Game Maker's Garage Forum
Game Maker's Garage => Announcements => Topic started by: Gan on April 08, 2010, 09:24:44 PM
-
Have you guys watched the Keynote? Absolutely amazing.
Multitasking looks wonderful, all those new APIs make me excited, and iAd looks like a great way to make profit on a free app. ;)
You guys know what happens tomorra? Yes. The iPhone RPG gets the developer license. I'll be able to play directly on my iPhone instead of in the simulator and stick up apps on the store.
So what do you guys think of it all?
-Gan
-
Sorry for being a noob, but what is the name of the iPhone game you are releasing ? Will it also be available on iTouch ? The forum entries on the subject are too copious a read.
-
We don't have an actual name yet, we just know it as the iPhone RPG.
It should be available for iTouches and iPhones.
-Gan
-
We don't have an actual name yet, we just know it as the iPhone RPG.
It should be available for iTouches and iPhones.
-Gan
Thanks for the information.
One final question ;D : what does the licensing involve ? Does Apple verify your identity or the validity of your content ?
-
The developer's license is a $99 license that gives you access to many developer resources on the apple site. It also pays for apple to test your app for app store approval. Now when you have this you can submit applications to the app store and then have it approved and get rich. This is the final step of the app. We're hoping to reach this step soon.
-Gan
-
You have to pay to develop and release applications for Apple's mobile platforms? That's a joke, right?
-
Yeah. Paying pays the testers of your app, for the developer resources, and a bunch of other stuff. It's actually well worth it.
-Gan
-
The developer's license is a $99 license that gives you access to many developer resources on the apple site. It also pays for apple to test your app for app store approval. Now when you have this you can submit applications to the app store and then have it approved and get rich. This is the final step of the app. We're hoping to reach this step soon.
Once you have to pay money to make money, you know your being scammed.
-
Yet paying $20 for Mac GameMaker and never making a cent with it doesn't bother you?
You want to make a computer game right? Well then, the first thing to do is build a computer. That should take a few years, what with all the mathematic, mechanical and electrical circuitry knowledge you'll have to acquire. But wait! There's a company who've already done the hard work for you, and all you have to do is pay them for it. Sounds fair to me!
Now that you have your computer you'll want it to do stuff, and that stuff requires an operating system. A few decades of heavy research on how to manipulate those 0's and 1's and you'll be flying. But wait! There's a company who've already done the hard work for you, and all you have to do is pay them for it. Sounds fair to me!
Now that you have an operating system you can start developing your game, but all those 0's and 1's are mighty cumbersome to work with, so you'll have to write a programming language and create an application development environment. Again, cross out the next few years in your dairy and- but wait! There's a company who've already done the hard work for you, and all you have to do is pay them for it. Sounds fair to me!
Finally you've made a game, so how do you make money with it? Well, you'll need to sell it to people, and that means you'll need to advertise it. Get cracking on "Building Your Own Advertisement Agency For Dummies" and a few years down the line when you've gathered enough reputa- but wait! There's a company who've already done the hard work for you, and all you have to do is pay them for it. Sounds fair to me!
And so gentlemen, $99 sounds fair to me.
-
I cannot say anything to Silver's post above but a hearty: "Agree."
-
To me it mostly seems like an anti-spam and quality control device.
-
I wasn't saying it was a scam I was just pointing out most scams work by telling you that you are going to end up making a lot of money but first you have to pay us so we can get your name out and such. So you pay them and they disappear. Thus, you are out the money you payed them. I don't think Apple is actually scamming people.
-
Of course not. But the comparison to a pyramid scheme is interesting ^_^
-
I see what you're getting at Silverwind, but if Apple's smartphones/PDA's ran Mac OS X 10.6, would you be putting that argument forward? I can see how it works as a quality control mechanism, but if you don't test your own applications then you probably haven't got the ability to compile and distribute software. It seems silly to me that you need to pay for a licence to create programs for hardware you've already purchased.
It's like saying you have to buy a licence from a newspaper to do the crossword - and when you've finished with the newspaper, you can't leave it on a bus for someone else to read. The idea of having to purchase a licence from Apple which could contain all manner of binding terms and conditions - perhaps one could be restriction from porting iPhone apps to the Android or other platforms - is rather unappealing.
-
I see what you're getting at Silverwind, but if Apple's smartphones/PDA's ran Mac OS X 10.6, would you be putting that argument forward?
Well yeah, the amount of work involved in achieving that would be substantial. They'd be more deserving than ever!
The idea of having to purchase a licence from Apple which could contain all manner of binding terms and conditions - perhaps one could be restriction from porting iPhone apps to the Android or other platforms - is rather unappealing.
I don't think a one off payment of $99 is much compared to some of the other app and game development environments. Unity can cost as much as $1,500 for example. Furthermore your apps will get more publicity on the App Store than on any other advertising network. Apple sell the game for you.
-
I don't think a one off payment of $99 is much compared to some of the other app and game development environments. Unity can cost as much as $1,500 for example. Furthermore your apps will get more publicity on the App Store than on any other advertising network. Apple sell the game for you.
Maybe so, but still; xcode is free, and I believe the iPhone SDK is too. You could get more publicity on the App Store but wouldn't it be nice to release software through other channels? Perhaps a web based software library for the iPhone which would publicise iPhone applications online without spending as much money or agreeing to Apple's terms and conditions (which can change at any time without them having to tell you). Apple can really only maintain the pay-to-develop model for so long until a) developers start asking to release software through other channels or b) the price goes up, which would be inevitable; more developers, and more apps means more paperwork and staffing required at Apple.
-
I like this current setup Apple has. It's safe, secure, efficient, and gives a great app store to consumers without crap.
Silver's reasoning strikes me as clear as a bell to me.
Gan
-
The bottom line is, if you want someone to do the work for you they need to be payed for it.
-
I understand that, what I'm saying is that Apple asking you to pay for access to developer tools that are otherwise already freely distributed seems fishy. There's almost certainly a slew of developers that have paid up to Apple without guarantee that any of their applications will actually make it - because they either don't pass quality control or provide functionality already available on the native OS (regardless if the 3rd party tool is any better). It might be fine for consumers, but wouldn't it be cheaper for the customers to go directly to the software developer? Theoretically yes, but that's not allowed. You'd have to jailbreak the iPhone to do that, which voids your warranty.
The point I'm making is that it is not only cheaper for customer and the developer to buy directly from the vendor, but it should be like that anyway because developers have probably paid the $400 or so for an iPhone. They shouldn't have to spend a single cent on development tools that are already offered free of charge from the same company. They should be able to release their applications WITHOUT going through Apple - sure, you can pay to go through Apple if you want, but what I'm saying is that you should have the choice to sell software directly to the customer. It's just about their profits and revenue; the only things large conglomerates care about, which is why a developer gains little advantage from going through Apple to sell iPhone software.
-
You can use the free dev tools without a license. Though if you want to get anywhere in programming for the iPhone, you'll need to get one.
The reason? Security. Whole reason there's a protected app store. In Wal-Mart random people can't just stick things on shelf and plan to sell it that way. They wouldn't allow that consumers expect a safe environment and good quality.
-Gan
-
If that's the way it should work, submit all the games and downloads available on this site to Apple for "security" approval. I mean, it's not like Apple can reject or eradicate programs from a platform for competitive reasons, right (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/gadgetology/google-uses-mobile-web-bypass-apple-block-217)?
It's not about sticking items on Wal Mart's shelf, it's about the idea that a developer should be able to set up a lemonade stand selling software.
-
Can't the developer start his own website and sell the application all by himself? If the person wants to sell his app at the apple website doesn't Apple have the right to charge people for that service?
-
it's not like Apple can reject or eradicate programs from a platform for competitive reasons, right (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/gadgetology/google-uses-mobile-web-bypass-apple-block-217)?
Apple are notorious for doing exactly that. They've become one of the biggest names in the business world and they go to extravagant lengths to ensure they remain so.
It's not about sticking items on Wal Mart's shelf, it's about the idea that a developer should be able to set up a lemonade stand selling software.
Lemonade stands are only legal if you make your own lemonade; you're using Apple's brewery.
I think a good way to put it is that you can't separate the bits from the marmalade. If you're happy to accept Apple's help by providing you with their amazing development kit (not to mention the astounding device itself) you shouldn't complain about their choice of product distribution. Especially since it's so darn good! ;D
-
If the person wants to sell his app at the apple website doesn't Apple have the right to charge people for that service?
Yeah, of course. The issue is that that is your only option, a developer can't just start a website and sell his own iPhone applications.
-
Why not? You can go to google and get some ads. Then BOOM almost everyone knows about your product. However, it would be cheaper to just use the apple website.
-
Yeah, of course. The issue is that that is your only option, a developer can't just start a website and sell his own iPhone applications.
You can.
-Gan
-
Sure, if you're only targeting jailbroken machines.
-
Un-jailbroken too.
-Gan
-
You can.
-Gan
Now that I'm on my mac I can further explain.
If a developer can build a site, then they can sell their iPhone app from it:
http://www.rovio.com/index.php?page=angry-birds
Click the link on their page to buy.
-Gan
P.S. A big reason for apps going through the app store is because of security. In jailbroken iPhones, viruses can run rampant and even get into other jailbroken devices near. Not only that, but on the Android market they have a "Highly Inappropriate For All Ages" section of apps. Apple doesn't want that for good reason. The money it costs to put an app on the app store is well worth it. There are so many confidential things I can't tell you guys... though I can say; it's so cool.
-
Hehehe... Sounds like a neverending debate.
In the end, it's not like anyone is ever forced into accepting any contracts anyway.
-
The link goes to the App Store. You did not demonstrate how one can sell an app without using the App Store.
There needs to be a supported method of creating and selling apps without going through the App Store or Apple's approval process. Consider the Macintosh - we don't have to submit our apps to some clearinghouse just to get them released. We just release them, and everything works pretty well.
Steve Jobs remarked recently about the Xcode-only limitation in the SDK. He said that "allowing" third party development systems such as CodeWarrior held back the platform due to lagging apps. Would you like it if you could only make your games in Xcode? How many games do you think we would never see? Should those people not have been making games in the first place? After all, they're inferior games because they were made in an inferior program. You should take classes and learn Xcode and spend twice as much time to make the same game and then it only works on 10.6 because you only learned the latest SDK.
-
Gan - you edited my post instead of quoting me. Please fix the original post and then put a proper post below it, so I can reply correctly.
-
Holy cow! Sorry Mike, that was completely unintentional. Didn't even notice--All better, good thing I quoted everything you said. :)
The link goes to the App Store. You did not demonstrate how one can sell an app without using the App Store.
True, though I did demonstrate this:
Yeah, of course. The issue is that that is your only option, a developer can't just start a website and sell his own iPhone applications.
I guess he was just a bit vague in the post. :P
There needs to be a supported method of creating and selling apps without going through the App Store or Apple's approval process. Consider the Macintosh - we don't have to submit our apps to some clearinghouse just to get them released. We just release them, and everything works pretty well.
You gotta realize the impact an app store-less market for the iPhone would have. No security, people would be replicating Apple's apps, they'd be using private API's, viruses, they could potentially crash cellular networks, overload things, go rampant on the iPhone(As sandboxing wouldn't exist), inappropriate apps would thrive, users would not have a nice market to buy stuff from. They wouldn't know who to trust and chances are anyone can do horrible things to them. Did I mention viruses?
Steve Jobs remarked recently about the Xcode-only limitation in the SDK. He said that "allowing" third party development systems such as CodeWarrior held back the platform due to lagging apps. Would you like it if you could only make your games in Xcode? How many games do you think we would never see? Should those people not have been making games in the first place? After all, they're inferior games because they were made in an inferior program. You should take classes and learn Xcode and spend twice as much time to make the same game and then it only works on 10.6 because you only learned the latest SDK.
The mac and iPhone are very different. The iPhone has private APIs, sand boxing to preserve user data and keep apps from being monsters, and many other things...
Macs can handle that stuff. Your analogy doesn't work very well; the iPhone needs the security probably most of all.
-Gan
P.S. Pirating would also be through the roof as people could download apps, upload them and allow others to download them for free. Having that sort of free-app method would make the App Store useless as it goes against their goals. Then users wouldn't have a friendly app store to find all the hundreds of thousands of apps they'd ever want.
-
This is a case of anarchy (open architecture and market) versus dictatorship (current situation; Apple controls everything). Neither scenario is perfect - anarchy would lead to less security and porn games, while the status-quo allows censorship and hinders creativity. Ideally we would have a mixture between those two extremes, but ultimately it comes down to what is most profitable for Apple - and clearly, a model which forces developers to program on Apple products and sell their games at the mercy of Apple's censorship on Apple's store is more profitable for the corporation.
-
Exactly. :)
-Gan
-
-No security
Too vague.
-people would be replicating Apple's apps
The restriction against duplicating Apple's apps is bullshit anyway.
-they'd be using private API's
Whoop-dee-do?
-viruses
In theory only.
-they could potentially crash cellular networks, overload things
I actually don't see how this is possible.
-go rampant on the iPhone(As sandboxing wouldn't exist)
Sandboxing is independent of whether or not the app is from the App store or an independent release...
-inappropriate apps would thrive
Irrelevant.
-users would not have a nice market to buy stuff from
I'm not advocating that we shut down the App store, I'm advocating that developers have alternate means of distribution.
-They wouldn't know who to trust and chances are anyone can do horrible things to them.
Then how can you trust any Mac apps you download? How did you ever trust SilverCreator? After all, it's written in a subversive language (REALbasic) that goes against Apple - and it wasn't published through an App store, OMG!
The mac and iPhone are very different. The iPhone has private APIs, sand boxing to preserve user data and keep apps from being monsters, and many other things...
Macs can handle that stuff. Your analogy doesn't work very well; the iPhone needs the security probably most of all.
You just said that the iPhone has sandboxing.
The Mac OS also has some private and undocumented APIs, and has had them since 1984, yet if you use them in your Mac app, you're not a banned thought-criminal as you would be on the App store.
P.S. Pirating would also be through the roof as people could download apps, upload them and allow others to download them for free. Having that sort of free-app method would make the App Store useless as it goes against their goals. Then users wouldn't have a friendly app store to find all the hundreds of thousands of apps they'd ever want.
We already have pirating of App Store apps. Someone buys the app and then cracks it so everyone else can use it for free. Instead, non-store apps could use a standard serial number system.
More music is pirated than paid for from iTunes; does that make the iTunes store useless?
-
-No security
Too vague.
Unrestricted access. Doors without locks. Apps could access user data and skrew many things up. Look at JailBroken iPhones, they have tons of access, nearly unlimited which allow them to directly change anything in the system. Even the UI.
-people would be replicating Apple's apps
The restriction against duplicating Apple's apps is bullshit anyway.
Hmmnm...
-they'd be using private API's
Whoop-dee-do?
API's to access core features which only the Apple Team should have access to.
-viruses
In theory only.
There are viruses for jailbroken devices. They works because they have the access.
-they could potentially crash cellular networks, overload things
I actually don't see how this is possible.
I once read an article on this... I'll have to dig around.
-go rampant on the iPhone(As sandboxing wouldn't exist)
Sandboxing is independent of whether or not the app is from the App store or an independent release...
With free access they could use private APIs to access user data and go around sandboxing.
-inappropriate apps would thrive
Irrelevant.
Entirely relevant, major reason why they have censorship on the App Store.
-users would not have a nice market to buy stuff from
I'm not advocating that we shut down the App store, I'm advocating that developers have alternate means of distribution.
A free app market would destroy the whole purpose of the App Store which is to control what kind of apps go on the iPhone/iPad/iTouch. Who'd pay $99 to put an app on the app store when they can freely distribute?
-They wouldn't know who to trust and chances are anyone can do horrible things to them.
Then how can you trust any Mac apps you download? How did you ever trust SilverCreator? After all, it's written in a subversive language (REALbasic) that goes against Apple - and it wasn't published through an App store, OMG!
Mac was made to be more secure. It can handle applications that can access user data without being sand boxed.
The Mac OS also has some private and undocumented APIs, and has had them since 1984, yet if you use them in your Mac app, you're not a banned thought-criminal as you would be on the App store.
You wouldn't be banned, just have your app rejected.
We already have pirating of App Store apps. Someone buys the app and then cracks it so everyone else can use it for free. Instead, non-store apps could use a standard serial number system.
Exactly why a free app store is a bad reason. Without jailbroken devices pirating would = 0 for the app store. Thus developers could get much more money that they deserve.
More music is pirated than paid for from iTunes; does that make the iTunes store useless?
It makes it less effective.
-Gan
-
Censorship is an invalid reason to support the App store. If your application is compliant with the laws of the United States, or in whichever country it is released, then it should not be subject to any censorship for distribution within that country or any other country in which it does not violate the law. This is not 1984.
As far as private APIs go, they should have written the OS in a way as to not expose any private APIs, or physically prohibited non-Apple apps from using them. The entire issue is very problematic - one of the things Microsoft was cited for in the 90s was using secret APIs in Office which allowed it to have more features/whatever than the competition, thus giving Office an unfair advantage over other office programs on the free market. Apple screwed up here - not the developers.
-
Some of Apple's goals are to make the devices family, gaming, and educational friendly. That means censorship.
They do prohibit non-apple apps using private APIs. They have some sort of scrubber that goes through your app and detects private APIs in the submitting process into the app store.
-Gan
-
Some of Apple's goals are to make the devices family, gaming, and educational friendly. That means censorship.
Then Safari and Mail must be removed, as well as any app that uses WebKit, and the new Opera Mini browser, hell, any app that access the internet, because they all have the potential to load pornography and other "subversive" materials.
-
Indeed, though much safer than having those sorts of apps directly on the App Store such like what Android has.
-Gan
-
Indeed, though much safer than having those sorts of apps directly on the App Store such like what Android has.
-Gan
Those apps don't need to be in the App store. I'm not advocating that at all. I'm advocating that developers be able to release apps outside of the App store.
-
That'd destroy the purpose of the app store. To have a safe and friendly environment to find apps. To allow only certain types of apps on the iPhone.
-Gan
-
That'd destroy the purpose of the app store. To have a safe and friendly environment to find apps.
-Gan
Allowing independent apps does not destroy the App Store!!! Hell, most people will still use it, just because it's an established market (sort of how everyone uses eBay). All it does is allow some independent developers to release apps without censorship.
I sell Apple products every day, I love Apple but I stop at drinking the kool aid. If you don't question anything then you will lose everything.
-
I've questioned and agreed.
App Store seems like not only the best thing for Apple but also the developers.
-Gan
P.S. You should try Apple's hamburgers, goes great with the Kool-Aid.
P.S.S.
To allow only certain types of apps on the iPhone.
-
How about this question: how would allowing non-app store publications hurt developers?
-
I never said it'd hurt developers, but I sure know it helps them tons.
-Gan
-
How about this question: how would allowing non-app store publications hurt developers?
I never said it'd hurt developers, but I sure know it helps them tons.
So you are saying that allowing non-app store publications would help them tons???
-
Whoops. I'll rephrase that...
Only allowing app store publications helps developers tons by directing all consumers to the same place where a developer has a very fine chance of being noticed. Especially since the majority aren't large companies with ad agencies of their own.
-Gan
-
We're not suggesting getting rid of the app store; we're only saying developers should have the choice of where to sell their stuff. Developers would still put their apps on the marketplace and would still be noticeable, but would be allowed to choose to sacrifice that advantage in return for more freedom. Isn't that a win-win for the devs at least?
-
It'd be a win-win-lose. If apps could be freely downloaded and installed, any app could potentially have unlimited access to your phone. Now one main issue is pirating. With jail broken devices since they have free access they can easily take apps from the app store and distribute illegally. Then someone makes their own free app store and everyone downloads it and gets free apps.
Wait a sec... This all has happened on jail broken devices... :P
-Gan
-
How would buying an app from somewhere other than the app store give it "unlimited access" to a device?" Also, how would it facilitate piracy? The hardware would obviously still have security checks that would block cracked software, it would be no easier to pirate stuff than it already is.
Piracy is absolutely inevitable and unpreventable when it comes to files and software, but that's another debate.
-
Gandolf, you keep mentioning these iPhone viruses which I am still still yet to hear about. Are you saying that the iPhone hardware and operating system is insecure in the first place?
Why stop homegrown API's from running on the iPhone? Surely libraries that add extra functionality to a device is a good thing and make developer's jobs easier. If a software house use their own API for one of their applications, it makes sense for them to be able to port it to something compatible with the iPhone rather than rewrite all their software from scratch just to cater to an audience of iPhone users.
Maybe the iPhone is fundamentally flawed for that reason. I can take any old Nokia and run a Java applet without any worries. I could even ssh into a server and restart server applications from a command line, as long as I have an internet connection... is there an App for that?
-
How would buying an app from somewhere other than the app store give it "unlimited access" to a device?" Also, how would it facilitate piracy? The hardware would obviously still have security checks that would block cracked software, it would be no easier to pirate stuff than it already is.
The use of private APIs.
Gandolf, you keep mentioning these iPhone viruses which I am still still yet to hear about. Are you saying that the iPhone hardware and operating system is insecure in the first place?
These viruses only work on jail broken devices due to the freedom.
Why stop homegrown API's from running on the iPhone? Surely libraries that add extra functionality to a device is a good thing and make developer's jobs easier. If a software house use their own API for one of their applications, it makes sense for them to be able to port it to something compatible with the iPhone rather than rewrite all their software from scratch just to cater to an audience of iPhone users.
Not homegrown APIs, undocumented and private APIs created by Apple to achieve greater access and functionality.
Maybe the iPhone is fundamentally flawed for that reason. I can take any old Nokia and run a Java applet without any worries. I could even ssh into a server and restart server applications from a command line, as long as I have an internet connection... is there an App for that?
Apple has made it clear that it doesn't want to support flash or java. Have you ever owned an iPhone/iTouch/iPad?
Which way is better is a little bit of a matter of opinion. Some people would like this so sacrifice of that...
Anyways, We have Android, we can always put the two on the scale to see which has been more success.
Now back to the original topic:
The iPhone Dev License is worth it. Why? I've experienced it and it's amazing. This is a pretty useless debate. I was just hoping to discuss the iPad or OS 4 when I created this thread.
-Gan
-
Alright, enough of this... but for the record, I was only talking about the option to sell stuff off the app store, not the use of private APIs (which I think are a good thing as well, but whatever ::))
About the iPad, it was a smart business move on Apple's part to use software that doesn't reach the full potential of the hardware, now they can release a iPad firmware update at the same time as the new iPhone and people won't need to buy a new device.
-
:) I agree. My programmer friend SamBaylus recieved an iPad and says it's amazing. Looks speedy, I'd love to program on it.
-Gan
-
Should make a version of the RPG for it, we're using tiles so the only difference would have to be the screen size.
-
I think you have a point...
For making the iPhone RPG the iPad RPG it really wouldn't take any extra code. We'd just need to revamp the UI for a large screen and reposition the buttons.
-Gan
-
I know you'd like to keep to the point of the thread; but I do have one point that needs to be made.
Apple has made it clear that it doesn't want to support flash or java. Have you ever owned an iPhone/iTouch/iPad?
Not supporting Java or Flash is just a terrible mistake more than anything. That excludes the iPhone from viewing pretty much 40% of the content available on the web. That turns it from an "internet communications device" into Netscape 1.4 or something.
Like I said before, a Java developer can write an applet which can log into his computer remotely from his phone and let him restart server software when it needs to be restarted. That's probably why most IT co-ordinators are still using Nokia cells. In IT, might is right - the server is at the top and anything below will have to adapt to the way it works. The admin can write a Java applet (much like the one I just described) on pretty much any machine they want, test it, drop it into the phone's memory and run it. On the iPhone, it's a different story - you'd need to rewrite the application and most likely apply for a developer's licence in order to run it on your hardware and take it with you. Most organisations are fond of the former, more open-minded method whereas they would have to shell out even more cash (try getting $99 out of your boss to pay for a developers licence - they will tell you to use Java instead) for the latter.
No, I don't own an iPhone, although I've had many iPhones shoved in my face/demos/tried out in Apple store blah blah. They're pretty good playthings but they aren't serious phones in my opinion. USER REPLACEABLE BATTERIES - that's another thing worth pointing out, however that's a completely different issue. If you're happy using the iPhone, I'm glad for you, but they're no good to me :)
-
This reminds me of a certain episode of Spongebob...
Can anyone take a guess at which one I'm referring to?
-Gan
-
Who watches Spongebob anymore...?
-
Not supporting Java or Flash is just a terrible mistake more than anything.
It's actually a smart business move... if Flash was supported then people could play Flash games for free instead of buying their equivalents on the app store.
-
You have a problem with Spongebob!? :O
-Gan
P.S. Pfft, replaceable batteries. One minor missing feature and suddenly the whole cake is ruined.
-
I'll keep this short and sweet: Spongebob rawcks.
-
Lol !
You had a war about Apple and now you're on the verge of having a war about *Sponge Bob*.
[EDIT] Turned bits of this into a QotM candidate.
http://www.gamemakersgarage.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=QotM;action=display;num=1270122513;start=15#27
-
It's impossible to port Flash to a touch screen device. Without the presence of a curser the mouseover/mouseout commands used in like, 90% of all Flash apps are totally useless. Most professional web developers dislike Flash in the first place, advocating HTML5 and CSS3.
Furthermore all the big names in the web world are redesigning their sites specifically to work on the iPhone. Apple have influenced a new generation with the iPhone; it hasn't moved with the world, it's moved the world.
Oh, and which episode Gan? The Strangler one is my favourite! ;D
-
Furthermore all the big names in the web world are redesigning their sites specifically to work on the iPhone. Apple have influenced a new generation with the iPhone; it hasn't moved with the world, it's moved the world.
Silver would know, he's one of them.
Oh, and which episode Gan? The Strangler one is my favourite! ;D
That was a good episode. :) I was speaking of the one where Squid refuses to eat the patty claiming it to be horrible even though he later finds that it's delicious.
-Gan
-
That was a good episode. :) I was speaking of the one where Squid refuses to eat the patty claiming it to be horrible even though he later finds that it's delicious.
-Gan
But it goes straight to your thighs!
-
But it goes straight to your thighs!
LOL! ;D
-
Furthermore all the big names in the web world are redesigning their sites specifically to work on the iPhone. Apple have influenced a new generation with the iPhone; it hasn't moved with the world, it's moved the world.
Which new generation? Pretty much every phone around these days can browse the web with pretty good compatibility and speed. We've been able to do that for years. Nobody had to redesign sites, they just did smaller versions of sites, for example m.google.com. That is fine. Suddenly, all the major websites have to start making iPhone compatible versions of their websites because the normal mobile versions aren't good enough for the iPhone? Why can't it just view the normal version of the website? Let me see... is it because the iPhone can't handle the full, unadulterated web? Can it even download zip/mp3/video files and save them in a folder?
This is where the confusion lies - there's a revolution and then there's popularity. The iPhone is a popular product, but it's by no means revolutionary. The iPhone/Pad/Pod may well be a cell phone, an internet communications device and an iPod - if that's three things in one that make a product revolutionary then you'd better brace yourself for what my Intel Mac can do!
It's a jukebox, a games console, a word processor, it's the Swiss army knife of computer communications, I can make calls, it has a keyboard that has this neat technology called 'buttons', it's a personal cinema, a clock, a calculator, an accountant, a paperweight... and I can develop and release as much software as I want for it without having to hand over any more cash other than what I paid for it. Isn't that neat?
-
Let me see... is it because the iPhone can't handle the full, unadulterated web? Can it even download zip/mp3/video files and save them in a folder?
The whole point of the iPhone browser is that it can handle the full web - at least the web as defined by HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. You can load any page with these things and it will work fine. Most other phones before the iPhone could not do this at all, and even the ones with a full browser handled things far less elegantly than the iPhone.
You can't load ZIP files. You can load MP3s and some videos, but you can't save them. I have personally loaded MP3s off of random websites whenever I wanted to hear a full preview of a song. If I like the whole song then I'd buy it from the iTunes app (but not if it's $1.29. those are rip-off prices.)
-
This is where the confusion lies - there's a revolution and then there's popularity. The iPhone is a popular product, but it's by no means revolutionary.
O.M.G. Seriously, this is beyond silly now! You're like one of those tech people who go around challenging the statistics of things despite the contrary opinion of the entire world.
"The iPhone's screen is too small to efficiently read e-books on", whilst several million people are happily reading e-books on their iPhones.
"The iPhone's lack off Flash will dramatically reduce web usage", whilst practically everyone in possession of an iPhone is surfing the web at several hundred times the rate prior to owning the device.
"Incurring a fee for the developer license will turn too many developers away for the App Store to be a success", whilst developers flock to the iPhone at a rate higher than any existing platform in history.
The iPhone/Pad/Pod may well be a cell phone, an internet communications device and an iPod - if that's three things in one that make a product revolutionary then you'd better brace yourself for what my Intel Mac can do!
It's a jukebox, a games console, a word processor, it's the Swiss army knife of computer communications, I can make calls, it has a keyboard that has this neat technology called 'buttons', it's a personal cinema, a clock, a calculator, an accountant, a paperweight... and I can develop and release as much software as I want for it without having to hand over any more cash other than what I paid for it. Isn't that neat?
And yet your laptop neither resides in the pockets of over 50 million people, is the topic of the century or won awards for being the "Innovation of the Year", "Most Stylish Technology of the Year", "Best Mobile Phone of the Year" or "Gadget of the Year".
You're missing a blindingly obvious revolution Air. I'm finished with this discussion.
-
The iPhone, iPad, and iPod are different products. The iPhone can handle zip and many other formats because... there's an app for that.
The main point of the iPhone is that it can do everything the average user wants yet fits in the hand. It's much easier to carry my iPhone around then my iMac.
Seriously you need to try, I mean use for a week then you can hate.
-Gan
P.S. From my iPhone.
I would make a longer post but in the middle of a track meet. So much better than lugging a computer.
-
Well said Silverwind-san.
-
Domo arigatou gozaimasu, TD-kohai. *bows*
-
In all honestly, I don't believe the iPhone is a revolution. To me, a revolution is a significant change in the way we think or do things. Until the laptop is completely obliterated and touch control takes over, the iPhone/iPod Touch remains a damn cool (and damn useful) gadget which holds it's own well-deserved spot in the electronics market.
A revolution? No, but a step in the right direction? Yes.
-
Yamete kudasai Swamp-kun! (http://209.85.48.12/11610/159/upload/p4639338.gif)
-
When did you start to learn Japanese Silverwind-san? I hope you don't start speaking Japanese all the time; I might have some difficulty understanding you. I might have to ask my Japanese speaking friend what you are saying.
-
It's impossible to port Flash to a touch screen device. Without the presence of a curser the mouseover/mouseout commands used in like, 90% of all Flash apps are totally useless. Most professional web developers dislike Flash in the first place, advocating HTML5 and CSS3.
Furthermore all the big names in the web world are redesigning their sites specifically to work on the iPhone. Apple have influenced a new generation with the iPhone; it hasn't moved with the world, it's moved the world.
Oh, and which episode Gan? The Strangler one is my favourite! ;D
One thought on Flash : it's old ! (almost as old as GM)
It was created in the mid-1990's, long before iPods and iPhones, and probably with goals different from what you'd expect today. One would suppose supporting such new devices wasn't in mind at the time of its inception.
-
They beri gluten-free their nizagara (https://umichicago.com/nizagara/) buy prednisone using paypal (https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/prednisone/) india ed-sample-pack-2 online (https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/item/ed-sample-pack-2/) prednisone for dogs (https://heavenlyhappyhour.com/prednisone/) prednisone cialis (https://frankfortamerican.com/tadalafil-20mg/) discount on lady-era (https://abbynkas.com/pill/lady-era/) generic monuvir (https://sjsbrookfield.org/monuvir/) procyclidine 5mg (https://shilpaotc.com/procyclidine/) forzest uk (https://driverstestingmi.com/item/forzest/) cenforce 100 (https://americanazachary.com/cenforce/) cheap lasix online (https://primerafootandankle.com/item/lasix-lowest-price/) dydrogesterone without a doctor (https://racelineonline.com/dydrogesterone/) wynzora (https://inthefieldblog.com/wynzora/) ventolin (https://primerafootandankle.com/item/ventolin/) zoloft cost (https://yourdirectpt.com/zoloft/) zoloft prednisone dhea (https://frankfortamerican.com/prednisone-10-mg-dose-pack/) prednisone (https://primerafootandankle.com/www-prednisone-com/) online vega extra cobra no prescription (https://fairbusinessgoodwillappraisal.com/vega-extra-cobra/) buy sildenafil online canada (https://pureelegance-decor.com/sildenafil/) online canadian pharmacy esomeprazole (https://shilpaotc.com/esomeprazole/) replicative <a href="https://umichicago.com/nizagara/">nizagara</a> <a href="https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/prednisone/">buy prednisone using paypal</a> <a href="https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/item/ed-sample-pack-2/">buying ed-sample-pack-2 in australia</a> <a href="https://heavenlyhappyhour.com/prednisone/">prednisone</a> <a href="https://frankfortamerican.com/tadalafil-20mg/">generic cialis europe kamagra</a> <a href="https://abbynkas.com/pill/lady-era/">lady era</a> cheap lady era online <a href="https://sjsbrookfield.org/monuvir/">overnight monuvir</a> <a href="https://shilpaotc.com/procyclidine/">procyclidine 5mg</a> <a href="https://driverstestingmi.com/item/forzest/">forzest uk</a> <a href="https://americanazachary.com/cenforce/">comprar cenforce canada</a> <a href="https://primerafootandankle.com/item/lasix-lowest-price/">lasix</a> <a href="https://racelineonline.com/dydrogesterone/">buy dydrogesterone online cheap</a> <a href="https://inthefieldblog.com/wynzora/">wynzora no prescription</a> <a href="https://primerafootandankle.com/item/ventolin/">where to buy ventolin online</a> <a href="https://yourdirectpt.com/zoloft/">zoloft</a> <a href="https://frankfortamerican.com/prednisone-10-mg-dose-pack/">prednisone without perscription</a> <a href="https://primerafootandankle.com/www-prednisone-com/">prednisone cost</a> <a href="https://fairbusinessgoodwillappraisal.com/vega-extra-cobra/">vega extra cobra on internet</a> <a href="https://pureelegance-decor.com/sildenafil/">buy sildenafil online canada</a> <a href="https://shilpaotc.com/esomeprazole/">lowest price on generic esomeprazole</a> esomeprazole 40mg findings argument influenza, https://umichicago.com/nizagara/ https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/prednisone/ https://sunsethilltreefarm.com/item/ed-sample-pack-2/ https://heavenlyhappyhour.com/prednisone/ prednisone 20 mg https://frankfortamerican.com/tadalafil-20mg/ https://abbynkas.com/pill/lady-era/ https://sjsbrookfield.org/monuvir/ https://shilpaotc.com/procyclidine/ https://driverstestingmi.com/item/forzest/ https://americanazachary.com/cenforce/ https://primerafootandankle.com/item/lasix-lowest-price/ cheapest lasix dosage price https://racelineonline.com/dydrogesterone/ https://inthefieldblog.com/wynzora/ https://primerafootandankle.com/item/ventolin/ https://yourdirectpt.com/zoloft/ https://frankfortamerican.com/prednisone-10-mg-dose-pack/ prednisone dhea https://primerafootandankle.com/www-prednisone-com/ https://fairbusinessgoodwillappraisal.com/vega-extra-cobra/ https://pureelegance-decor.com/sildenafil/ https://shilpaotc.com/esomeprazole/ segments compressed palatal back-to-back.