The fact that you've deliberately made it sound more difficult and convoluted that it is by using the solution of fitting a square peg to a round hole. The logical solution would be to use linux or a linux VM, then that lops off 75% of your issues.
Very few games do this. Most use textures that have been created for specific resolutions.
Scaling up these textures looks tolerable but not great.
You don't have to scale them up if you use vector graphics or procedural textures or even if you pre-compute them from higher resolution assets, these are *very* basic principles of game development.
You're missing the part where Amazon is authorized to sell their music and has a license (an actual written contract) to do so. And their license doesn't say they're allowed to stream it.
I didn't miss that, i wasn't questioning that component of it.
So none of the ipad-specific apps are just scaled up versions of iphone apps?
What you're missing is that iPad is not a big iPhone, it is a small Mac/PC. It doesn't seem that way because iOS and touch are coming from the phone, but the full-size 10 inch screen is the defining feature of iPad, and that is coming from the Mac.
The 10" screen doesn't come from the Mac any more than it comes from the iPhone and every other thing - aside from a couple of tablet-specific layouts - is the same as the iphone. Even the hardware (on the first ipad) is the same as the iphone.
And the OS X underneath is a PC class OS, the app platform is PC class native C.
The app platform is objective-c and the tablet version of iOS is certainly closer to iOS on the iphone than MacOS on the Mac.
But we've been told all about how open it is here, and why that makes it a far superior choice to all its closed competitors... are you saying it's... NOT open?
I think you're confusing 'open' with GPL. When Android code is released it is released under an open source license.
Since there is such a wide range of resolutions on Android devices, I have to assume that most game developers include high-resolution assets to facilitate scaling to any resolution.
Or they use scalable assets. When working with a 3D framework you use world coordinates (not screen coordinates) to handle object transformations anyway so the only thing that changes is your view and projection matrices. If you doing things in 2D you use relative coordinates, not absolute ones when drawing and positioning UI elements, this means your application can scale smoothly across multiple resolutions and screen sizes.
Games are actually the worst possible point you could bring up in this context
How so? Most use scalable assets and anything done in 3D can just change the view and projection matrices to handle different resolutions and aspect ratios.
because they are so often tailored exactly for a specific size and even aspect ratio.
That's a load of rubbish, most are done just as they always have been - to handle multiple screen sizes and resolutions, which is VERY easy to do.
Or rather, wouldn’t a linux phone with everything included be a nice plaything?
It's called the Nokia N900.
Why didn't they include more Linux libraries, command line utils etc? What's the point in making a linux phone if it doesn't include most of the platform?
Because it's a smartphone, not a mobile PC. Many linux-based devices don't include the often associated GNU tools because they simply don't need them.
Android is open - if somebody's running it on the market, then surely the source code has been released as well, and we can expect dozens - nay, hundreds! - nay thousands! - of tablet-optimized versions of software in a matter of days, right?
Wrong. Android is not licensed under a model that requires the release of the source code with the binary or upon request.
If an Android app just gets a quick tweak to the UI when moving to the tablet platform, then it's a shit tablet app. Tablets are not just bigger phones. For example an app that requires a drill down interface (a hierarchy of screens) may just need a single screen on a tablet. You don't do that just by tweaking the screen layout, or worse: relying on automatic layout. Actual code needs changing.
Look at the settings app on the ipad and iphone, it's very similar, the only real difference is the layout. The items that appear in a list on the iphone, and take you to another page, appear in the left pane of the 2-pane layout on the ipad and simply change the right pane instead of taking you to another page. It's not difficult to adapt this as a layout option.
- a "security researcher" that take the alarm at face value and never check if is actually there, check if the process run, what kind of content it was logging and where it is sending them.
He didn't take it at face value, he did an 'in-depth analysis' and concluded that the malware was 'undetectable', you insensitive clod!
That doesn't answer the question of where the owner of the copyright can dictate the terms of use, it appears - from what you're saying - that they can't and the only 'terms of use' is the 'fair use' policy for copyrighted material, the terms of which not dictated by the copyright owner.
You claimed that established companies would have access to "native code development", in other words an unmanaged or otherwise "unsafe" (in.NET lingo) environment, on Windows Phone 7. But Microsoft hasn't published any information about giving access to an "unsafe" environment to established companies on Windows Phone 7 the way it does on Xbox 360. So I assumed that you might have access to information still under NDA. Let me reiterate that I don't seek such NDA information at this point. But I further assumed that any company that already has access to NDA information would be aware of best practices for taking a video game developer from 0 to established.
That is actually in the partner agreement, it is under NDA but it got leaked a little while back, you could probably still find it online somewhere.
Not to mention at the bottom of the article: According to Wednesday's Wall Street Journal, Allen's portrayal of Gates "in the book is already making waves within the tight circle of early Microsoft alumni, with several people who know both men privately expressing confusion about Mr. Allen's motivations for criticizing his old business partner and questioning the accuracy of Mr. Allen's interpretation of certain events
It's a whole different ballgame when a for-profit company takes music it doesn't own, stores it, and streams it out, even if you are the one who is asking them to do so.
So what you're saying is you shouldn't be allowed to store copies of licensed copyrighted data on rented or leased servers, it has to be a server you own?
So your interaction code would have to be re-written depending on the device.
But that doesn't mean your game's logic tier would necessarily have to be rewritten.
Correct, the 'interaction code' is how the user interacts with the application so if you are using a different interaction method (touchscreen, controller, keyboard/mouse) then that should be the only part you need to re-write.
And these "professional" developers (i.e. commercial dev companies) you speak of will have access to native code development the same way they do on the XBox
I'm writing a business plan. Can you recommend a guide for a company trying to make the transition from Xbox Live Indie Games to commercial dev?
What did i write that gave you any idea i would know anything about that?
Did you really just try to refute the statement - I don't see much code being reused on quality apps, but it should lead to lots of mediocre games. - by pointing at Angry Birds?
That's freaking hilarious.
Well you can define 'mediocre' however you want but it's certainly one of the world's most popular games. And if you really want a XBox to WP7 example have a look at Full House Poker.
Out of curiosity, wouldn't the game just crash then considering that you'll be creating objects to respond to input methods that don't exist? I don't know C# nor am I familiar with XNA beyond knowing about both of them, so this is a legitimate question.
Well it wouldn't build if you ported it directly since the interaction code would call into xbox-specific methods to deal with the controller. So your interaction code would have to be re-written depending on the device.
Slashdot Mirror
What did I miss?
The fact that you've deliberately made it sound more difficult and convoluted that it is by using the solution of fitting a square peg to a round hole. The logical solution would be to use linux or a linux VM, then that lops off 75% of your issues.
Or they use scalable assets.
Very few games do this. Most use textures that have been created for specific resolutions.
Scaling up these textures looks tolerable but not great.
You don't have to scale them up if you use vector graphics or procedural textures or even if you pre-compute them from higher resolution assets, these are *very* basic principles of game development.
Having a cell phone != having a contract smartphone with tethering.
Thanks captain obvious...what part of my post could possibly make you think i would need that pointed out?
You're missing the part where Amazon is authorized to sell their music and has a license (an actual written contract) to do so. And their license doesn't say they're allowed to stream it.
I didn't miss that, i wasn't questioning that component of it.
No, that is not true. It is never true.
So none of the ipad-specific apps are just scaled up versions of iphone apps?
What you're missing is that iPad is not a big iPhone, it is a small Mac/PC. It doesn't seem that way because iOS and touch are coming from the phone, but the full-size 10 inch screen is the defining feature of iPad, and that is coming from the Mac.
The 10" screen doesn't come from the Mac any more than it comes from the iPhone and every other thing - aside from a couple of tablet-specific layouts - is the same as the iphone. Even the hardware (on the first ipad) is the same as the iphone.
And the OS X underneath is a PC class OS, the app platform is PC class native C.
The app platform is objective-c and the tablet version of iOS is certainly closer to iOS on the iphone than MacOS on the Mac.
But we've been told all about how open it is here, and why that makes it a far superior choice to all its closed competitors... are you saying it's... NOT open?
I think you're confusing 'open' with GPL. When Android code is released it is released under an open source license.
Since there is such a wide range of resolutions on Android devices, I have to assume that most game developers include high-resolution assets to facilitate scaling to any resolution.
Or they use scalable assets. When working with a 3D framework you use world coordinates (not screen coordinates) to handle object transformations anyway so the only thing that changes is your view and projection matrices. If you doing things in 2D you use relative coordinates, not absolute ones when drawing and positioning UI elements, this means your application can scale smoothly across multiple resolutions and screen sizes.
Games are actually the worst possible point you could bring up in this context
How so? Most use scalable assets and anything done in 3D can just change the view and projection matrices to handle different resolutions and aspect ratios.
because they are so often tailored exactly for a specific size and even aspect ratio.
That's a load of rubbish, most are done just as they always have been - to handle multiple screen sizes and resolutions, which is VERY easy to do.
If they comply with the OSS licenses in play they have to release it and this will allow ANYONE to use Android as a platform.
All that statement shows is that you don't know what OSS license they are using, because that is absolutely NOT a requirement of the license.
If Google wanted to keep things closed they should have forked something with a BSD style license, like Apple did.
Why?
Or rather, wouldn’t a linux phone with everything included be a nice plaything?
It's called the Nokia N900.
Why didn't they include more Linux libraries, command line utils etc? What's the point in making a linux phone if it doesn't include most of the platform?
Because it's a smartphone, not a mobile PC. Many linux-based devices don't include the often associated GNU tools because they simply don't need them.
I've never seen an Android phone that listed the Android version on the box.
It doesn't have to be on the box, the version shipping on a device is well publicized.
With any iDevice, you can check under Settings->General->About to see what version you're running.
That's after you've bought the device though, too late.
And I just had my app's update approved last week... runs on everything from 3.1.3 (supports the 1st-gen devices) through 4.3.
what app is that?
I don't have a cell phone
Then you're an EXTREME minority.
Android is open - if somebody's running it on the market, then surely the source code has been released as well, and we can expect dozens - nay, hundreds! - nay thousands! - of tablet-optimized versions of software in a matter of days, right?
Wrong. Android is not licensed under a model that requires the release of the source code with the binary or upon request.
If an Android app just gets a quick tweak to the UI when moving to the tablet platform, then it's a shit tablet app. Tablets are not just bigger phones. For example an app that requires a drill down interface (a hierarchy of screens) may just need a single screen on a tablet. You don't do that just by tweaking the screen layout, or worse: relying on automatic layout. Actual code needs changing.
Look at the settings app on the ipad and iphone, it's very similar, the only real difference is the layout. The items that appear in a list on the iphone, and take you to another page, appear in the left pane of the 2-pane layout on the ipad and simply change the right pane instead of taking you to another page. It's not difficult to adapt this as a layout option.
- a "security researcher" that take the alarm at face value and never check if is actually there, check if the process run, what kind of content it was logging and where it is sending them.
He didn't take it at face value, he did an 'in-depth analysis' and concluded that the malware was 'undetectable', you insensitive clod!
That doesn't answer the question of where the owner of the copyright can dictate the terms of use, it appears - from what you're saying - that they can't and the only 'terms of use' is the 'fair use' policy for copyrighted material, the terms of which not dictated by the copyright owner.
You claimed that established companies would have access to "native code development", in other words an unmanaged or otherwise "unsafe" (in .NET lingo) environment, on Windows Phone 7. But Microsoft hasn't published any information about giving access to an "unsafe" environment to established companies on Windows Phone 7 the way it does on Xbox 360. So I assumed that you might have access to information still under NDA. Let me reiterate that I don't seek such NDA information at this point. But I further assumed that any company that already has access to NDA information would be aware of best practices for taking a video game developer from 0 to established.
That is actually in the partner agreement, it is under NDA but it got leaked a little while back, you could probably still find it online somewhere.
Not to mention at the bottom of the article:
According to Wednesday's Wall Street Journal, Allen's portrayal of Gates "in the book is already making waves within the tight circle of early Microsoft alumni, with several people who know both men privately expressing confusion about Mr. Allen's motivations for criticizing his old business partner and questioning the accuracy of Mr. Allen's interpretation of certain events
It's a whole different ballgame when a for-profit company takes music it doesn't own, stores it, and streams it out, even if you are the one who is asking them to do so.
So what you're saying is you shouldn't be allowed to store copies of licensed copyrighted data on rented or leased servers, it has to be a server you own?
You own nothing but a license to play it under the terms that its real owner dictates
And where does a music owner specify these terms? i don't think i've ever seen any agreement with regard to usage when i've bought tracks online.
So your interaction code would have to be re-written depending on the device.
But that doesn't mean your game's logic tier would necessarily have to be rewritten.
Correct, the 'interaction code' is how the user interacts with the application so if you are using a different interaction method (touchscreen, controller, keyboard/mouse) then that should be the only part you need to re-write.
And these "professional" developers (i.e. commercial dev companies) you speak of will have access to native code development the same way they do on the XBox
I'm writing a business plan. Can you recommend a guide for a company trying to make the transition from Xbox Live Indie Games to commercial dev?
What did i write that gave you any idea i would know anything about that?
Did you really just try to refute the statement - I don't see much code being reused on quality apps, but it should lead to lots of mediocre games. - by pointing at Angry Birds?
That's freaking hilarious.
Well you can define 'mediocre' however you want but it's certainly one of the world's most popular games. And if you really want a XBox to WP7 example have a look at Full House Poker.
Something Something Astroturfing...
Out of curiosity, wouldn't the game just crash then considering that you'll be creating objects to respond to input methods that don't exist? I don't know C# nor am I familiar with XNA beyond knowing about both of them, so this is a legitimate question.
Well it wouldn't build if you ported it directly since the interaction code would call into xbox-specific methods to deal with the controller. So your interaction code would have to be re-written depending on the device.