An all things Apple thread

[JTK]

*shrugs* Why not? They're a BDA member and frankly, I don't know what else to call this thread.


I'm going to hit a few birds with one stone here with these interesting tidbits. We'll kickstart this thread with some controversial remarks.

Courtesy of the February 2007 issue of Game Informer Magazine. Page 42, interview with Gabe Newell.

Gabe Newell's Background:

Founder and Managing Director of Valve Software, where the Half Life games have come from along with the Steam download service. Newell started out as an MS employee who worked on the first three editions of Windows. He worked with John Carmack of ID software to bring Doom to the Windows platform. After this success, Carmack encouraged Newell to leave MS and start is own game development studio, which he did with fellow MS employee at the time Mike Harrington.

Half Life comes out, the rest is history.



This is rather fascinating interview that folks should take the time to track down and read the entire thing. I'm going to take a few of the comments, in context, because there's some issues that he brings up, as an ex MS employee, that I find too tantalizing to resist.

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Sto...1324.31632.htm

^^ That's some of it. I'm going to fill this out from the actual magazine.

Game Informer: What about the PS3?

Gabe Newell: The PS3 is a total disaster on so many levels. I think it’s really clear that Sony lost track of what customers wanted and what developers wanted. I’d say, even at this late date, they should cancel it and do a “do over.” Just say, “This was a horrible disaster and we’re sorry and we’re going to stop selling this and stop trying to convince people to develop for it.”

Wow. I think this is excessively harsh, but hey, he IS an ex MS employee.

I wish he would have expanded and elaborated as to how and WHY he feels this way.

Gabe: The happy story is the Wii. I’m betting that by Christmas of next year, the Wii has a larger installed base than the 360. Other people think I’m crazy. I really like everything that Nintendo is doing.”

I'd laugh if this happens. Heck, I hope it does.

GI: What’s your opinion of the Xbox 360?

Newell: Microsoft has so many problems with Vista;

I wish they were focusing more on the thing that runs on hundreds of millions of PCs rather than six million proprietary clients.

So do I.

Gabe: Vista really shows a lack of focus on making a better consumer platform. I came out of the Windows group, and right now, I’d go with a Macintosh as being a better solution for most consumers than a Vista-based PC. It’s shocking to me.

If you’re an XP user, you’re going to be more comfortable upgrading to an Apple than Vista.

Apple: I speak for a lot of people when I say: I'd love nothing more than to do exactly this, but I'm a PC gamer and you NEED to start meeting us halfway, at least, WITHOUT kneeling at the altar of Microsoft and Windows.

Your OS is better. Your next one will probably be jaw dropping.

Your platform is better. Everything you've got, pretty much, is better.

The dual boot thingie for Windows was a nice gesture, but it also showed you all kneeling to MS as a concession. There's no reason or excuse for a PC gamer to not be able to kick ass on Apples all the way without any MS. That's the bottom line.

Gabe: Vista is going to drive you crazy in terms of some of the user interface decisions.

Other than gaming, which is Apple's Achilles heel, almost everything else works better on a Mac. As somebody who used to live and die to make Windows successful, that's super sad to me.

I agree with him on Vista totally.

Here's where I continue to be incredibly frustrated. This question goes out to Apple and pretty much everyone else: Why do you all continue to ALLOW Microsoft to STEAL YOUR ideas and take full credit for them? Mac OS has been doing stuff for YEARS that Vista is boasting about.

The successor to Mac OS is probably going to be downright amazing. Stability. Security. Apple blows it out of the water.

The only thing Macs don't do is gaming. As a PC gamer, I'm forced to kneel at the altar of MS and Windows and I think that stinks and is unfair.

If I thought Apple would ever get a clue and get serious about finally bridging the gap to gamers WITHOUT kissing MS's ass...I'd buy a Mac today, right now. Dead serious.

Even the latest issue of PC Gamer magazine put out this shootout between a DX10 ready rig they made up vs. a nicely loaded Mac and even THEY couldn't believe how awesome the Mac was and how much better it was, except for a few things: Hardware and you HAVE to have Windows to play PC games.

Apple: Get rid of that Achilles heel WITHOUT Microsoft and WITHOUT Windows and you've got customers for life in people like me. Believe it!

I'll bet Apple's OS's don't cost $200-$400+ either, do they?


http://www.pcgamer.com/archives/2007...-_mac_pro.html

^^ Hopefully they'll actually post this story pretty soon, but this is the PC Gamer article I was talking about where they were like "Gosh, this Mac really is a joy to use but too bad we can't play games on it."

[kilofox]

Good Post.

From my view point.. the day I switched to Apple was the day I just completely lost interest in gaming on a computer.

I do have a PS3 which I use mainly for BR movies, h264 videos, showing my hi-res pictures, music and an occasional game. I use my computer as a tool/appliance today. The only entertainment I use my Imac for is movie/picture editing. It does that beautifully. My computer just works, I dont worry about viruses, spyware.

I have no interest in gaming or watching movies on my 20" screen when I have a 50in 1080p screen with 7.1 sound in the next room. I realize that some people cant have both, and in that case they have a very valid point.

I dont like DRM, but if I have to use it... I will take Apple's over Microsoft's any day. I shudder to think what Vista's DRM will be like. I have yet to even notice Apple's DRM restrictions in my everyday usage.

I work with computers everyday. That being so, I dont care to spend much my free time infront of one as means of entertainment. I have tons of other interests (cycling, skiing, reading, movies) plus I spend enough time as it is infront of a computer screen.

I think Apple realizes this too and this is the market they are interested in. I could be completely wrong, but I think there of more of me than there are of you. People like me just arent has vocal as you are because Apple satisfies us.

In the long view, I see Apple's future going up, and Microsoft's going down. Microsoft cant make up what kind of a company they are, they are a Jack of All Trades, and master of none (the exception being the XBOX and Office).

Apple is way too late to enter the pc gaming market they realize this and also realize that there is a good chance you wont be a pc gamer for life... and you might switch then.

Please dont think that I assume that my experience is the norm, I dont, its just speculation on my part.

PS.. there is always Boot-Camp right?

[joeorc]

i do enjoy reading pro-industry comments "instead of " the MS fud machine zealots always commenting "if its not windows os, than it sucks" you know what i like about both APPLE an SONY at this point both are showing the consumer there are other options to OS's other than WINDOWS. in the industry Microsoft gets its "photo copier" ready when something new threatens a market share in the IT industry that MS does not have a hand in. like take the IPOD, now MS has released the zune "an you know what's sad the ZUNE is being sold at EB GAMES" WHERE IS THE SALE OF THE IPOD AT EB GAMES...? , that's what i love about the PRO-MICROSOFT ZEALOTS always slamming other companies esp..SONY when MS an their zealots are just as arrogant. now with the release of the IPHONE MS is releasing a MS version of a phone that intergrates with "LIVE". the same people who always comments on xboxlive being the best thing since sliced bread should also know someone already had "live anywhere" first ..but you know MICROSOFT's

Amiga... Anywhere?

As the name suggests, Amiga Anywhere will be marketed as a cross-platform solution, providing the ability to execute applications on any hosted environment. The table below shows a selection of the platforms that Amiga Inc. have indicated will be/are supported:


Desktop Windows
AmigaOS 4.2
Linux
QNX
Portable Windows CE / Pocket PC 2002
ZaurusOS
EpocOS
iTron


http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/amigade.html

[JTK]

Originally Posted by kilofox

Good Post.

Thanks.

From my view point.. the day I switched to Apple was the day I just completely lost interest in gaming on a computer.

I guess I can see why since that's the one weak link in the chain.

I do have a PS3 which I use mainly for BR movies, h264 videos, showing my hi-res pictures, music and an occasional game. I use my computer as a tool/appliance today. The only entertainment I use my Imac for is movie/picture editing. It does that beautifully. My computer just works, I dont worry about viruses, spyware.

Those are the pluses all the way. I also have a PS3 and use it for all the things you just cited, but for me: PC gaming still > *

I have no interest in gaming or watching movies on my 20" screen when I have a 50in 1080p screen with 7.1 sound in the next room. I realize that some people cant have both, and in that case they have a very valid point.

Indeed. It's all relative to viewing distance and other things and certain tastes in games as well.

It isn't cheap, but there are some PC games that are just so complex and in depth: You'll never see the likes of a Supreme Commander or a Crysis on a console.

I can put my headphones on, throw on my Buttkicker gamer, and I sit at a optimal viewing distance and have the high rez cranked on a quality LCD widescreen monitor, and frankly, I almost like that the best over just about anything else.

I dont like DRM, but if I have to use it... I will take Apple's over Microsoft's any day. I shudder to think what Vista's DRM will be like.

It's ghoulish already, even despite the heat MS took to scale some of it back.

Read Maximum PC and some of the other recent leading PC magazines and websites' rundown on all this.

The DRM is absolutely nightmarish and medieval.

I have yet to even notice Apple's DRM restrictions in my everyday usage.

I work with computers everyday. That being so, I dont care to spend much my free time infront of one as means of entertainment. I have tons of other interests (cycling, skiing, reading, movies) plus I spend enough time as it is infront of a computer screen.

I think Apple realizes this too and this is the market they are interested in. I could be completely wrong, but I think there of more of me than there are of you. People like me just arent has vocal as you are because Apple satisfies us.

In the long view, I see Apple's future going up, and Microsoft's going down. Microsoft cant make up what kind of a company they are, they are a Jack of All Trades, and master of none (the exception being the XBOX and Office).

Apple is way too late to enter the pc gaming market they realize this and also realize that there is a good chance you wont be a pc gamer for life... and you might switch then.

Please dont think that I assume that my experience is the norm, I dont, its just speculation on my part.

I couldn't agree with you more, but my attitude is: Why can't Apple do it all?

PS.. there is always Boot-Camp right?

Yeah, except that's half assed and my point is: That's kneeling at the altar of MS and giving ground.

Originally Posted by joeorc

i do enjoy reading pro-industry comments "instead of " the MS fud machine zealots always commenting "if its not windows os, than it sucks" you know what i like about both APPLE an SONY at this point both are showing the consumer there are other options to OS's other than WINDOWS. in the industry Microsoft gets its "photo copier" ready when something new threatens a market share in the IT industry that MS does not have a hand in. like take the IPOD, now MS has released the zune "an you know what's sad the ZUNE is being sold at EB GAMES" WHERE IS THE SALE OF THE IPOD AT EB GAMES...? , that's what i love about the PRO-MICROSOFT ZEALOTS always slamming other companies esp..SONY when MS an their zealots are just as arrogant. now with the release of the IPHONE MS is releasing a MS version of a phone that intergrates with "LIVE". the same people who always comments on xboxlive being the best thing since sliced bread should also know someone already had "live anywhere" first ..but you know MICROSOFT's

Amiga... Anywhere?

As the name suggests, Amiga Anywhere will be marketed as a cross-platform solution, providing the ability to execute applications on any hosted environment. The table below shows a selection of the platforms that Amiga Inc. have indicated will be/are supported:


Desktop Windows
AmigaOS 4.2
Linux
QNX
Portable Windows CE / Pocket PC 2002
ZaurusOS
EpocOS
iTron


http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/amigade.html

Amiga. This just made my heart go all warm and fuzzy and put a smile on my face.

[kilofox]

Originally Posted by JTK

I couldn't agree with you more, but my attitude is: Why can't Apple do it all?

Apple doesnt want to be "a Microsoft", they want to be Apple.

PS... Another point I forgot to mention, MS cant even use real money on Xbox Live or Zune Market Place... points instead of real money? If the points where a 1 to 1 ratio with dollars I could get it.. but its not, how stupid is that? Another example of MS "not getting it".

[joeorc]

those that like the amiga or remember how good of a computer's they were an still are...seems that those that have not looked into recent Amiga news may be happy to know Amiga os4

here is the first part of the info..

"After five years Hyperion announces the availability of AmigaOS 4.0: 'Amiga OS 4.0 is the most stable, modern and feature-rich incarnation to date of the multi-media centric operating system launched by Commodore Business Machines (CBM) in 1985 with which it still retains a high degree of compatibility.' But there is a snag: the new OS supports only the AmigaOne, which is not available anymore. According to Hyperion, the new hardware platform will be announced by third parties early 2007."

an now the second:
* The Mesa and AmigaOS specific implementations are based on the published OpenGL® APIs, but are not implementations which are certified or licensed by Silicon Graphics, Inc. under the OpenGL® or OpenGL ES® APIs.

here is the kicker...

does the playstation 3 use OPEN GL...
DOES THE PLAYSTATION 3 ALSO HAVE A POWERPC PROCESSOR......
WOULD THIS BE THE RETURN OF THE AMIGA as a gameing platform but for the next generation....

this intro TO Amiga OS4 screams..were putting our OS on the playstation 3
http://os4.hyperion-entertainment.bi...itstart=0.html

perfect for the CELL processor:


an finaly the end of the speculation: ol ya its comeing to the playstation 3..

21. Would Amiga Inc. support/encourage Hyperion to port AOS4 to the PS3? Given Eyetech's apparent withdrawal from the Amiga hardware market, and the prohibitive cost of producing adequate PowerPC-based hardware in sufficient numbers, surely a port to Sony's CELL-based system is now the only realistic chance for the platform to return to the mass-market.

Bill McEwen -- I have had conversations with the Freidens about this, and once we have the legal situation resolved then we can put that horse before the cart. If we can not do it with OS 4, then I am sure the FIVE can take care of that issue.



http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...&ct=clnk&cd=13

[JTK]

^^ Interesting stuff.

Originally Posted by kilofox

Apple doesnt want to be "a Microsoft", they want to be Apple.

Thank God for that!

PS... Another point I forgot to mention, MS cant even use real money on Xbox Live or Zune Market Place... points instead of real money? If the points where a 1 to 1 ratio with dollars I could get it.. but its not, how stupid is that? Another example of MS "not getting it".

One of countless examples.

[Urian]

The reason why Apple has a lot of advantage is simple:

-They have redesigned their OS and launched OS X (back in 2000) that is Modular System were the Application Code, the Interface Code and the Data Code aren´t joined in a spaguetti code. Thanks to this new technologies are easier to implement and the update of the system is easier to do. See how Apple gave to us OS X Tiger in 2005 with more features than Vista and Vista is going to be released this year and with 10bilions $ of R&D behind it.

-Apple has applications like Final Cut HD (Pro and Express), DVD Studio Pro, Shake, Motion, Logic series (Pro and Express) all them make the Mac the platform of choice over the concurrency when we talk about video editing. They can help a lot to BluRay cause, more than Microsoft FUD to HD-DVD cause, I am a video professional and I prefer to go where Apple says because they know the video market, Microsoft is only pure bullshit and FUD.

-AppleTV doesn´t feature an HD player but we can understand it since Apple is under Intel pressure and have taken the neutral position of waiting who is the winner format (of course they know what format is going to win, this is why they never allied with HD-DVD camp) but it features an USB 2.0 port. It could be cool a drive from Apple with a USB 2.0 interface for Apple Computers and AppleTV.

-I am sure that if we talk about the next Mac Pro a SuperDrive HD based on BluRay are going to be in the system, being them the only Apple computers with a built-in BluRay recorder in the system. The others are going to have the option of the BluRay Player from USB 2.0.

[Zvi]

The only good thing I see in all this, at least some competition to Windows. Other than that, IMHO Apple is no better of a company than MS is. Their DRM practices on itunes is already a subject for anticompetitive and monopoly charges.

Look at their products such as iPod, upcoming iPhone, etc. No 3rd party software allowed as usual. And as for the apple comps, upgradeability always was an issue. I most certainly wouldn't wish Apple becoming a dominant home PC, though that most likely won't happen anytime soon. I don't mind apple OS running on PCs, it's better at some point.

[Urian]

Originally Posted by Zvi

The only good thing I see in all this, at least some competition to Windows. Other than that, IMHO Apple is no better of a company than MS is. Their DRM practices on itunes is already a subject for anticompetitive and monopoly charges.

Look at their products such as iPod, upcoming iPhone, etc. No 3rd party software allowed as usual. And as for the apple comps, upgradeability always was an issue. I most certainly wouldn't wish Apple becoming a dominant home PC, though that most likely won't happen anytime soon. I don't mind apple OS running on PCs, it's better at some point.

This partie support is allowed in iPhone, the problem is that the PC media have confused the words "closed API" and "it must be validated by Apple" with no third partie support.

Actually this is the same situation of OS X, we program in closed APIs (Cocoa and Carbon) and we must validate our applications in the ADC.

[jsb_hburg]

Originally Posted by Zvi

The only good thing I see in all this, at least some competition to Windows. Other than that, IMHO Apple is no better of a company than MS is. Their DRM practices on itunes is already a subject for anticompetitive and monopoly charges.

Look at their products such as iPod, upcoming iPhone, etc. No 3rd party software allowed as usual. And as for the apple comps, upgradeability always was an issue. I most certainly wouldn't wish Apple becoming a dominant home PC, though that most likely won't happen anytime soon. I don't mind apple OS running on PCs, it's better at some point.

Apple ensures that within its ecosystem, its software works because it also makes the hardware.

The antitrust laws do not punish a company that establishes market power through business acumen.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Urian

This partie support is allowed in iPhone, the problem is that the PC media have confused the words "closed API" and "it must be validated by Apple" with no third partie support.

Actually this is the same situation of OS X, we program in closed APIs (Cocoa and Carbon) and we must validate our applications in the ADC.

Are you an Apple employee?

[Urian]

Originally Posted by JTK

Are you an Apple employee?

I am a member of the ADC, not an Apple Employee.

Actually one of my working platforms is OS X.

[Shadowself]

The core question seems to be, "Why has not Apple gone after the gaming market significantly more than it has?"

The real reason is historical as much as for any other reason. This is a bit long, so grab a cup or glass or pitcher of whatever and read on.

When the Macintosh first launched it was truly revolutionary. Microsoft knew it. IBM knew it. HP knew it. Dec knew it. DG knew it. Virtually everyone knew it. Hell, I'd been doing computer related stuff on and off for over 18 years at that point and even I couldn't wait to get my hands on one after witnessing my first demo!

There were only two modes that these companies had a reasonable chance of attacking the Mac.

1. Price:
If it had launched at $1,500 rather than $2,500 we'd be in a different world. Apple had gross margins on the Mac (up through the Mac IIfx and beyond) of greater than 50% (some over 65%). At the time the rest of the industry had gross margins of about 25% to 35%. Thus Apple's competitors went with the campaign of Apple Macintoshes being way over priced -- and for the most part they were. -- Campaign successful! (N.B. Even today many people believe Macs are way over priced even though you can find comparable HP and Dell boxes as much as $1,000 more. -- That's not to say Macs are universally less expensive today. They are not. It's just that they are not universally more expensive.)

2: It's a toy.
These companies just had to point at the computer with its tiny screen, "cute" mouse and no numerical keypad (Steve had declared that there will never be a numerical keypad on a Mac keyboard.) and declare it a toy. It must not be meant for anything serious. It must be for "Artsy stuff" and for play. If you want to connect to your IBM mainframe use an IBM PC. If you want to connect to your VAX use a DEC workstation. If you want to front end a Cray use a Sun workstation. Don't use a toy. Don't try to use one of those thing for REAL computing! Again... Campaign successful!

Steve (and Sculley even more than Steve) and Apple were resolute on the first issue. Because of its margins Apple was somewhat of a Wall Street darling and could afford a lot more than many companies its size. Apple did not give up those huge margins until the dark days.

As a consequence of the second campaign, Apple stayed away from pushing gaming on the Mac -- there were some interesting exceptions of course: Dark Castle, etc. But as a general rule games were being developed at a rate of over 10 to 1 for the DOS machines over the Mac.

One way these two things worked together against Apple was Apple's versus Microsoft's handling of developers and developer expenses. This is most aptly shown by Ballmer's famous rant of "Developers! Developers! Developers!" at the start of one of Microsoft's conferences several years ago. Microsoft was into supporting developers (large and small) and not charging them huge fees for development kits and access to help. Conversely Apple charged a lot for its development kits and help was never easy to get.

And to top it off Apple had published this multi volume set of rules about how things were supposed to be implemented on the Mac (sometimes down to the smallest detail). This left developers with little flexibility in how to implement their software. Game developers of the day were notorious for not following the rules. (e.g., Most game developers of the day wrote directly to the display hardware for the greatest speed. Apple's rules forbade this, and Apple's System software [as it was called back then] made it more difficult to do than on DOS.)

Also Gassee was not interested in games at all and considered it a lesser form of software. While I've never been told this by him personally, I've been told this by several people inside Apple who dealt with him directly.

Thus before the dark days of Apple, Apple did not actively support game developers on the Mac. The Mac market share for games by 1995 was a small fraction of its hardware market share which in and of itself was falling like a rock! (Most people haven't accurately tracked back Apple's market share, but it's total personal computer market share was over 19% in 1990. In just seven years it's market share had dropped to under 2% by some accounts. It went from the number one computer supplier to not being in the top ten in under seven years.) During that freefall Apple was just interested in plugging the leaks in the sinking ship. Thus as the days became darker and darker Mac games all but vanished.

During the dark days -- and the first couple years after Steve's return -- Apple was focusing on just trying to keep its core customers (education & publishing and to a lesser extent the general public) and trying to expand from there. You don't get into the good graces of the K-12 administration with games. You do it with interesting/useful hardware and a better OS supporting "useful things". Witness the iMac and Mac OS 8.5 and Apple forming closer ties to education software ISVs.

My personal opinion is that during the climb out of the pit Steve still was not interested in doing anything that could bring back the old "toy" claims. Thus Apple did not court any of the game developers during the early stages of Mac OS X development.

This has led to decreased support for game developers on Macs. Decreased support has led to developers fine tuning their games less for the Mac. This means lower frame rates and poorer graphics on Macs (even on games which are on both platforms). This has led to gamers buying Windows games over Mac games. This has led to the Windows platform being the de facto standard for games. (It's the old "for want of a horseshoe nail" scenario.)

For a long time even many major game houses did not directly do Mac games. They hired "secondary" companies with programmers that ported the Windows specific game code over to the Mac. While these porting houses got better support from Apple than the game houses which were Windows focused they didn't get as much support as the education and "productivity" ISVs did.

Additionally, Microsoft has, since about DirectX 5.0, actively courted game developers. Microsoft has held meetings and small symposia dedicated to getting game developers using DirectX. Apple never did such things. I remember back in about '89 or '90 when QuickDraw3D came out. It was very interesting and a significant step forward in 3D programming -- and 3D imaging in general. But like many, many projects of that era Apple did not put the necessary focus on it or effort behind it. (As an aside, there was Pink. Apple's ground breaking OS. I know for an absolute fact it was actually running on Apple hardware within Apple in 1990. However, it was almost unbelievably miss managed and literally every middle manager got their say about what needed to be part of the final version of Pink. It became one of those "be all things to all people all the time" kind of projects and thus never became a shipping product. If they had just finished it up enough to be a 1.0 release Apple would have shipped the equivalent of Windows 98 as early as 1991 or 1992. Additionally, during the switch to the PowerPC Apple didn't even have a decent development environment. There are many, including me, that believe Metrowerks' CodeWarrior all but saved Apple from itself. Besides, Metrowerks was not actively supporting game developers either. They were into supporting the huge houses like Adobe.)

With all these things happening to effectively kill gaming on the Mac it is somewhat amazing that as of 2000-2002 there were any games at all available on the Mac.

The first real indication of any real interest by Apple in games and gamers was their inviting John Carmack to come to Apple and discuss the implications of Mac OS X's usefulness to game developers. IIRC he even spoke at one of the MacWorlds about gaming on the Mac. While Carmack is not the "be all, end all" game developer/programmer, when he says something the game developer community at least listens to what he has to say. For Apple to get him to go up on stage and say nice things about the Mac was a huge first step. Since that time Apple has slowly (glacially?) been warming up to game developers. There are breakout sessions at Apple lead conferences which are directly relevant to game developers. Apple has a long, long way to come back. OpenGL in Mac OS X helps, but it's not enough in and of itself.

Are there initiatives within Apple to push more into gaming? Yes. Just look at things like Steve displaying games on an iPod. Apple has come to realize that gaming is an integral part of the consumer market so things are changing and things are being done. I don't know many details as I don't work in the gaming world directly (just some of the OS features are important to both their and my needs), and unfortunately the few I do know are under NDA. However, a small push exists, and Apple is talking to game developers and is trying to turn things around. Apple's gaming push is smaller than its Enterprise Market push -- and we all know how slowly that's going. That said, I don't expect any major announcements about games within the next year. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

Bottom line... Things are changing both within Apple and outside of Apple with regard to Mac gaming. Just don't expect any significant changes soon.

[Zvi]

Originally Posted by Urian

"it must be validated by Apple" with no third partie support.

Which effectively kills 3rd party software for Apple. If you look at the amount of open source and third party software for PC, it clearly impossible for one company to either validate or review even 10% of it. So, one way or another Apple is shooting themselves in the foot. I'd think they'd learn by now after all those years, but no. They're just as arrogant and greedy as before.

Originally Posted by Urian

Actually this is the same situation of OS X, we program in closed APIs (Cocoa and Carbon) and we must validate our applications in the ADC.

Don't tell me you view that as a good thing though. Although the results speak for themselves.

Originally Posted by jsb_hburg

Apple ensures that within its ecosystem, its software works because it also makes the hardware.

What Apple ensures doing that is the absence of lots of software for Macs. Is apple software 100% bug free? Of course not. This is about control. And that's real stupid for software market.

Originally Posted by jsb_hburg

The antitrust laws do not punish a company that establishes market power through business acumen.

Nah, they do not. Except when it's done outside of business acumen it's perfectly punishable.

How about this: "In fact, other than Apple's iTunes, no other online music vendor has such a restriction in place; yet these other online vendors still manage to provide copyright protection mechanisms to artists and record labels -- often the same artists and labels whose same songs are sold online through iTunes." That is about their DRM and Apple preventing anyone else to play iTunes files on other portable players and other software playing music on iPod, Apple refusing to license Fairplay DRM and so on.
You can look at that as business acumen, but IMHO that's monopolist, anticompetitive and all that.

[Urian]

Which effectively kills 3rd party software for Apple. If you look at the amount of open source and third party software for PC, it clearly impossible for one company to either validate or review even 10% of it. So, one way or another Apple is shooting themselves in the foot. I'd think they'd learn by now after all those years, but no. They're just as arrogant and greedy as before.

Is the same strategy than game consoles, the third parties are able to do all the applications that they want the only that is required is a validation and this validation is being a member of the Apple Developer Connection paying annually.

In other words, instead of paying a license for XCode we pay a license for publish our works on the Mac.

Don't tell me you view that as a good thing though. Although the results speak for themselves.

One example of closed API is DirectX, you can add your own libraries to the standard for your own use but the API isn´t fully documented and you cannot make a modification or a new API based on this. In the case of OS X we have 2 main APIs named Cocoa and Carbon, they are like WIN32, anybody can program for them but who dictates the standard is the propietary of it.

What Apple ensures doing that is the absence of lots of software for Macs. Is apple software 100% bug free? Of course not. This is about control. And that's real stupid for software market.

In other words, you are a Mac-hater of your touch with the Mac platform is limited to the falacies of the PC media.

¿Absense of a lot of software? Apple has an huge directory of sofware in their webpage, watch it:

Made4Mac

I can put an entire page about OS X and how it runs, but this a BluRay forum, if one of the mods ask me I can educate the people about how OS X is inside.

How about this: "In fact, other than Apple's iTunes, no other online music vendor has such a restriction in place; yet these other online vendors still manage to provide copyright protection mechanisms to artists and record labels -- often the same artists and labels whose same songs are sold online through iTunes." That is about their DRM and Apple preventing anyone else to play iTunes files on other portable players and other software playing music on iPod, Apple refusing to license Fairplay DRM and so on.
You can look at that as business acumen, but IMHO that's monopolist, anticompetitive and all that.

The problem here is that all the media was waiting for Microsoft, and in middle of this waiting Apple made the proposition of an internet music shop named iTunes and it became a succes.

The reason? iTunes concurrency have only spreaded words, not facts.

[JTK]

This has become an amazing thread! Thanks to everyone who has participated thus far and for those who will.

Originally Posted by Urian

I can put an entire page about OS X and how it runs, but this a BluRay forum, if one of the mods ask me I can educate the people about how OS X is inside.

Do it!
Urian: It's an "all things Apple" thread. I can't see the mods having any problems with what you suggested posting, but I'm not the last word on the subject.

[Urian]

OS X FAQ

What is Mac OS X

Mac OS X or OS X is the Operating System from Apple for Apple Macintosh platform and Apple iPhone.

A simple description please

OS X is different from Windows and shares a lot of similarities in design with Unix BSD, Unix System and Linux. This means that is a design where Application Code, Interface Code and Data Code are separated, thanks to this is more easier to update the code for a low cost, making it better and adding new functionalities.

The ideology is that the system combines de power of a Unix OS with the easy to use of a Macintosh platform.

Any relationship with the old Mac OS?

None.

In 1987 Steve Jobs made Next with a few engineers from Apple where he was dismissed back in 1985. They made the first Operating System with an object oriented API at 100% and it became the most powerful desktop OS with a graphical interface, the problem is that it was expansive for the general public and only a few people used the NextStations.

In 1990 Apple wanted to make a superior Operating System than NextStep and made a joint venture with IBM for a new platform, this platform was named Pink OS/Taligent and failed in 1993 when Apple broke the software contract with IBM and started Copland, a vaporware OS with the same capabilities of the existing NextStep, in 1996 Apple recognized the vaporware and bought Next, thanks to this movement Jobs returned to Apple.

At the same time Next launched two computers, the Next Cube and the NextStation but both of them failed in the market at the beginning of the nineties, Next became a software only company and designed with Sun OpenStep, the fourth version of NextStep that appeared in 1993 being compatible with Motorola 68k, Sun SPARC and Intel x86, Sun promised to Apple that the OpenStep could be one of the main parts of Solaris, at the end Sun discarded the idea in favour of Java.

Rhapsody was developed inside Apple, they discared the support for the SPARC platform and changed the environment to one similar to the Mac OS environment with a few enhachements, this version was able to Run Mac OS 7, OS 8 and OS 9 software for PowerPC but only in the PowerPC version, it was never released to the market.

The first alpha of the final OS X was OS X server, released in the year 1999 as a beta program it was designed for servers only and it ran with OS 9 interface instead of the Aqua interface designed for the final version of OS X, at the end in 2000 the first real version of OS X was released, being the seventh version of NextStep and the third OS Made from 0 inside Apple.

Until today OS X have received 5 major releases:

-OS X Puma 10.0 (Included as an extra disk in the Mac computers back in the year 2000).

-OS X Cheetah 10.1 (Free update for 10.0 users)

-OS X Jaguar 10.2 (First OS X that was released to the usual distribution market)

-OS X Panther 10.3, OS X Tiger 10.4 and the next release is OS X Leopard 10.5

XNU: The kernel.

XNU is the main kernel of OS X, in reality it has 2 kernels, the main kernel is XNU and the auxiliary kernel is Mach 3. We can define XNU as a monolitich kernel made with a microkernel+extensions.

The first part is Mach 3, thanks to it OS X can do preemptive multitasking, including kernel threads (POSIX threads on Mac OS X are implemented using kernel threads), memory protection, virtual memory management, inter-process communication interrupt management
real-time support for kernel debugging (the built-in low-level kernel debugger, ddb, is part of XNU's Mach component, and so is kdp, a remote kernel debugging protocol implementation) and Unix console I/O.

The second part is the BSD part, a lot of people believes that OS X copies from FreeBSD or NetBSD, yes, is true that they include FreeBSD as a base in the last versions of the OS but originally it was based all in the BSD 4.4 distribution from Berkeley like FreeBSD, NetBSD and other other BSD Unixs. The BSD part gives the next features: process model, management of user ids, management of permissions, basic security policies, POSIX API, BSD style system calls, TCP/IP stack, BSD sockets, firewall VFS and filesystems, System V IPC, crypto framework, various synchronization mechanisms.

The last part is the I/O Kit, an object oriented device driver framework that controls the hardware that is in the system and the management of it. Is based on a reduced set of C++ and it does the next things: support for numerous device families that are today standards (ATA/ATAPI, FireWire, Graphics, HID, Network, PCI, USB, HID, ...), object oriented abstractions of devices that can be shared, real plug-and-play and hot-plugging, power management, preemptive multitasking, threading, symmetric multiprocessing, memory protection and data management, dynamic matching and loading of drivers (multiple bus types), a database for tracking and maintaining detailed information on instantiated objects (the I/O Registry), a database of all I/O Kit classes available on a system (the I/O Catalog), an extensive API, mechanisms/interfaces for applications and user-space drivers to communicate with the I/O Kit, driver stacking.

But this is only the bottom part of the OS X. Above the kernel we start to have a combination of Open Sourced libraries with propietary libraries that provides the multimedia power to OS X. All is divided in 2 groups, Core Services and Application Services.

CoreServices

CarbonCore: Core parts that are used by the Carbon API. Carbon API is the classic Mac OS API that was ported to OS X for make more easier porting apps from old Mac OS to OS X.

CFNetwork: An API for user-level networking that includes several protocols such as FTP, HTTP, LDAP, SMTP, ...

OSServices: A framework that includes various system APIs for communication of the applications with the I/O Kit in the kernel (accessing disk partitions, the system keychain, Open Transport, sound, power, etc.)

SearchKit: A framework for indexing and searching text in multiple languages. Since OS X 10.4 it supports metadata searching in all the system. Metadata is data that talks about the data, for example the date when you made a file is a metadata tag, the ID3 tags in a MP3 are metadata tags, searching using metadata is more faster than the usual form.

WebServicesCore: APIs for using Web Services via SOAP and XML-RPC.

But the most important of them is CoreFoundation, is the most important API, thanks to it the the applications can access to features like access to URLs, parse XML, maintain property lists and a long etcetera of features that are outside the multimedia part. CoreFoundation makes more easier to add new features to existing applications without having to put huge R&D in the code.

Application Services

Quartz: The Windowing environment is named Aqua and the engine that runs it is named Quartz and Quartz Extreme, Quartz is when it runs from the CPU and Quartz Extreme is when it runs from the GPU, since Jaguar Quartz disappeared and became Quartz Extreme, making possible to enhace the graphical part with the current technology of GPUs.

Quartz is based on the internet pdf standard and the OpenGL libraries, it renders the windows like a OpenGL texture and filters it with AntiAlias, supports transparencies and a lot of things that are possible thanks to OpenGL.

The other frameworks supported by the Applications Services layer are:

Apple Events: a mechanism for inter-application communication.
Apple Type Services: a framework for managing and accessing fonts on Mac OS X.
ColorSync: Apple's color management system that's integrated with Mac OS X.
HIServices: framework providing human-interface related services, such as for icon management, translation, "pasteboard" (clipboard) etc.
LangAnalysis: an API to the Language Analysis Manager, allows for analyzing morphemes (a morpheme is a meaningful linguistic unit, that is, a distinctive collocation of phonemes, having no smaller meaningful parts) in text.
LaunchServices: a medium-level interface to starting applications, including opening documents with either a specified or the default application, open URLs, etc.
PrintCore: an API to the printing subsystem.
SpeechSynthesis: an API for generating synthesized speech.

The Cores, Quicktime and OpenGL need a part for themselves becuase if they are application services at the same time they are more important than the others in the multimedia inside the system.

I will continue later.

[kilofox]

Originally Posted by Zvi

How about this: "In fact, other than Apple's iTunes, no other online music vendor has such a restriction in place; yet these other online vendors still manage to provide copyright protection mechanisms to artists and record labels -- often the same artists and labels whose same songs are sold online through iTunes." That is about their DRM and Apple preventing anyone else to play iTunes files on other portable players and other software playing music on iPod, Apple refusing to license Fairplay DRM and so on.

You can look at that as business acumen, but IMHO that's monopolist, anticompetitive and all that.

Frustration doesnt equate to monopolist. Pretty much ANY song you want on iTunes you can buy elsewhere at the same price or better. Shall we punish Toyota because they sell more cars than Ford, GM or Chrysler? It aint going to happen to Toyota, it aint going to happen to Apple. You, me or anyone else can purchase the same music that can be purchased on iTunes and play it on a different player and in most cases do it cheaper.

If you can sue a company because they market better than another company (and that's all Apple has really done with iTunes and iPod), then its a sad day for people that want to work hard and set themselves above their competitors.

BTW: Microsoft is doing the exact same thing with the Zune.

[jsb_hburg]

Originally Posted by Zvi

(Snip)

What Apple ensures doing that is the absence of lots of software for Macs. Is apple software 100% bug free? Of course not. This is about control. And that's real stupid for software market.


Nah, they do not. Except when it's done outside of business acumen it's perfectly punishable.

(snip)

I practice antitrust law. I will not provide an opinion. As for software, there are over 5,000 Universal titles that run on the Intel Macs and that is just a subset. As for hardware, the Apple ecosystem ensures that third party peripherals work.