Slashdot Mirror
Apple Console Rumour Resurfaces
1up has commentary on speculation from an industry analyst, which GamesIndustry.biz has published. Prudential analyst Jesse Tortora gesticulates wildly in the direction of renewed interest by Apple in the games market. From the GI.biz article: "We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store ... The game console device could be morphed out of some combination of the MacMini and iTV, while the handheld player could be developed as an enhancement for a future version of the widescreen iPod."
Buy Nintendo, slap an Apple logo on the Wii, call it Applicious and get sued by the Beatles (again)!
Just like their last one. BTW, isn't the console market getting a little crowded already?
The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
A stripped-down, customised OSX variant for the Wii.
Hey, they're both white. It's an ideal match. You heard it here first...
I think they just noticed how much the PS3s were going for on Ebay before they were release and thought "you mean we can get away with selling one for that". If they did release a game console:
a.) it'd only play the games it wants to play, when it wants to play them
b.) the retail price will match the PS3 pre-release ebay price. c.) no one will be lined up to get one
Beer! It's what's for breakfast!
I agree, Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.
As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware
(unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market).
There would have to be some major changes there.
"We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store," - Yeah, cell phone quality video games bring forth a new age of gamming only made possible by Apple.
And, consider the fact that most Mac users are old people, any console they release will tank.
They are using Intel chips now, so it is kind of feasible... Ok, maybe not.
Only problem is getting people in that particular age group and price point. But, one man told me, "Parents buy things. That's what they're for." [Insert inflamitory jokes about Paris Hilton here]
$0.02
Here's a concept that should be considered: Apple are clearly wanting to build a living-room device that displays content from the network and internet on the television. The hardware they will use will be better than the mere "just enough" to get the job done. So why not invest a couple of extra bucks and partner up with Nintendo so their living room device plays Gamecube and Revolution games? Surely future Apple hardware could hack it. Neither side has anything to lose: Apple's living room device becomes more versatile while the market for Nintendo games grows substantially. Plus, don't underestimate the the value of Steve Jobs and countless Apple ads saying the word "Nintendo" on multiple occasions. Nintendo need the added mindshare.
I think it could have huge potential for apple. Especially if they can get some deals with major producers to create games for whatever their system is. Especially if they make it easy to port games from their gaming systems to OSX. Somewhat like what Microsoft is trying to do with DirectX and Xbox360. Something like that could bring more games to the mac and possibly open even more developers eyes to the mac gaming market....
Microsoft uses DirectX to tie game development to Windows and the Xbox. That presents a significant weakness for an Apple assault into serious PC gaming, on the level of Microsoft trying to displace the iPod with the Zune. Microsoft can spend billions for years and may still end up no better luck than five years of Janus/PlaysForSure.
Apple's best bet may be to target competition with the Wii - leave Sony and Microsoft to fight over $500-700 game consoles (they are both the same price with HD optical media playback), and join Nintendo in trying to sell $200-300 simpler games to a wider audience.
The Wii targets physical gameplay and retro sales of earlier games. Apple already has the gameplan down for selling music, TV, and movies, in addition to free podcasting, and recently, online game sales for the iPod. The iTV is an iPod cousin that uses an HDMI TV instead of a 2.5" screen, plays the same content, works from the same iTunes media libarary. It also is tied into iPhoto and home movies with iMovie.
Future consoles aren't going to be 2006, they're going to be a lot broader. Apple has a lot of elements in place to deliver, and its own retail stores to hawk them.
Why Apple Will Change TV
"As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware (unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market)."
Last I checked, Sony and Microsoft were making hardware, too. The profits do come from the games. The game developers receive those profits and the hardware developers get a large cut. How many games do you see out there that are developed solely by the hardware manufacturer?
Apple has a brand, a very popular one right now. If they can tie their gaming platform to the iPod it will definitely get their foot in the door. If Apple enters gaming it most likely won't be to compete head on with the 360 or PS3, at least to start. As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea. And although a lot of us do not like to admit it. Apple has been an incredible innovator in the past few years and their products are highly desired in the areas that they focus on. I guarantee that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have already considered Apple in their gaming business strategies.
There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
We needed a Dreamcast for this generation and the original Microsoft Xbox team has been pretty nervous about "being the next Dreamcast" ever since the 360 debuted its weird circular logo and brought Peter Moore on to lead the whole thing.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
"...especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store"
I know I get all tingley when I think about playing 'Pong' & '2-D Centipede in My Pants' on my iPod...ohhhhhhhh....ahhhhhh! Start of a revolution, that! Look out PS3! U 'pwned!!
What would make me giddy like a schoolgirl is if Nintendo and Apple somehow got together and made it so I could play emulated NES/SuperNES games on my iPod, assuming it's even technically feasible given screen size, processing power, etc. Given those two, I imagine it would be possible to make a controller that plugs into the connector on an iPod. Would be awesome!
the joystick will only have one button.
Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.
Pippin comes to mind and how that was a failure.
2 things are different now and maybe that is what the impetus is.
Apple's customer base knows how to use the internet.
There are thousands of free computer games available that can be played on computers today and people know pretty much how to do it today.
Their `iTV` or whatever will likely turn heads when it is released. I know I am interested. I do not own an iPod. I do like their interfaces.
If their iTV thing does what I think it does, it will become a gateway for their content to be delivered to the living room and that means games.
I bet that most people would like to play Bejewed or some other flash/java game outside of their computer.
That being said, most people have a computer so the TV isn't really all that important anymore as it used to be.
If the iTV will be a platform for specialized content (games) then maybe it will be worth looking into for casual gamers.
I doubt it will be the graphic caliber of the uber expensive Xbox and PS systems but it may have some content worth looking into.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
how many games do you play that can be made to work with just one button on the controller?
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Steve Jobs has never embraced gamers as a legitimate target audience, regardless of the evidence that gaming is the number three reason people buy home computers, right behind the web and email. Even now, getting Apple to add decent video cards and support is like pulling teeth. Their implementation of OpenGL performs abysmally.
Apple may join the gaming fray, but they'll fall flat on their face with that egotistical moron running the show. He's gone out of his way to impede game creation on MacOS for fear that people won't take his baby seriously. Apparently, he believes you can do anything with your "bicycle of the mind" except have fun.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
There's a big problem that is brought up in the article: Console makers sell hardware at a loss. Yes, yes I know about the Wii and how it makes a "profit" but I doubt that is Nintendo's primary source of profit. It has been and always been the games. With Apple notorious for selling overvalued hardware in shiny plastic, this business model is something foreign to them. And then ponder this next point. So what GAMES is this iConsole going to have? If it just has ports of everything else no one in their right mind is going to buy it. It needs a killer app. Good luck Apple finding a developer to create a "must have game" on a new, possibly disastrous platform, for something you know absolutely nothing about. I detest companies trying to do everything for everyone. Do something and do it well dammit.
I think they're smarter than that. They wouldn't go after an entrenched market, where they have no particular skillset advantage, especially one that you need to throw tons of money at to get a foothold. Gaming has been done, by many more qualified competitors.
I wouldn't be surprised if they offered a few simple games, for the casual gamer, on a device like the iTV. Similar to what they do for the iPod. But, I wouldn't call that going after the gaming market, any more than I would call the iPod a GameBoy/PSP competitor.
Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are battling it out for console supremacy, devoting massive resources to winning this war.
Hey, what a great time for Apple to jump in! Low barriers to entry. No entrenched competitors, and a vast unserved market with pent-up demand. It's *perfect*!!!
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea.
This is certainly true, and your observation almost touches upon an interesting parallel.
In some respects, Nintendo is the Apple of the console world. They produce quality hardware in an attractive package. They rely on interesting, well integrated features to sell their hardware. The Wii even looks like a MacMini on its side.
I wouldn't suggest that Apple couldn't do as good a job as Nintendo. But is there really room for both in the market? Especially when on considers Nintendo's (and presumably Apple's) target audience? If Apple made a compelling feature, Nintendo would be forced to retaliate with another. Ideas are a scarce resource, and I doubt Nintendo or Apple has a large enough cache of them to avoid lame gimmicks. Kids might be fond of gimmicks, but grown ups usually aren't.
In the end, this would erode both brands.
After all, I am strangely colored.
It would also have the best voice recognition and handwriting recognition out there; but it wouldn't be advertised, because Apple wants to forget the past, even while retaining the technology...
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
They could call it the Pippen 2.
I think games on the iPod and - eventually - the next generation iPod video - would be more than decent. Anthing more is a massive money drain for audience share. Nintendo has driven the 3rd man out argument by virtue of it's own titles. A fourth? I don't see it. But then the market HAS grown to proportions not seen - well - ever.
Your comment does not really deserve a reply being a joke and redundant at the same time, but if you've seen Apple's recent mice I'd say they are of the same mentality as the Wiimote. That is to say, they are designed to be easy and accessible to everyone and to encourage developers to do the right thing. At the same time, they can easily enable power users to have the myriad buttons they need and want. In fact, Apple's "mighty mouse" is the only mouse I've ever seen where a shared computer can have one hardware mouse with one button for kids and novices and multiple buttons for expert users. I've seen firsthand what happens when novice users try to operate one of those four button designs favored by power users and I've cursed at trying to use the same mouse (as I'm accustomed to three or more). I find it sad that people still drag this old horse out of the closet, even if they're trying to be funny.
Just think about it. Nintendo tends to shoot for the family and low end market. They strive more for inovation of design. Their sales are not all that spectacular. It seems they are a worthwhile company for someone like apple to buy out. Further more it would open up the desktop gaming market to them as they could port all the nintendo games past, present, and future to OSX.
Actually, Mac gamers are a huge part of the game industry... they're called "Console Gamers".
No, but seriously, we already have an Apple in the game industry: it's called Nintendo. They share almost identical business, interface, and design philosophies. If Apple were to have made the perfect handheld back in 2004, it would have been a DS. If Nintendo had made a digital media player back in 2000, it would have been an iPod. Sometimes I even start to forget which company is which, anymore, they've been so obviously cross influencing eachother for quite some time now.
The best thing that we could hope for would be a merger of sorts, in the area between gaming and portable entertainment: a cross-developed iPod/DS would be both very nice and make a lot of sense. But I just can't see Apple entering the gaming market and having anything different to offer from Nintendo, they're infostructure and design philosophies are just too similar.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Marketshare is needed if they want to not waste billions like Microsoft and Sony did.
Nintendo already uses powerpc chips and making another wii with macosx and frontrow would be great. They could use nintendo api's to backport alot of wii titles to teh mac if any developers want to target that market as well. Too bad Apple switched to x86.
http://saveie6.com/
Nintendo's "Shop Channel" has so-far only shown games, and had us all waiting for the Opera browser. Why not team up with Apple, and include an iTunes application for the thing? It can't play CDs anyway...
My name would be Pi_r_[]ed, but this stupid thing wouldn't allow it. Well, at least now you know.
Noone would buy a Mac if it simply had Windows installed on it. People buy Macs because they love OSX, and its integration with the hardware. OSX is to Apple what Zelda and Mario are to Nintendo. People wouldn't buy a Nintendo, anymore, if Nintendo stopped selling great games, and stop trying to create an inspired atmosphere for developers to do the same. People wouldn't buy Macs if Apple stopped making OSX and stopped pushing developers to be more consistant, interface friendly, and created a framework for them to create better software.
It's all about infostructure, and both Nintendo and Apple have very similar philosophies when it comes to their developer frameworks.
The only real difference is how they ACTUALLY get their money. In the gaming industry, hardware is sold at a loss or at only a small profit (even Nintendo wouldn't stay in the game if they ONLY had their hardware profits to live off of). In the computer world, hardware is sold at a huge profit, and software is used to promote the hardware (iTMS and the iPod being a good example).
Simply because Apple, itself, doesn't "do games", per-say, has very little relivance. They don't do games because the Macintosh lost the gaming war LONG AGO, and it would be futile for them to put a lot of money into trying to win back that market. Also, Apple's plug-n-play, and hard-nosed infostructure is much better suited for the console market than the Computer Gaming market, which are very different.
So, you're right, Apple doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell in the Computer Gaming market. They have about as much chance as Nintendo does in the PC gaming market. Both have an attitude very well suited to the console gaming market.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
When Sony introduced the Playstation, everyone thought that it would get stomped by Nintendo and Sega. Even though Microsoft has huge cash reserves, there were some who thought that Microsoft would get whipped by Nintendo and Sony. It wasn't the market leader, it sold a respectable number of consoles and proved that it was a player. Apple could compete with Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft, but they would have to make very good decisions. Otherwise it would be a repeat of the poor, dead Pippin.
The Pippin was both ahead of its time and a late entry into the console market. Consoles were not a multi-purpose multimedia station back in the mid-nineties like they are (or can be) today. The Pippin was too much too soon and not enough of a console too late. By the time the Pippin-based products were on the market the market was already dominated the Big 3. They did what they were designed to do better too. The market wasn't willing to wait for the Pippin to mature given multiple mature alternatives. The Pippin should have remained an Apple R&D project and never should have been sent to market. Like so many of Apple's great ideas they were timed poorly. Had Apple brought back the Pippin 3-4 years ago as a multi-functional entertainment system (TV, DV, DVR, home audio, Web, some gaming perhaps) they would have had a stellar product on their hands.
No, Sony is the Apple of the console business, no matter what the Nintendo + Apple = LOVE crwd says.
Which console manufacturer makes a console that not only can play AAC, can rip CD's into it? Sony.
Which console manufacture makes consoles and portables that can play iPod video content? Sony
Which console manufacture makes a portable device that can play AAC? Sony
Which console manufacture makes a console that is a true "home computer" and can do what the Mac Mini does but is a better game machine. Sony.
Which console manufacturer makes x86 desktops and laptops with style (Vaio)? Sony.
Which console manufacturer sucks at marketing which is why they haven't trounced everyone else with their technologically superior products? Sony.
Do the Sony commercials mention the fact that the PSP has a built in web browser, supports RSS and can download podcasts and vodcasts directly to itself with no PC intervention needed? No.
Do the Sony commercials mention that the fricking PS3 can run Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, can edit your photos, etc via Linux, so that it's not just $600 gametoy for lil Timmy, it's a computer too? No.
Frakkin SCEfoo marketing morons.
There already is an iPod/DS, it's the Sony PSP. Why do you think the PSP plays AAC and video content encoded for the iPod. Surely Sony's been influcenced by Apple too, including the Vaio line.
From the perspective of the portable games market, the PSP is vastly more similar to the Zune than it is to the iPod.
Apple... bit player?
A little too much ganja, mon?
Yes, we all know Apple only has one good product at the top of its class. Nevermind the MacBooks that're selling like hotcakes... or the fact that it has multiple iPod products, each of which is at the top of their respective classes...
Buy an iMac... shove Boot Camp on it... Games Machine!!
Seriously though, maybe they should concentrate on having people write games for their computers then. I mean granted, you have Civ IV and Doom, but 99% of Mac games arrive late and it's just embarrassing. I mean they have Myst as the splash graphic for Strategy Games on their store for Pete's sake! My local Game store here in the UK has just removed its Mac shelf (yup, one shelf) to make room for... more console magazines.
If Apple are really serious about making a console, it isn't going to happen anytime soon. Put plain and simple; Apple don't understand gaming. And if they did, it'd probably hurt their 'creative professional' image. Leave the consoles to people who do it best and plough your money, brains and time into making the Mac better.
It's just a rebranded Wii.
...and I do not mean 3D as in 2D graphics with 3D drawings but real 3D graphics, as in floating in mid air images with 360 degrees visibility. The technology is already available.
And if such a console was coupled with an innovative control method analogous to the Wiimote, it could be a success.
I do not see Apple succeeding in the console market in any other way.
"Which console manufacturer makes a console that not only can play AAC, can rip CD's into it? Sony." .m4p file). Sony does not (nor does anyone else) make hardware or software that will play iTunes Store files because Apple don't license out FairPlay.
You do know AAC is not an Apple proprietry format? The iTunes Store uses AAC protected with their FairPlay DRM (creating a
"Which console manufacture makes consoles and portables that can play iPod video content? Sony"
You do know h264 is not an Apple proprietry format? The iTunes Store movies/videos are saved as h264 files and are once again protected with Fairplay and won't play on any other hardware than your iPods and on authorised machines running iTunes.
"Which console manufacture makes a portable device that can play AAC? Sony"
See my first point.
"Which console manufacturer sucks at marketing which is why they haven't trounced everyone else with their technologically superior products? Sony."
So now you're implying Apple sucks at marketing!?
Or are you trying to say Sony has failed to trounce MS/Nintendo because of marketing and not the MASSIVE price tag of the PS3 and MASSIVE shortages of hardware? Let us not forget the PSX was inferior to the N64 but Sony certainly won that round. the PS2 was technologically inferior to the xbox and gamecube but again Sony definitely won that round too. Sony didn't win those rounds by technologically superior hardware.
I have a PS2 Linux kit, and it's fully capable of running standard "home" applications at 294 MHz and 32MB RAM. The CPU isn't the bottleneck at all except for things like converting flv into MPEG4 with PSPVC, stuff like that.
The PS3 is 10x faster and has 8x the RAM and you're saying it won't be able to do that? You do know that GIMP is capable of editing images larger than available RAM. I bet if had a 5 megipixel image I could load and edit it on the PS2. I've done 3.2 MP myself on it.
My local Wal-Mart has desktops on the shelf with slower CPU's and the same RAM.
Trust me, for home desktop uses the PS3 will run just fine.
the apple iBox360.
This space intentionally left blank
Just as Microsoft and Sony weren't really on the list when you think of gaming until they brought out their own consoles, and Apple weren't the first thing you thought of when you thought mp3 players a decade ago..
which is totally what she said
I think the iPod is pretty big proof that Apple does not suck at marketing.
I think that Apple probably is trying to come up with some strategy to address the problem of not enough games for the Mac. I don't think they will make a separate video game console. I think they will do some things to try to make the mac more attractive to game developers and maybe they will create some games of their own for the Mac.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
OS-X should be a major draw for Apple customers. In my opinion, it's a top-shelf OS that makes Windows XP seem crude.
With that said, I'd love to see some stats on how many people buy an Apple product (computers especially) because of the "pretty" factor; I'm certain there are people drawn to Apple computers on looks alone, unaware they are different from a "normal" (read: Windows) computer.
To be fair, prior to the debut of the playstation Sony was a console game developer under the Sony Imagesoft Brand, Developed the VERY good sound chip used in the SNES, and collaborated with Nintendo on the never released SNES CD drive that eventually led to the playstation. Anyone who kept their ear to the ground re: the console industry could have seen a Sony console coming sooner or later. Microsoft is less obvious, though with the way consoles have been gradually inching towards PC territory it was inevitable sooner or later. Microsoft had also been experimenting with set top boxes for quite some time prior to the debut of the Xbox as well for the same reasons. (Remember ultimate TV?)
Apple is supposed to be computer company, not a portable audio company.
"To gesticulate wildly" is an idiom indicating urgent and frantic communication, and usually implies that the thing communicated is not as important as the speaker implies, or just plain doesn't exist.
A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.
Who dictates that law?
I suppose Sega is supposed to be a gaming hardware company then, too. And Sony is a Betamax manufacturer. And what the hell does IBM think they are doing? They are a punch card manufacturing company for God's sake!
A company that is just a ______ company is sure to die eventually, especially if they are not on the top of their market. Every company needs to find its segment of the market. Every company needs to adapt to survive. Apple may have been a "computer" company, but now they are evolving into something else. Would you rather they stagnate and die? I welcome any additions to the gaming world. Even if they don't fair well, the competition they provide will spur innovation in their competitors.
There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
I don't remember ultimate TV, I was always a Mac/Amiga boy until 1998 or so when we got our first PC (well we had a 486 that I used to play Quake on but I don't think that counts :p ). Microsoft did make games before the X-Box, but I always thought of Sony as makers of walkmans until then(I was only 14/15 in 1998!)
which is totally what she said
You didn't really miss anything in regards to ultimate TV. It was a set top box that combined the features of a TIVO (though the interface was not as good) with a Web TV. It was released around the time when common thinking was that set top boxes like web tv would eventually overtake the pc as the dominant platform for web browsing, etc. nothing stellar...it sold terribly and microsoft dropped it once it became obvious this wasn't going to happen.
Mood Lighting! Get the blue one to compliment the LED on your PS2
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
There are two reasons for this. The first reason, which applies to both of your complaints here, is that everyone who cares already knows. They already did their marketing. It's called making press releases. The nerd press has done the rest.
The second reason, which applies mostly to the second one, is that the machine is not a credible general-purpose computer, primarily because it has too little memory. You could use it to surf the web or read your email but I shudder to think of what it would be like trying to do photo manipulation or similar. The PSP actually is similar; who wants to surf on a game console? But again, anyone who would want to knows that it can be done already.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Ummm Microsoft was on the list the minute Windows the defacto standard for playing PC games. I don't see too many being made to run on the competitors' OSes
How about a $199 add on to a Mac that makes it XBox360 compatible, using the existing DVD, hard drive, display, sound - i.e using the Mac as an audio and storage peripheral, and steal its monitor to play games? And that can also work with any PC whose manufacturer takes the trouble to tweak the software?
It's just a side effect that Windows is the 'standard' gaming platform on PCs as you say. Microsoft started off in the OS business, then later Office 'productivity', then games. There are more and more games being made that run on other OSes, and there used to be plenty of games made for Mac, Atari and Amiga. We're talking about a different market here anyway: console gaming. There is a distinction, though obviously a lot of people will have both a console and a PC.
which is totally what she said
Apple as they are currently have no hope of succeeding in the console marketplace. The thing to understand and what's being ignored is that any console machine NEEDS a steady supply of games software to have any hope of succeeding (at least half a dozen games a month). This steady supply has to represent as many genres as possible, be of mostly solid quality with regular standouts and at least one killer app per year (during the holiday season). No game hardware company can provide this quantity and quality of software on its own (only N64 era Nintendo came close), and as such it is the third party game developers that are the true kingmakers in the industry. It is the EAs, the Ubisofts, the Capcoms, the Konamis, the Epics, the Bungies, the Rares, and Square-Enixes of the world that determine how well console hardware sells in comparision to its competitors, not the hardware company itself. Apple would have to learn not only how to play nice with these guys but beg for their support and Apple has never struck me as a company that plays well with partners. I hesitate to think how they would handle being so dependant on outside software developers. The games are always the most important thing and I don't know where Apple would get that supply.
I remember my first Lisa - now there was a gaming machine! I remember dragging files to the trash... Good times. Good times.
Which console manufacturer sucks at marketing which is why they haven't trounced everyone else with their technologically superior products? Sony.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*breath*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Sony sucks at marketing and hasn't trounced everyone in the console world? You seriously missed the past 12 years of console gaming?
Sony, and let's be crystal clear about this, is the Microsoft of the console world. 70%+ of the console market, massive marketing campaigns, nearly everything runs on it, huge media blitz for new product release, proprietary formats everywhere...
Your post was a joke, right? Right?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Who the hell wants to edit photos on a gaming counsel? First off, trying to constitute a PS3 as a cheap solution to a computer is ridiculous. Despite being able to use a keyboard/mouse on a PS3, you're going to use a regular TV to edit photos? Even with an HD tv you're going to have to shell out $2000+ and at that point I think it's moot. (Speculation)Plus you have to be somewhat tech savvy to even run linux/install it on the PS3 which most consumers aren't and could possibly brick the damn thing. Linux on the PS3 is a geek's wet dream but serves a purpose like tits on a bull. Sony just beat us to the question as to whether you could put linux on it. And Frankly, I'd rather have my gaming counsel and my work machine separate. I don't like mixing my ice cream with my mashed potatoes.
ChronoCloud... Sony or Square Fanboi? I'm putting my money on Sony.
make a cheaper MAC mini included with video out options and a media centre interface and a controller.
and Microsoft has always been associated with fun. in theory Apple could just buy up a bunch of game developers like Microsoft has done.
in all honesty it seems a bit out there. if these new Apple devices can play games, i would guess it's a secondary thing (if even that). if Apple is talking to game makers, or hiring a few in-house, i would think it is more likely to be for the iPod (or maybe iPhone, if it is real). Macs have always had some goofy little time killing games on them, like snake on older cell phones. becoming a full blown console maker is a bit hard to keep under wraps... even for Apple.
talk about thinking different!
I've done it,works fine. People used to do all sorts of things on 320x200 and 640x400 displays.
You can buy 1080p HDMI sets for less than a 1000 here. But the PS2 does other resolutions so you could use an older or less capable (cheaper set) and still get better than standard NTSC.
Anybody who can follow simple instructions can install Linux on a PS3, or PS2 for that matter. It's like following a recipe. And there's no possiblity of bricking it, Linux is a totally separate thing from the GameOS, in both the PS2 and PS3 it's akin to dual booting Linux and Windows.
Running Linux is not that hard at all, plenty of books on the subject out there and since the PS3 can use standard PPC Linux binaries it's even easier, less need to compile everything like one does for the PS2 (though that isn't that difficult either) Anybody could learn to use the PS3 as a desktop machine.
Square first, Sony second, but SCEfoo can't market it's way out of a paper bag.
Crono... your digging a very big hole for yourself lol
:P
get out while you still can
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32171
Actually,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Betacam
Sony IS STILL a betamax manufacturer(scroll down to the bottom where is says HDCAM SR to get to my point, but its all relevant since everything about 15 years old or newer is probably still in use at some smaller stations).
You didn't think the TV station downtown uses a $20 walmart VCR did you?
gamers would just laugh at any Apple-branded gaming device. this is coming from a diehard Mac user, btw.
Spot on.
I love working with Macs, but you have to be delusional to think Apple is going to woo hardcore gamers. Jobs knows this. Tilting at windmills won't work for Apple, and he knows it. I'm frankly surprised that this rumor is getting so much play, when it so obviously makes no sense. Think of the effort required to get game companies to develop titles on a new platform. That in itself is a massive barrier to entry for Apple.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Oh that, the PS2 works the same way. You don't use the "local memory" the way PC's do it. It's not a real issue except for anti-sony folks looking for some kind of ammo. You write to local memory, you don't read from it.
Nothing new.
An Apple-cider console, huh? Name any good games for the Mac besides MDK or anything from Bungie.
Not with the GMA950.
And if they were going to do a mini that was both fast enough and cheap enough to compete in the console market, why the hell would they have bothered making the crippled horror that is the current mini?
The thought in my mind is... is Apple thinking of making a "game console," or is the rumor based on an idea that Apple might be making a living-room console that also plays games?
If the iTV had even rudimentary game playing ability, it would be one more feature that could entice buyers. If it were relatively easy for Apple to implement, it would make a lot of sense. At the announced price level, the iTV is close to being an impulse buy for people with disposable income. Perhaps a game feature could be the one thing that makes some people say "why not?"
I don't think I'm the only person who has ever seen something in the store, found it intriguing but not quite worth buying, and then noticed some "extra feature" that made me reconsider. "Oh... it does that too? Well... that might be worth it, then."
It doesn't have to be as good as the Wii or the PS3. It just has to play games that people find fun at the right time.
I own a Nintendo DS. I don't play with it nearly as often as I play Solitare on my Blackberry. The DS is a much better game machine than the Blackberry. However, I usually have my Blackberry with me when I'm stuck in a waiting room, and the DS isn't something I carry around all the time. It doesn't matter that the Blackberry is a poor gaming machine; it's entertaining enough at the right time.
There are a lot of people who would not buy a "game console" who would play the occasional game if it were available on the iTV they bought to watch movies or listen to their iTunes library. Even if the graphics were on par with the Atari 2600. (How many Atari Flashback2 consoles has Target sold, I wonder?)