Vacuous nonsense. There's no such thing as a soul, and even if there was, the mythology doesn't include the possibility of murdering it.
What is it with these capital punishment enthusiasts? Why does believing in illogical mythical nonsense make it more likely they want to see criminals being killed?
Rape is horrible, and people often suffer from mental repercussions. But it's not murder, in any form. The death penalty would be an escalation, not an "eye for an eye".
And most of the remaining 5% get rejected because they have bugs.
The rules allow one to predict pretty well what is acceptable and what is not. Out of hundreds of thousands of apps, there's perhaps 1 a month that gets a debatable rejection and hits the blogs. Those are pretty good odds.
There are some Zynga's on the app store making mad cash. And for every hit like "Angry Birds", there are literally thousands of apps that don't sell at all. It's a bit like playing the lottery.
No, the lottery is a game of chance. Creating apps is a game of skill. The people not making money are the people with crappy apps.
Why are people still stupid enough to trust Apple enough to sink money and development time into their silly, arbitrary little prison-platform?
Because they'll make more money than doing Android development. Reports from developers that have tried both platforms seem to put it at about 10:1 in terms of return.
And the rules are published to developers. Whilst every set of rules has borderline cases, the sensible developers stick to something that's obviously within the rules, or test out a potentially rule breaching idea with a quick proof of concept.
Given that this game is playable as on line as a HTML5 game, the iOS development probably consisted of little more than copying some boilerplate code for putting a web-view on screen, and loading up the HTML. A hours work for the chance of also being on the App Store, or at least the publicity of getting a rejection. Not a bad investment.
Angry Birds may not be to your taste, But judged by the amount of time people spent on it, and how many sequels people bought, it is indeed an excellent game. And you don't create an excellent game without putting the work in.
Because the NYT App is not 'solely target[ing] a specific race, culture, a real government or corporation, or any other real entity'. One particular editorial might. But overall one might expect some reasonable balance.
I hear that some folks make a ton of money for Linux stuff they develop. IBM, Red Hat, Oracle, etc etc etc. And I highly doubt they have to have 6 customers download something to make a single dollar.
You're kidding. There's more like 10,000 people download Red Hat Linux for every one that pays.
And of course, once again, no App Store developer who puts a price on his apps has anyone downloading apps for free.
If you haven't realised by now the illogicality of your statement, you must have an IQ problem.
It takes far more than coding to make a game. The graphics need drawing, backgrounds and objects. The sounds need creating. The levels need designing. They all need testing and refining.
Angry Birds is far more sophisticated than you imagine. There ARE similar flash games available on line, such as one with a castles theme. But they aren't as enjoyable. They spent time to perfectly balance the mechanics and level design in Angry Birds. Angry Birds success wasn't a fluke. They didn't just market it well so that lots of people bought it... people played it incessantly, which shows how well it had been crafted.
I've created clones of 1980s games in less than a month. But an original game like Angry Birds, no that's far more work than that.
Actually the topic had digressed to an accusation that Jobs didn't know what patents are at the point that you joined the thread. You then took it off in your own direction. You don't get to decide what's on topic and what's not. That's the mods job.
How short are people memories. Jobs put Apple into near bankruptcy before he was forcibly retire the first time in 1985.
You dumb fuck. I nearly asked you to say which time, but I didn't because of course Jobs didn't "retire" in 1985. He was either sacked or resigned, depending on how you want to read it. And Apple was far from bankruptcy then. It took 12 years of decline under several other ineffectual CEOs before it got to near bankruptcy.
When you have no idea what you are talking about, it's better for you to keep quiet.
Slashdot Mirror
If you click through to the actual Anonymous page, you'll see that they also got into email accounts. Low level hacking.
Rape is murder of the soul.
Vacuous nonsense. There's no such thing as a soul, and even if there was, the mythology doesn't include the possibility of murdering it.
What is it with these capital punishment enthusiasts? Why does believing in illogical mythical nonsense make it more likely they want to see criminals being killed?
Rape is horrible, and people often suffer from mental repercussions. But it's not murder, in any form. The death penalty would be an escalation, not an "eye for an eye".
I don't care.
WebGL is not part of HTML5 standards.
And most of the remaining 5% get rejected because they have bugs.
The rules allow one to predict pretty well what is acceptable and what is not. Out of hundreds of thousands of apps, there's perhaps 1 a month that gets a debatable rejection and hits the blogs. Those are pretty good odds.
There are some Zynga's on the app store making mad cash. And for every hit like "Angry Birds", there are literally thousands of apps that don't sell at all. It's a bit like playing the lottery.
No, the lottery is a game of chance. Creating apps is a game of skill. The people not making money are the people with crappy apps.
Why are people still stupid enough to trust Apple enough to sink money and development time into their silly, arbitrary little prison-platform?
Because they'll make more money than doing Android development. Reports from developers that have tried both platforms seem to put it at about 10:1 in terms of return.
And the rules are published to developers. Whilst every set of rules has borderline cases, the sensible developers stick to something that's obviously within the rules, or test out a potentially rule breaching idea with a quick proof of concept.
Given that this game is playable as on line as a HTML5 game, the iOS development probably consisted of little more than copying some boilerplate code for putting a web-view on screen, and loading up the HTML. A hours work for the chance of also being on the App Store, or at least the publicity of getting a rejection. Not a bad investment.
Now the thief can sell for analytics and bloggers the information what kind software Microsoft is cooking for Apple devices.
Who cares? Must be worth about 50c. They'll do far better out of selling the iPads.
please don't try to compare Angry Birds' development efforts for some of the major-motion-picture efforts of your typical FPS.
I didn't and I wouldn't. Angry Birds is a 99c game. "major-motion-picture efforts of your typical FPS" cost anything up to $60.
I'm saying that, compared to other 99c app developers, who may be making little money, Rovio put in the work. They deserve their success.
Not because it was particularly a "good" game. And certainly not because of massive development efforts.
Here's the similar Flash game I mentioned. People spent weeks playing Angry Birds. I doubt many would spend more than minutes playing this.
http://armorgames.com/play/3614/crush-the-castle
Angry Birds may not be to your taste, But judged by the amount of time people spent on it, and how many sequels people bought, it is indeed an excellent game. And you don't create an excellent game without putting the work in.
P.S. Are you a games developer?
Because the NYT App is not 'solely target[ing] a specific race, culture, a real government or corporation, or any other real entity'. One particular editorial might. But overall one might expect some reasonable balance.
From the blurb it doesn't seem to target anyone. You can pick to play either side.
Go lick Jobs dead balls and shut up.
Thanks for underlining exactly the kind of person you are, lest anyone was in any doubt.
I hear that some folks make a ton of money for Linux stuff they develop. IBM, Red Hat, Oracle, etc etc etc. And I highly doubt they have to have 6 customers download something to make a single dollar.
You're kidding. There's more like 10,000 people download Red Hat Linux for every one that pays.
And of course, once again, no App Store developer who puts a price on his apps has anyone downloading apps for free.
If you haven't realised by now the illogicality of your statement, you must have an IQ problem.
It takes far more than coding to make a game. The graphics need drawing, backgrounds and objects. The sounds need creating. The levels need designing. They all need testing and refining.
Angry Birds is far more sophisticated than you imagine. There ARE similar flash games available on line, such as one with a castles theme. But they aren't as enjoyable. They spent time to perfectly balance the mechanics and level design in Angry Birds. Angry Birds success wasn't a fluke. They didn't just market it well so that lots of people bought it... people played it incessantly, which shows how well it had been crafted.
I've created clones of 1980s games in less than a month. But an original game like Angry Birds, no that's far more work than that.
Apple was better 12 years later than in 1985, rest assured.
You don't know your Apple history.
The dumb fanboy who thought Jobs entered apple 15 years ago is you.
And comprehending the English language seems to be a struggle for you.
Actually the topic had digressed to an accusation that Jobs didn't know what patents are at the point that you joined the thread. You then took it off in your own direction. You don't get to decide what's on topic and what's not. That's the mods job.
I see you're a Linux fan. How much do Linux developers earn per download?
Which is exactly my point - musicians get paid for every download, app devs get paid for 1-in-6. Big difference there.
Your point is that developers who chose to set their app price at zero get zero income from the download.
Clearly your specialist subject is the bleeding obvious.
There are plenty of people giving free music away. They just aren't given the option to do it via iTunes.
You don't have a rational point.
The whole thing is notable for the effect of mobile.
Objective C has jumped from 5th to 3rd place, almost entirely due to the success of iOS.
And for those developers who want to code their app engines for portability with other mobile devices, C is the common language.
I'm sure there must be more Dalvik programming going on too. But not enough to save Java from falling.
How short are people memories. Jobs put Apple into near bankruptcy before he was forcibly retire the first time in 1985.
You dumb fuck. I nearly asked you to say which time, but I didn't because of course Jobs didn't "retire" in 1985. He was either sacked or resigned, depending on how you want to read it. And Apple was far from bankruptcy then. It took 12 years of decline under several other ineffectual CEOs before it got to near bankruptcy.
When you have no idea what you are talking about, it's better for you to keep quiet.
Same goes for the rest of your nonsense.
That's 1 paid download against 5 free downloads. The 5 free downloads were never expected to get any money from downloading.
If it weren't for ad revenue, this model wouldn't work at all. Might as well not even bother.
Have you considered telling Google their business model is flawed, and they might as well give up?
iTunes is 30% exactly the same as the App Store is.
And the concept of a few stars getting the majority of the income is the same too.
Charity? Where?
It's business. On both sides.
80% of zero is zero.