Slashdot Mirror
Monkey Island Creator Slams Corporate Control Over Game Publishing
An anonymous reader writes "Ron Gilbert, co-creator of classic games Maniac Mansion, Monkey Island 1 and 2, and many more, has spoken out against corporate censorship — the way of large companies getting a say on what does or does not get published on the distribution channels they control. Although his insightful rant applies to a number of corporations (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and Comcast are mentioned), most of the direct examples single out Apple. Quoting: 'Apple has maintained an almost North Koreanish dictatorial control over the devices, becoming the arbitrator over what is good and bad, what is allowed and not allowed. They don't have this control over the Mac because it is a real computer and an open device, but they can do this with the iPhone because we (as consumers) were convinced by the cell phone carriers that they needed this control to protect their networks (in the same way they wouldn't let us own our own telephones in the '70s) and Apple was happy to jump on that ship because they could finally control everything that went on the device and we bought it into it. Apple apologists say that Apple needs this control to maintain the "specialness" of the device. I say that's a load of crap.'" He also mentions Adidas dropping out of iAds because they couldn't accept Apple's excessive creative control, and a photography app that was rejected because it used the volume buttons as trigger."
I bought the iPhone because I know they are controlling the user experience. I'm greatly enjoying my user experience on my iOS devices. I feel like I got what I paid for, and am likely to get more apple products in the future.
When will Apple learn what Nintendo learned back in the 90s, consumers don't like censorship and will but their games from the platform that doesn't have censorship.
If Apple intends their iPhone to be more than "the obsolete product that started a revolution" they need to change their policies. People want to use the devices that they paid for in the ways they want, otherwise, a rival platform (probably Android) will have a "killer app" rejected from the Apple app store and Apple will pay the price like Nintendo did with Mortal Kombat.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
What the mans says is true. Yet people still buy and use the products (including many here on /.). Given that there exist alternatives, people must be OK with the compromise (design/"sexiness" vs openness).
We each have a most powerful weapon against such authoritarian control - do not buy the offending company's product. No-one truly needs an iPhone. Either go without or buy a more open alternative.
The problem with Android is that even though it lets you see what other apps can do, Google doesn't offer something simple like a checkbox to turn off their capabilities when people don't want them to run. Once Google implements something like that, it will be smooth sailing for Android.
But you've also got the black box problem, everything you run on the iPhone is based on trust with Apple, for all we know, there -could- very well be malicious apps in the app store that got through. The difference is, its a lot easier to detect malware running on Android than on iOS.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
well I hate to rain on your parade. But Apple's iOS has been caught to be just as guilty as the Android App market with applications that constantly transmit private information to servers. Just because Apple wants their fancy walled in garden for their app store does not make them immune to that happening to them.
I am personally sick of people who think since I own a Mac or Linux box, I am immune to viruses and other crap that people get with windows. And the same holds true for iOS vs Android vs Blackberry vs Windows Mobile. Live with it.
If it sucks so much then fortunately we are not forced to buy it.
I don't own an iPhone and don't have a burning desire to own one. So reading this is kind of entertaining.
$30 dollar phone with pay as you go airtime for the win.
How to avoid Apple lock-in in one easy step:
1. Don't go through Apple.
Really, vendors shouldn't have any control over any of their services and be forced to whatever a whiny geek whines about. How dare stores control what they choose the sell, how much they sell it for, and how they sell it?!?
Why shouldn't buttons be multi-purpose though? There are 3 buttons on an iPhone 4 and one switch. One of the buttons is used to exit the app, the other two should be used as needed. There are a lot of ways that buttons can be used for more than one purpose. For example, in the camera app, there would be no need to have music playing, if you want to change the volume of your phone you could just use the silent/loud switch included. Rocker buttons are very nice for page scrolling when holding a phone in vertical mode and would be useful in the camera app. Android lets apps switch functions of the buttons and its not frustrating, its very convenient on a touch-phone with very few physical buttons.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
From the article:
Aaaaand that's where you lost me. Beaten Wife Syndrome: if you keep going back for more, after a while you have to take some responsibility for enabling the whuppings.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I seem to remember the Atari 2600 games that were mostly junk because of the complete lack of control over the quality of content. If you've ever played the ET and fell into a hole about a thousand times, you know what I mean. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.T._the_Extra-Terrestrial_(video_game) Extremely strict oversight might not be great, but neither is total anarchy.
Apple's controls are well known. In fact, they're probably the closest you get to console-style controls from the big three except they're open to everyone.
If you want to write code and not worry about approvals and crap like that, there are three major platforms you can write for - PC, Mac, and Android. Heck, I'm sure other than the Google Marketplace, the other marketplaces for Android probably excercise some control as well.
I guess I'm just getting tired of all these posts of "whine whine whine Apple approvals suck whine whine whine". Apple's not forcing you to code for their platform, so if you don't like it, don't. There's no law (yet) that says everyone must write for the iPhone. We all know Apple's approval process sucks. It's well publicized in many mass media publications already and has been since the app store opened 2 years ago. I know lots of people who won't write an app for iPhone out of fear of it getting rejected. (Some refuse to write for Android too, but that's more of a "I can't afford to support and test on a million different phones" than "I refuse to subject myself to Apple's draconian policies").
Or is it more a case of "I don't like to write for iPhone but it's the only way I can make money"?
As for Adidas, they did what any business would do - they withdrew, which is their right. If enough people do that, Apple may relent. If not, they risk having their iAd platform rendered marginalized. But that's a business decision only Apple can make, and if others are happy about it, good, if not, they'll leave.
Heck, I don't know what ads Adidas was trying to do, but they could've been highly annoying and distracting ones that really, no one would've wanted.
It's a volume button.
What's a "volume button"? Is that any different than any other button? Does it have a label on it that says "this button only controls volume, and nothing else, always"?
I don't have a problem with Apple with rejecting an app that subverts the defined usage of a hardware button.
Ha! "Subverts the defined usage of a button". That's very Orwellian of you. Isn't the "defined usage" of a button to be pressed?
I haven't used (or heard of) this app
Yeah, and you won't either, because Apple rejected it. You'll never get to determine, for your own usage scenarios, whether it's more comfortable or natural to press a button on the side of the device to take a picture. You won't have to make that choice for yourself, because Apple has already made it for you.
what does it do if you try to change the volume of your music or phone call when also trying to take a picture?
What do you think it does? It takes a picture. That's why you're using the camera, right? Do you turn on your music, take a phone call, and then start the camera? If you have the camera running and know that the volume button takes a picture, is it going to confuse you when you press the volume button and it takes a picture? Why is this difficult to figure out? Maybe it's better that Apple did make that choice for you if you're confused by things like this.
Your keyboard has a button on it near the bottom that's really long and doesn't have a label. Most of the time, when you're typing sentences, when you press this button it inserts a space character in the text. Do you get confused when you're online and you're using TAB to skip between interface elements, you land on a button, press the space bar, and it "clicks" the button? This key is only supposed to insert spaces into text, right? Why is it also clicking buttons that you've focused? That's madness! And what's the deal with that TAB button, anyway? Sometimes it inserts a bunch of whitespace, and sometimes it changes focus. How can anyone be expected to make any sense of this? And don't even get me started on a backspace key that would cause my browser to go to the previous page. That totally loses me.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
We must be reading different news sites. I've seen stuff about Android apps sending GPS data, and even contacts. The "counter point" article I saw on iPhone says that two thirds of apps send the unique device ID to the server.
Now, I don't love that it sends this, but it really is an entirely different class of problem.
-Peter
I know everyone loves to hate on apple's dictatorial approach, but just for once I'd like to talk about some of the less egregious examples of corporate censorship. He mentions XBLA in passing. I want to know what he's specifically talking about.
The indie section was a mess last time I looked, the top sellers were "personal massager" programs that did nothing more than make the controllers vibrate on command. There were several "games" that just tortured your avatar. One involved just shooting your avatar out of a woman's womb and trying to make the "baby" break as much stuff as possible. The indie section of XBLA seems more like an abandoned lot than a walled garden. If MS is exerting any control over that crap pile, they should be ashamed of themselves.
The non-indie sections of XBLA on the other hand do have better offerings, but I've heard of a few cases where MS has definitely meddled. They're pushing a "gamers have no reason to expect things for free, so you can't give them anything for free" motto it seems. Valve claimed that MS wouldn't let them release TF2 updates for free for that reason. They could have charged for it, but free updates for an already watered down version of the game? Absolutely not. At some point there was also an issue of how big a file TF2 could update, though I don't remember if that was MS putting artificial limits on it or the XBLA software couldn't handle it. I'd wonder if that's part or all of the reason steam is coming or has come to the PS3 but not the 360. MS may have said they couldn't, or steam may have decided (for good reason) to not bother. Either way, we 360 owners lost out there, and any game that my computer can run I'll be buying on steam.
Anyway, I think this discussion can use some examples that aren't apple because this problem isn't limited to iphones and ipads.
What about this? http://gizmodo.com/5592521/how-a-guy-tricked-apple-with-a-disguised-iphone-tethering-app
If tethering can make it past the Apple gates, why won't other 'features'?
This space for rent.
Sorry, but having to spend $79 to replace the battery in a $99 iPhone 3GS is just plain idiotic.
I'll preface this by saying that I don't like non-user-replaceable batteries either, even just because you can't take a spare battery if you're not going to be near power for a while.
But you should know better than to say "$99 iPhone 3GS": It cost a lot more than that and it's subsidised by your fixed term service contract with the telco. Although you consider $79 too much, compared to $600 - $800 to purchase the phone outright, it's not wildly out of proportion.
?
Android apps tell you what permissions they want. While I wish they gave you more information, it's enough to get the feeling with something isn't right. If you download malicious app and expect to play a game when the app requests contact data and GPS location, along with internet connection, you know something is wrong.
Minecraft guy has made a couple million dollars posting his early-alpha game on the Internet. You don't need Apple. You don't need EA. You just need a game that doesn't suck and an IP address.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The app that Apple pulled needed to perform various steps to enable the easter egg, so it's not as if the volume buttons are instantly reconfigured. You have to go out of your way substantially to enable it, and still people did it, because they really wanted to.
That is because some people enjoy using the items they purchased as they see fit. If came out with a brand of axes and sent a copyright license along with it you implicitly agree to by purchasing and it read, "By purchasing this Axe, you agree to only use it for chopping Birch trees and you may not modify the handle nor the axe head in any way without explicit permission of Antisyzygy Inc.". Most people would probably want to use the axe to also chop down other types of trees or even planks of wood, or maybe they would want to add a special grip to it. Software and hardware is no different than any other tool. You use it for purposes as you see fit and if it simply doesn't work for that purpose then you get a different tool or augment your tool to work. I don't want to argue the copyright portion. A tool to do something virtually is still a tool, albeit a more abstract version. Im not disagreeing that Apple's product is designed for aesthetics and ergonomics in that order. Its just bullshit you can't do something with a tool you purchase. If there was an alternative to loading apps through there App store I wouldn't complain.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
iPhone apps don't have to track your GPS data and sell it, when Apple will do it for you.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2010/06/apple-location-privacy-iphone-ipad.html
Your keyboard has a button on it near the bottom that's really long and doesn't have a label. Most of the time, when you're typing sentences, when you press this button it inserts a space character in the text. Do you get confused when you're online and you're using TAB to skip between interface elements, you land on a button, press the space bar, and it "clicks" the button? This key is only supposed to insert spaces into text, right? Why is it also clicking buttons that you've focused? That's madness!
Your example shows the major difference between the touch-based iOS devices and generic computers. On the iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch, you never have context-specific behavior of any buttons. The space bar on the onscreen keyboard always inserts a space into the focused text field. The home button always terminates the current application (well, except when you double/triple-press it or you're already on the home screen and there's nothing to terminate). iOS never requires the user to remember any keyboard hotkeys or differing behavior based on the current application's state. The return key even changes to "Submit" in a web form, or "Search" in the search bar, etc.
You just can't directly compare the user interface of a traditional computer to this new kind of system.
Companies only "learn" when they are getting their ass handed to them by a competitor. When Sony's PlayStation started kicking Nintendo's ass, Nintendo then became more developer friendly. Now that the Wii has become successful, they instantly reverted to their old unfriendly ways. They quickly forgot that being a shithead never is good strategy.
But hey, go ahead and keep thinking that typical corporations learn. Companies that are on top ALWAYS exert their control as much as possible, whether it be developer or consumer. Becoming consumer/developer friendly becomes a last ditch move to survive, not as their main strategy.
I've been testing an iPad as a work tool for the last day or so.
The findings have been not overlly surprising.
Pros:
Cons:
Sadly, I won't be recommending the iPad as a work tool.
My neck hurts. I accidentally deleted a file on a workstation I was controlling via VNC due to the klunky touchpad interface. And I had to re-purchase a BLu-ray I already own because Apple wouldn't let me mount it without buying yet_another_app.
This is not my definition of sexy.
Your example shows the major difference between the touch-based iOS devices and generic computers. On the iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch, you never have context-specific behavior of any buttons.
Never? Really? Wow, then I really need you to help me figure something out, because I'm suddenly very confused.
When I single click my home button, it:
1) Exits an app if I'm in an app.
2) Exits the folder if I'm looking at an app folder.
3) Takes me to the home screen if I'm on any screen other than the home screen or an app folder.
4) Takes me to the search screen if I'm on the home screen
When I double click my home button, it:
1) Brings up the music controls if the device is locked
2) Hides the music controls if the device is locked and the music controls are already visible
3a) On a device that supports iOS4 multitasking, it brings up the task manager screen (don't recall the name of it) if the device is not locked
3b) On a device that doesn't support iOS4 multitasking, it:
3b1) Brings up the music controls if music is playing (and I should mention, that this is an entirely different looking set of music controls than the one it brings up when the device is locked).
3b2) Behaves like a single click if no music is playing and you are in an app or on a screen other than the home screen
3b2) Does absolutely nothing if no music is playing and you are already on the home screen
When I click the volume button, it:
1) Controls the volume (using the volume control overlay) when the the device isn't locked
2) Controls the volume (using the volume control overlay) when the device is locked and music is playing
3) Does absolutely nothing when the device is locked and music is not playing.
4) Controls the volume without displaying the volume control overlay on any screen where there is a volume slider showing. However, if you wait a few seconds and the UI autohides, then suddenly the volume button displays the overlay again.
That's funny. To me, that seems like a whole shitload of context-specific behaviors, but I'm more than willing to learn what it really is, since iOS apparently never has context-specific behavior of any buttons.
I wonder if she's ever heard of the Nintendo DS
Nintendo DS software development is even more restrictive than iOS software development. For one thing, Nintendo doesn't want anyone working from home, so the smallest of shops are shut out entirely. See the case of Bob's Game.
or Archos
Google has made a decision not to open up Android Market to Archos devices yet. Only phones with a voice and data plan quality as of right now.
Besides being bulky and not holding much content on it's own, [an iPhone or 3G iPad] can also rack up absurd network roaming charges.
That's what airplane mode is for. Use it until you get back on one ;-)
Not necessarily enough value to justify it, but...
I have had an iPhone for a while. I regard it as a toy. I got a G2 recently. I spent a couple of hours browsing the app market.
On the Android app market:
* About a third of the things I looked at had a 5-star review which was, in fact, spam for a warez site. ("This app is awesome! Get all apps for $9.99/month from our site, ")
* Some apps had warnings such as "this app sends unauthorized text messages" or other malware-like things, apparently undisputed... but were still there.
* While I am all for freedom and creativity, it seemed that every page of search results in any of several categories contained at least one thing which was obviously based on ripped off sounds, images, or something else. e.g., tons of people, none of whom were the actual show producers or staff or anything, selling "soundboxes" based on Family Guy characters.
In short... fundamentally, while I really like the abstract notion of an open market, and I like the existence of things like tethering apps... I gotta say, the openness has gotten to the point where it makes it hard for me to find software I actually want.
I actually find that I rather miss the editorial control and basic housecleaning. I think that obvious malware should not, in fact, be staying up in the store. I think that spam should be getting removed, and spammers banned -- they shouldn't be posting comments on hundreds of apps over a period of days. I am not sure I can have that without too high a cost. I certainly do like the potential of the Android market to offer apps that Apple wouldn't approve of... but it also means that some of them are genuinely Bad Shit, stuff that harms other people by being available for download, and makes trying to find software of any particular interest or value much harder than it should be.
It's a tradeoff. But there is some real value to that moderation and editorial control, even though there's also real costs to it. If we ignore those benefits, we're never going to figure out a way to compete effectively with the target market for the Apple app store.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Just one thing that tends to bug me a bit every time I hear the "they are not paying me" argument about the Apple/Sony/Nintendo/Xbox/Steam/Etc digital stores:
It may be true that they are not paying you, but they are stores. You can't force BestBuy to carry your products even if you give it to them free on some profit sharing scheme. True, these stores don't have the luxury of "unlimited shelving" digital stores have, but there is more to the story than just shelf space.
If I go to Best Buy and buy garbage (ignore for now they yield refunds for most inventory) and I let it go and my next purchase ends up being also garbage, soon I will start to think they just carry garbage and stop buying there.
In that same line, Apple, Sony, and any other digital store handler is forced to put at least some levels of standards for the products they carry. They really don't want to force users to dig through garbage or to buy buggy and/or spyware from their stores as it will eventually lead people to stop trusting them and therefore stop buying from them.
Sure, Apple could open up the doors to other competitor stores inside their devices (entirely separate topic, though) but what's the use? How many you think will buy through those channels?
I doubt opening the doors for other stores would make the average user bother installing that additional store. Mostly just the same type of user that jailbreaks would bother getting and browsing the store.
I do not disagree [with Apple] personally about iTunes as a syncing tool. I do wish there was more programmable on how to sync my own app's files, though. App file sync is very well hidden and iTunes does not automatically sync the sandbox files, making it easy to loose things like game saves.
As an iPhone user that has jailbroken I can tell you I don't trust the stuff in the Cydia or Rock stores to spend money there. I no longer jailbreak, I used to do so to get multi-tasking, and that's no longer a reason.
I will agree there are some things Apple could improve. Some sort of Shared Document folder would be interesting, but at the same time potentially problematic when it comes to messy applications and uninstalls. Would not be shocked if that became The Big New Feature of iOS5 or 6.
The volume control is a policy thing. Apple may someday change policy, but currently they have a strict policy on the use of the volume controls. Anyone that uses the volume control for anything else knows very well their app will not be approved. I actually wish they changed that rule someday as it would be very useful for gaming to adopt the volume controls for input, but it's far from something that would make me hate them.
At the end of the day, Apple is way friendlier and open than Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft with the Xbox will ever be, and he mention these just in passing. That, just does not compute, unless Apple has personally rejected one of his apps and he are holding a grudge on it.
On DVB-S I receive many more than the 999 channels my decade-old receiver is able to memorize, and that includes TBN broadcast in my language.