else, or least not with the same utility.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    There are ALSO plenty of uninformed consumers, though, who buy an iPhone because they saw a commercial about how it can tell what song is playing, not realizing that they have PLENTY of cheaper options that will do the same exact thing.
    I do not see how in the world that would reflect badly on Apple. Maybe I've misunderstood you though.

    If other companies cannot advertise their products well enough to get people to buy them it is not Apple's fault. Its the company's inability to hire an ad firm who's worth the millions they'll be paid for what they produce. If your product is really better then it shouldn't be that difficult to sell. Especially for large companies like Sony or Microsoft. I could see there being an issue if you're a start-up with little to no capital to pay for ads, but I don't believe that's what you're talking about here.
    Evander wrote:
    People also believe false notions about apple and it's competition. People also believe that Apple is something other than the for-profit corporation that it currently is.
    Would you mind going over what these false notions are, and what people believe Apple to be outside of a corporation? Just curious.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    If other companies cannot advertise their products well enough to get people to buy them it is not Apple's fault.

    I had this very thought earlier today, when I saw a commercial for the Droid.

    So many companies are intent on showing you how RAD their products are or how AWESOME they are, complete with heavy metal douchery in the background. They tend to make absolutist statements (or at least imply them) about how everyone else is STUPID and this thing is TEHSHITXZ!1 Or you have Microsoft, who I never can exactly figure out who their marketing targets. "Hi, I'm so dumb, I think this buggy, underpowered OS is amazing because it does this one thing Windows never did before, even though OSX has done it for years!" "Hi, I just saved $300 over a Mac by buying a PC which will be obsolete before I get home and open it!" "Hi, I'm a four year old Korean girl! Buy Windows 7, for some reason!"


    And Apple commercials are usually just soft indie rock played over a minimalist representation of how the product works. Gee, I wonder why that's working so well.

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Well, I understand what Motorola was thinking with the "DROID Does" campaign. They wanted to try to point out the flaws that they saw, and that a lot of people see, in the iPhone. I'm sure that caught some people's attention, but it bugs me in the same way the Mac v PC commercials bugged me. Focus on your product, not the other guy's. Those commercials have gotten better lately, and it's more of what the DROID does, rather than what the DROID does compared to X Y or Z.

    Same with Microsoft. Those damn PC Hunter ads were horrible. I know it's supposed to be ordinary people looking for a computer, but it just smacked of "lookit, cheap!" Which isn't really how you want you sell your product. Or at least I wouldn't want to sell mine that way. Just like Motorola though, Microsoft's looking like they're moving away from that, and moving toward showing off their own features. The "I'm <X>, and Windows 7 was my idea" commercials seem pretty good to me. I also enjoyed the little girl commercials too though, because they were about what Windows could do (and do simply) without talking about what the other guy does. Obviously you can take and email pictures with OS X or whatnot, but MS's point wasn't about comparing Windows and OS X, it was "Windows does this well!"

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    3.3.1: Apple is using their lead position in the smartphone application market as leverage to place roadblocks in the way of developers seeking to develop cross-platform. By saying "you can only use these specific languages to develop for us, and you must write the code yourself", Apple makes it harder for developers to maintain their codebase to implement their application for other platforms. And for a lot of smaller developers, they may just decide the pain isn't worth it.
    These developers should check out this Internet thing. Its got these "pages" that you can view in these "browser" things across just about any OS you want and they'll look and work almost exactly the same. Write the code once, reach almost every platform!

    d d d dubble poast!

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    And Apple commercials are usually just soft indie rock played over a minimalist representation of how the product works. Gee, I wonder why that's working so well.

    Those worked quite well. Even I think so.

    Now, the long line of Apple commercials that seemed to imply that anyone not using an Apple product was a colossal tool and idiot, and that saying this didn't make you a douchebag, but instead, part of a latte-sipping master race that I wasn't previously aware of....eh, not so much. For all their applause and celebration, I've yet to meet a person who actually had the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" commercials convince them to switch platforms. Everyone is firmly divided into two audience: people who thought the commercials were hilarious satirical skits that were not convinced to switch platforms and people who thought the commercials were blatant examples of douchebag smuggery who were not convinced to switch platforms. And it's not just those either. They were doing it a few years back, and it it didn't exactly do Apple any favors reality-wise.

    "Hi, I've got a smug sense of superiority. Wouldn't you like a smug sense of superiority? And maybe some of this latte?"
    Spoiler:

    It just seems like Apple's commercials are so much stronger for their other products, I guess this is where all their idiots are lumped together. At least they learned--I remember a time where, if you had cable, you saw no less than two of those commercials every half-hour (I'm not exaggerating). Now they realized that trying to cram consumer's faces into the same thing every fifteen minutes wasn't actually working as they planned....

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    Apple's iPhone commercials are really stellar examples of how to sell the world on your product.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e982_bz9NIM

    Real world examples of how easy it is to do stuff that people will actually do on their phone.

    Counterpoint: Droid.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9P_KAyOlZw
    They are showing off some neat functionality in a downright frightening and absurd way... most people older than 30 are tuning out as soon as the commercial starts though, and searching for a friend named "human?" it's just kind of fucked from the get-go.


    Palm Pre
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9aPp2ldO_k
    I'm not even commenting on how retarded this ad campaign was.


    Marketing plays a huge part for sure... if other manufacturers could pull their heads out of their asses and show how easy it is to do things without trying to break the bank on weird special effects and schizophrenic commercials, they could swing some market favor.

  • AtomikaAtomika Hypercritical Queen Bitch of Cinema Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Same with Microsoft. Those damn PC Hunter ads were horrible. I know it's supposed to be ordinary people looking for a computer, but it just smacked of "lookit, cheap!" Which isn't really how you want you sell your product. Or at least I wouldn't want to sell mine that way. Just like Motorola though, Microsoft's looking like they're moving away from that, and moving toward showing off their own features. The "I'm <X>, and Windows 7 was my idea" commercials seem pretty good to me. I also enjoyed the little girl commercials too though, because they were about what Windows could do (and do simply) without talking about what the other guy does. Obviously you can take and email pictures with OS X or whatnot, but MS's point wasn't about comparing Windows and OS X, it was "Windows does this well!"

    I just think Microsoft spends way too much time in their commercials focusing on the people telling you stuff. I'm keniesthetic, man, don't tell me, show me. I'm not going to ever buy a product because some doof on a commercial said I should, but never showed me what I was buying. With Apple, everything is about the product and what it can do.

    And the people on Microsoft commercials always look like doofs. I guess that's intentional, aiming for an "everyman" feeling, but I can't imagine how anyone would be inspired to buy a product because the guy showing it to you is a moron Luddite.

  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Apple builds a strong loyalty for their brand through word of mouth and very well designed marketing, and sells the consumers a device at a level of mark-up that is honestly quite stunning. The real problem comes in when lower prices from competitors aren't even able to dissuade a large chunk of consumers from that marketing.

    Once again, every other smartphone maker sells their hardware/apps/etc. at pretty much the same price Apple does.

    We were talking about just smartphones and not the rest of Apple's market, right?

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I'm not going to ever buy a product because some doof on a commercial said I should, but never showed me what I was buying.

    Er....not to pick, but isn't this exactly what the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercials did?

    Come to think of it, isn't this exactly what almost all Apple Computers advertisements still do?

    I mean, maybe they just don't air them in my area (or any of the countries I've lived in...), but every Mac commercial I can recall doesn't actually show their computers on, with the exception of maybe one or two laptop commercials. You're lucky if you get to see a computer period, instead of some sort of bizarro personification or some guy in front of a stage explaining how much better an unseen product has changed every aspect of his "life".

    Isn't that literally "someone saying you should?", because Apple did that for years with their Mac line. And still does. o_O

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • gearngearn __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Did you know iPhone and iPad commercials are pretty cheap to make.

    Mac Vs PC were even cheaper.

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I always assumed they paid John Hodgman and that hipster guy from Dodgeball large amounts of money.

    But otherwise, yeah, they look pretty inexpensive. Which is kind of ironic, I guess, given the cost of much of Apple's computer line?

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Zhu-Li, do the thing! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Yeah, the Mac ads are much, much less effective than the iPhone ads (especially since John Hodgman is hilarious and the Apple hipster's just flat boring). Much like the way that Apple's computers are still sold at a premium but the iPhone is pretty much in line with the other smartphones.

    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    3.3.1: Apple is using their lead position in the smartphone application market as leverage to place roadblocks in the way of developers seeking to develop cross-platform. By saying "you can only use these specific languages to develop for us, and you must write the code yourself", Apple makes it harder for developers to maintain their codebase to implement their application for other platforms. And for a lot of smaller developers, they may just decide the pain isn't worth it.

    For the life of me I can't see what your point is.

    The FCC should take action against Apple because their market share is so large it makes developers have to spend more to develop if they want to produce products for Apple AND a third party?

    This can't seriously be what you're asking. This is ludicrous. This is goosery.
    3.3.9: This one's even more blatant - Apple's pretty much crippled all third party ad streaming services, granting their own first party ad streaming service a clear advantage.

    So the FCC should pull iPhone OS under the umbrella of what, public radio?

    Advertisements do not fall under the category of free speech. Total goosery.

    Just because you can't understand the issue doesn't make it goosery.

    The problem with 3.3.1 is that Apple is using their market share as leverage to force developers to stay in the fold, as it were. By banning third party frameworks on their platform, Apple raises the cost of cross-platform development, and in doing so, discourages developers from developing for other platforms as well as Apple, since Apple is the dominant player in the smartphone app market. That's the anti-competitive behavior.

    As for 3.3.9, Apple is saying that third party platforms aren't allowed to gather user metrics, which is the lifeblood of any/add platform. Furthermore, that restriction doesn't apply to iAd, meaning that iAd has a clear advantage over any other ad platform, all because of a clause in Apple's dev contract. And Apple has told developers that they see 3.3.9 as saying "apps may not gather user metrics whatsoever", which means no gathering real-world usage stats for improving your app.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    The Mac vs PC ads sucked because quite a few of them were out and out lies (a good example would be the one with the Japanese camera.)

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Because you didn't have to use their tools alone. That's a myth the Apple Defense Force has cooked up.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Because you didn't have to use their tools alone. That's a myth the Apple Defense Force has cooked up.

    So if I didn't buy a sony dev kit, and wanted to build my own PS2 title, Sony would be cool with that?

    I could arrange to sell my PS2 title in stores without people needing to deal with Sony approving it or them having to mod their systems to make the game run?

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    They also made the claim that "computer entertainment" consisted entirely of watching videos and scrolling through pictures. And that the only alternative was doing spreadsheets.

    Man, if only there was a large, long-standing industry that provided entertainment applications for computers...."games" if you will. One that Apple's platforms had once participated in, in the time before time....

    We could call them....computer....games.
    Spoiler:

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    They also made the claim that "computer entertainment" consisted entirely of watching videos and scrolling through pictures. And that the only alternative was doing spreadsheets.

    Man, if only there was a large, long-standing industry that provided entertainment applications for computers...."games" if you will. One that Apple's platforms had once participated in, in the time before time....

    We could call them....computer....games.
    Spoiler:
    And now the iPhone is on track to being one of the most-used mobile gaming devices on the market, and major players like Valve and Blizzard are doing same-day releases of Mac and PC titles.

    Funny how things change over time.

  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Not to mention:
    Lanz wrote: »
    PhoneGap will still work apparently
    Engadget wrote:
    PhoneGap framework fine for App Store development, sez Apple
    By Joseph L. Flatley posted Apr 15th 2010 3:04AM

    Now, we've all been concerned about recent updates to the iPhone dev agreement -- you haven't been sleeping and your parents are, quite frankly, worried for your sanity. And it's a heady subject: "what is the fate of PhoneGap in the wake of the iPhone OS 4 beta SDK?" Well, worry no more, little one -- it seems that Jesse Macfadyen, a contributor to the project, pinged Apple to make sure that users of the mobile development platform wouldn't find their apps rejected simply for using the tool. As you remember, the agreement states: "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine" (and of course HTML and CSS are cool), so PhoneGap -- which indeed sticks to HTML, CSS and Javascript -- is totally safe. Now developers can get back to having their apps rejected for any number of other silly reasons.

    [Thanks, Bea]

    SEGATA SANSHIRO! LIVE AGAIN!
    Lanz.gif
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    They also made the claim that "computer entertainment" consisted entirely of watching videos and scrolling through pictures. And that the only alternative was doing spreadsheets.

    Man, if only there was a large, long-standing industry that provided entertainment applications for computers...."games" if you will. One that Apple's platforms had once participated in, in the time before time....

    We could call them....computer....games.
    Spoiler:
    And now the iPhone is on track to being one of the most-used mobile gaming devices on the market, and major players like Valve and Blizzard are doing same-day releases of Mac and PC titles.

    Funny how things change over time.

    Clearly, this is how it works--if they are available on something Apple sells, they are games. If they aren't, they don't exist.

    Call it Schrodinger's software. Accordingly, Blizzard is the only company that produces and publishes computer games presently.

    This, specifically, is not their strong area so much.

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    They also made the claim that "computer entertainment" consisted entirely of watching videos and scrolling through pictures. And that the only alternative was doing spreadsheets.

    Man, if only there was a large, long-standing industry that provided entertainment applications for computers...."games" if you will. One that Apple's platforms had once participated in, in the time before time....

    We could call them....computer....games.
    Spoiler:
    And now the iPhone is on track to being one of the most-used mobile gaming devices on the market, and major players like Valve and Blizzard are doing same-day releases of Mac and PC titles.

    Funny how things change over time.

    Clearly, this is how it works--if they are available on something Apple sells, they are games. If they aren't, they don't exist.

    According, Blizzard is the only company that produces and publishes computer games presently.
    O_o

    I... I don't even know if you are trolling or what.

    And I am not going to listwar this because there is no point, but there is an ever growing amount of support for gaming on the mac platform, and something growing into dominance on the mobile side right now.

    Apple has been trying to get back into the gaming sphere for a while now, and they are finally making some good headway. I am looking forward to playing Portal 2 on my MBP, especially since I sold my PC rig a while back.

    edit: and of course it wasn't (and still ISN'T to a large extent) their strong suit. But I'll be damned if they aren't getting much better at it.

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote: »
    They also made the claim that "computer entertainment" consisted entirely of watching videos and scrolling through pictures. And that the only alternative was doing spreadsheets.

    Man, if only there was a large, long-standing industry that provided entertainment applications for computers...."games" if you will. One that Apple's platforms had once participated in, in the time before time....

    We could call them....computer....games.
    Spoiler:
    And now the iPhone is on track to being one of the most-used mobile gaming devices on the market, and major players like Valve and Blizzard are doing same-day releases of Mac and PC titles.

    Funny how things change over time.

    Clearly, this is how it works--if they are available on something Apple sells, they are games. If they aren't, they don't exist.

    According, Blizzard is the only company that produces and publishes computer games presently.
    O_o

    I... I don't even know if you are trolling or what.

    And I am not going to listwar this because there is no point, but there is an ever growing amount of support for gaming on the mac platform, and something growing into dominance on the mobile side right now.

    Apple has been trying to get back into the gaming sphere for a while now, and they are finally making some good headway. I am looking forward to playing Portal 2 on my MBP, especially since I sold my PC rig a while back.

    edit: and of course it wasn't (and still ISN'T to a large extent) their strong suit. But I'll be damned if they aren't getting much better at it.

    Easy there, I'm not trolling, just complaining about the commercials at the time (to be fair, it's been a while since the commercials were at their height--and as you said, they're expanding that area).

    The commercials are worth mocking, I personally feel. Again, not trolling (nor my intention to sound as such). Just ridiculing the sheer mental break needed for the commercials to actually work.

    (Of course, that's hardly limited to Apple's commercials--it's just that theirs were on with such a pervasive frequency.)

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    And lets be fair; if you are a WOW gamer, chances are Blizzard *is* the only company making games as far as you are concerned :lol:

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Because you didn't have to use their tools alone. That's a myth the Apple Defense Force has cooked up.

    So if I didn't buy a sony dev kit, and wanted to build my own PS2 title, Sony would be cool with that?

    I could arrange to sell my PS2 title in stores without people needing to deal with Sony approving it or them having to mod their systems to make the game run?
    That strawman never stood a chance. Do console manufacturers require you to sign with them and that they have to approve your title? Sure, and I never argued otherwise. What I said was that once you were signed with one, they never tried to limit your toolchain. Which is what Apple is doing. And while you might not have a problem with writing in languages that are over two decades old, some people would prefer not to.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    And lets be fair; if you are a WOW gamer, chances are Blizzard *is* the only company making games as far as you are concerned :lol:

    Okay, now you're just depressing. Incredibly.

    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Because you didn't have to use their tools alone. That's a myth the Apple Defense Force has cooked up.

    So if I didn't buy a sony dev kit, and wanted to build my own PS2 title, Sony would be cool with that?

    I could arrange to sell my PS2 title in stores without people needing to deal with Sony approving it or them having to mod their systems to make the game run?
    That strawman never stood a chance. Do console manufacturers require you to sign with them and that they have to approve your title? Sure, and I never argued otherwise. What I said was that once you were signed with one, they never tried to limit your toolchain. Which is what Apple is doing. And while you might not have a problem with writing in languages that are over two decades old, some people would prefer not to.
    Cue Microsoft, where unless they give you a HUGE pass (like they did EA), you HAVE to use their xbox APIs for network communication, messaging, multitasking (pop-over console menu), in-game chat, matchmaking, etc. You cannot release a game that allows multiplayer without them having Live Gold. Violation for not using their enforced services and tools is a non-approval of your app and no means to sell it to end users.

    edit: Objective-C along with Cocoa framework / interface builder is so fucking elegant and easy to use that I have no idea why this is even a thing. Anyone with coding experience can get up and running in days in this environment.

  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    As for 3.3.9, Apple is saying that third party platforms aren't allowed to gather user metrics, which is the lifeblood of any/add platform. Furthermore, that restriction doesn't apply to iAd, meaning that iAd has a clear advantage over any other ad platform, all because of a clause in Apple's dev contract. And Apple has told developers that they see 3.3.9 as saying "apps may not gather user metrics whatsoever", which means no gathering real-world usage stats for improving your app.

    [citation needed]

    As far as I can read into it, 3.3.9 only states that you can't use third-party gathering. I'd like to see where Apple is arguing that I can't use my own methods to collect data about something as simple as "how long have you been playing? what's your high score?"

    * all of this is opt-in and doesn't do anything other than let you ePeen on a webpage, yes I know they're not performance metrics but still

    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    They did not ban all of them, just cross compilers that allow C# or other languages into the mix.

    Unity3D, which allows for game development across a host of platforms, outputs an Obj-C xcode project for you to compile in the official tools. And is completely legal.

    I guess I don't see the hate. When Sony had a larger than 50% share of the hame console market, people weren't up in arms about how you had to pay (tens of thousands) for a developer license AND use their tools alone AND get their approval to release on their platform. Why is this different?

    Because you didn't have to use their tools alone. That's a myth the Apple Defense Force has cooked up.

    So if I didn't buy a sony dev kit, and wanted to build my own PS2 title, Sony would be cool with that?

    I could arrange to sell my PS2 title in stores without people needing to deal with Sony approving it or them having to mod their systems to make the game run?
    That strawman never stood a chance. Do console manufacturers require you to sign with them and that they have to approve your title? Sure, and I never argued otherwise. What I said was that once you were signed with one, they never tried to limit your toolchain. Which is what Apple is doing. And while you might not have a problem with writing in languages that are over two decades old, some people would prefer not to.
    Cue Microsoft, where unless they give you a HUGE pass (like they did EA), you HAVE to use their xbox APIs for network communication, messaging, multitasking (pop-over console menu), in-game chat, matchmaking, etc. You cannot release a game that allows multiplayer without them having Live Gold. Violation for not using their enforced services and tools is a non-approval of your app and no means to sell it to end users.

    edit: Objective-C along with Cocoa framework / interface builder is so fucking elegant and easy to use that I have no idea why this is even a thing. Anyone with coding experience can get up and running in days in this environment.

    Toolchain != API.

    And call me when Obj-C has an actual garbage collector.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum
    Spoiler:
145791029
Sign In or Register to comment.