Slashdot Mirror
Theorizing a Big Apple Push Into Gaming
Ian Lamont writes "Terrence Russell has outlined an interesting theory about what industry Apple intends to break into next. He points to games. Forget Pippin II, or an iMac gaming rig — he thinks the mobile realm is where Apple will make a big product push. It's not the first bit of speculation about Apple's renewed interest in gaming, but Russell's theory may have more legs, considering Apple's invitation to develop games on the iPhone SDK, its strong mobile product line, and a Apple trademark extension filed three months ago."
GM tried the electric car once before, it failed, and they're doing it again. It's because the Gaming industry is one that hasn't been affected by a potential recession, it continues to expand in revenue and profitability. It's because games (much like electric cars) are what consumers want. Go where the market lies, don't be afraid of past failures, or you'll be doomed to irrelevance.
While to me an annoyance, this standardization might actually work in Apple's favor when trying to woo game makers, as it could act to simplify development.
Read my Very Short "Stories"
Unless you're talking about hunt the wumpus or curses-based tetris, it doesn't do jack shit for Linux.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Because this time, they are not trying to break into a market. They are already in a market, with a very popular device (iPhone/Touch), that has decent power and 3D capabilities along with some really good control systems (accelerometers/multitouch).
Anyone who saw the demo of Monkeyball running on the iPhone from the launch of the SDK, is crazy to think that a whole lot of cool games are not forthcoming.
Furthermore, gaming on the iPhone has the same kind of hook that Wii gaming does - it's going to be kind of unique. Exactly because there's really nothing like a D-Pad on the system games are going to have to figure out what games work best with controls using multi-touch and the accelerometers. Being unqiue is also helpful in that games for the syste,m will seem different than what people are used to, even from the DS which already has a touchscreen.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Over the years, Apple has done everything short of spitting in the face of game developers.
Yes, there will be mobile games for the iPhone. I expect to see a Bejeweled port in short order. No, the iPhone will not be the next handheld gaming device a la Nintendo DS, Sony PSP, etc. It's capabilities will be similar to Windows Mobile, with fewer games. All development will be done by third parties who Apple will do nothing to encourage and whom Apple will end up screwing over (because they always screw over the developers). i.e. "We've just released the mandatory iPhone update X, which breaks all 3rd-party apps, and we didn't bother to tell developers this would happen, and no, we won't tell you what we changed to make it easy to fix your apps. We hate you."
Apple Gaming Platform + Duke Nukem Forever? That sir, is the end of the Universe as we know it.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Apple uses a modified version of gcc, but gcc has supported objective C since the NextStep days. GNUStep provides an OpenStep implementation.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
I can't wait for my controller with only one button.
Of course Apple's going to push the iPhone as a gaming platform- they'd be stupid not to. Why? Because it already IS the platform- they're already selling a mobile device with the form factor, screen, and processing power required for a good handheld gaming system. So failing to make it into one simply due to lack of the games themselves would basically be silly. I don't think Apple set out to build a competitor for the DS & PSP, but if they're selling competitive hardware anyway, why on earth wouldn't they want to make it compete? Especially if doing so is as simple as beefing up the SDK with gaming API's and encouraging independent developers to do the rest. And there's really not any question about that, because Apple's already done that. They invited in game developers to use their new SDK, and the game developers say they're impressed with what a great game development platform Apple's made the iPhone. It seems that this is yesterday's news; Apple already announced the iPhone as a portable gaming platform, and already has major game developers on board. This article is speculating that Apple might do something that Steve said they've already done in his last keynote.
If you want crazy theories about what Apple could do as far as gaming goes... how about, instead of selling Mac Pros with two quad-core Xeons, they start making them with one quad-core Xeon and one Cell. Sure, it would take a mountain of work to make Xcode optimize its compiler to execute code for running on two different architectures simultaneously, especially one as odd as the Cell, but Xcode already generates universal binaries for x86 and PPC at the click of a button, and Apple's got the resources these days to make Xcode optimize as much as possible for the Cell, and make decisions about which code to run on the cell and which to run on the Xeon.
Why would they try a crazy architecture like that? Well, in the markets Mac Pros are aimed at; video editing, rendering, Photoshop, scientific computing- Cells can, in certain circumstances, run circles around the competition. It could grant a speed advantage for certain tasks that Windows PC's would have no hope of matching. Throw in a quad Xeon, a Cell, and finish up making the OS offload some processing to the graphics card, and you've got a computer with three extremely different and very fast processors to throw at different sorts of problems.
But wait, didn't I say something about games? Well, if you're selling a computer with a Cell in it already, along with a graphics card, (how long could it be before Apple starts offering Blu-ray on Mac Pros...), could they license PS3 compatibility from Sony? They wouldn't even have to license it, Sony could sell a PS3 compatibility client for Mac Pros. Before you say "Sony would never do that," remember that Sony loses money on each PS3- they're in this for market dominance, not hardware profits.
Anyway, that's my crazy conspiracy theory regarding Apple gaming, to go with the "already happened so it's not even news" theory regarding iPhone gaming above.
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
Because John Carmack is one of the rare game developers who is wealthy enough due to his previous and ongoing successes (and being first and best into a massively successful niche...the first-person shooter) to own and run his own company which means that he calls all of the shots. Obviously Mr. Carmack enjoys proving the technical superiority of his code and games by running them on many platforms, even if those platforms don't earn a lot of extra revenue, but most game developers don't have these luxuries.
As for Adobe, Microsoft, and backwards compatibility, there are always trade-offs to be made with regard to supporting existing customers and ditching the old in favor of the new. These include not just technical issues, but money issues too. It is easy to Monday morning quarterback previous corporate decisions when one has the benefit of hindsight, but for those of us who are not prescient we make the best choices (or what we believe are the best choices) we can with the information that we have in the time available.
"If it wasn't for the iPod they would have been edged out by now."
Which computer company has the strongest 1st quarter PC sales? you know the post Christmas, not yet tax refund season when people are swimming in Christmas debt?
Apple computer, they are usually within 1 million units or so of their 4th quarter (the strongest quarter for any PC maker) numbers in the 1st quarter... what does that spell to me or to you or to anyone else?
There are people who because they couldn't get an apple computer for Christmas tucked that money away and bought it in the 1st quarter. There are enough of these people who couldn't get it in Christmas, that the 1st quarter sales for apple are insanely high.
So what if anything does the I pod having 75% of the mp3 player market have anything to do with the massive massive popular demand for new apple products since Steve Jobs took back control of apple?
basically, nothing. if the apple computers weren't so popular they'd have abysmal 1st quarters just like everyone else in the PC sector. But they Don't.
Keep in mind that a significant percentage of 'total' annual computer sales are purchased by businesses, almost none of which buy apple, because they're looking for the most stripped down and cheapest PCs they can deploy for their companies employees. Apple has the strongest consumer market out there as demonstrated by how many apple purchasers buy in the 1st quarter because they simply couldn't buy what they wanted in the 4th quarter.
Doing good when all your competitors are doing bad is a strong sign of having a good consumer brand. Ipods definitely affect apples bottom line though, and they definitely saw the company through some lean years, but they have nothing to do with apple's 1st quarter PC sales.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html