iPad

[Jayel]

Apple does care about developers, even if they have a funny way of showing it. After all, they started the 70/30 money split trend. Before that it was literally 30/70... how ridiculous is that?! And how amazing is the appstore model for distribution... I don't need to host my files or write my own registration code or online store code etc etc. I wrote a cellphone game in j2me (pre iPhone days) and it was seriously the most painful experience in my life! Apple changed the game for developers in an incredibly positive way.

I did a bit of shopping around for a distributor when I was trying to get into pocketpc/smartphone development 6~7 years ago (before I abandoned it as I always do), but I don't recall it being as bad as 30/70 split... There weren't that many outlets, as I recall, so maybe they started a cartel?

But in any case, yeah, Apple did a lot of things right with its appstore. Thanks to it, the whole mobile app market, not just apple's, is looking up (though some might argue since they can't charge $20 for a mobile game anymore). I can't think of a better analogy than a shopping mall - perhaps because me and my family had dealings with it:

Having and maintaining a store on your own is a lot of headache. Not so much if you have a store in a shopping mall. It's comfy, you get free security, and a substantial foot traffic. Sure, the mall officials treat you like dirt and the security guards act like thugs. They'll slap you with random charges and fees, take a cut of your profits, and you don't get to decide on the work hours or any mall policies for that matter... but ultimately, it's a beneficial arrangement for both parties. The only thing that cost you as a tenant is a bit of dignity and freedom.

[ThunderPeel2001]

I call bullshit. So many people thought the dual-screen concept of the DS was stupid, I remember plenty of forum threads all over the internet with people predicting the death of the DS before it even came out.

Eh? It's not bullshit, I've literally never heard any complaints about the DS. Ever. (Sorry.)

[Jake]

I think it's not the physical device people are apprehensive about, as much as how it shows how willing people are to accept a lot of "bad" things, like Apple's censorship and crazy rules for getting software on the app store, when the end result is a high quality user experience.

I find it extremely frustrating that this attitude is coming out so loudly from the gamer community. Why the hell are you guys all buying consoles and downloading from XBLA/PSN/WiiWare then?*

"This is different because it's more like a desktop machine" is a garbage argument. So it also runs productivity and information browsing apps as well as games. And? I watch Netflix, browse videos, and play music on my Xbox 360. I one time even browsed the web on my Wii. I also have never used any of those platforms for open software development. ... Please tell me why this is different, in any way that isn't purely emotional?

Is it just "another tower falls," and we lost gaming years ago? Even though I don't fully agree with the sentiment, that's an argument I could accept from someone -- it would be a fair thing to say, at least because it would be consistent.

It doesn't feel like that, though. It feels like the people who are happy to chomp down dozens of Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo approved and licensed games are now pissed as hell because this new thing that seems to be actually in demand, won't run the Linux distro they don't actually run but always brag about on forums. The system is blurring the lines in a way that hasn't happened in ages or ever (I would say the onset of game consoles was the first time, but that happened almost concurrently with the personal computer), and even though the components are extremely familiar (if this system only ran gaming software people wouldn't be saying anything, other than how it would never compete as a gaming device) people are feeling threatened. It's weird to me, I guess.

The iPad is a weird thing, and it does represent a potential change and a potential weird future for computers. I doubt the future will be exactly what Apple and the iPad wants it to be, but I think there is the potential for a zillion good ideas inside the iPad and I'm eager to see what comes of it. I hope something cooler and more progressive comes and blows it out of the water, though, because that's what it will take for change to occur, not a bunch of forum hand-wringing and screaming at people to not buy something they want.

I guess I'm more of an "In My Life" person than the seemingly "I'm Looking Through You"-subscribing majority of the Internet when it comes to things like this.

* Toblix I have no idea if you specifically purchase from console marketplaces, but your argument has been echoed by thousands who do.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Jake

[Murdoc]

I hope something cooler and more progressive comes and blows it out of the water, though, because that's what it will take. A bunch of forum hand-wringing will do nothing.

Alright, I see what your saying. Ok guys, time to make my own, better ipad; now who has the glitter and fuzzy twist ties?!

[Jake]

Alright, I see what your saying. Ok guys, time to make my own, better ipad; now who has the glitter and fuzzy twist ties?!

Haha.

Apple always builds hardware like this -- pushing one big thing at the expense of everything traditional -- and people always freak out, but I think it's the only real way to make things work in an industry as big and in-the-groove as tech. (This is depressing considering how new tech is compared to, say, automotive, home appliance, or even something like film.)

Apple introduces a new product which is basically a technological filibuster -- a personal computer with no floppy drive, serial, or parallel ports; a music player with no fm receiver, etc -- to get everyone to pay attention, and to wake the rest of the tech industry up. I don't think that latter thing is high on their priorities, but it has an effect. Science fiction, and general nerd lust, have been asking for touch interfaces, modular, and wearable computing for decades and decades. Apple shows time after time that these things are possible with today's technology as long as a few things are let go of and you are willing to commit to actually, you know, making it, instead of sitting in advertising and product positioning committees for 2 years. The App Store part definitely sucks, but I think it is undeniable that Apple's internal continuing to push the hardware and software they do is driving consumer technology into cooler and cooler places. Smartphones suck less now. Consumer PCs suck less, too. Soon, maybe netbooks will suck less, and so will HDTVs and small home displays. We have little things in our pockets, and now sitting on our desk, which seem to have literally fallen out of Star Trek or the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, and the internet is pissed because the first popular models have an app store.

I'm not saying we wouldn't have modern MP3 players, or that PC's wouldn't have shifted to USB and burnable media instead of serial ports and floppys, if Apple wasn't around, but Apple is extremely good at making people with dollars actually demand change and progress from the industry, instead of being passively fed it. Maybe they're being passively fed it by Apple, and everyone else has to catch up (I'm sure smaller coffee shops around the world are tired as fuck of hearing people order a Venti cappuccino)... but at least personally for me, most of the big changes Apple pushes align with things I already wish the tech industry would do, and I'm glad for it.

Would I like it if there was a more officially open channel for independent development on Apple's mobile platforms? Absolutely. I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually does it better anyway (will that be Android? People in Reddit comments seem to think so, so who knows), or even if, after a few years, Apple themselves opened up the platform, either because they finally got comfortable with the idea, or because the App Store as a platform cooled and they realized they could make more money with less control.

For right now, though, the benefits and the potential for the platform, and the new ways of interacting and using a computer it effectively tries to force through its limited design, interest me a lot, and I think far outweigh the fact that you have to write the software for it on a separate platform and get it approved by the manufacturer.

Also, if something like Coda or a BBEdit/CSSEdit suite comes out for the iPad, you can expect to see kids and hobbyists writing solid web apps right on the thing, which is a huge step up from Atari 2600 Basic or something like that. Not a 1:1 development:consumption relationship, but more than what most closed platforms can offer. It will be a huge foot in the door.

I'm done shitting out stupid posts about the iPad now, I think.

Oh yeah one last thing: iPads are, in practice, really fun to use.

[Patters]

I find it extremely frustrating that this attitude is coming out so loudly from the gamer community. Why the hell are you guys all buying consoles and downloading from XBLA/PSN/WiiWare then?*

I think the reason which these are commonly accepted is due to the nature of consoles, they tend to be locked down. Most people who make the argument to me seem to be PC users, those who know that the PC is completely open, from here they see Apple, traditionally a builder of computers releasing something which has a lite version of the authorisation to release a program for it. They follow the view that you should have a system completely locked down or one that is completely open.

People had similar sentiments about the original Xbox, with views that it was just a plug and play PC. Though about midway through it's life it became apparent to nay-sayers that Microsoft were serious about becoming involved in the console market.

That probably makes between little and no sense, for which I am truly sorry

[Grippage]

[Jayel]

I consider myself a PC gamer but I have purchased wiiware/XBLA/PSN games in the past - I hope I don't come off as a bit of hypocrite...

Wasn't it in one of the thumbs podcast that said that two things that are the same, presented in different lights have different responses? I think that people accept the same sort of restrictions they impose on indie console market because they see the consoles as "video game machine, with extra features added" but they see iPad (even though it's the same thing!!!) as "a computer, but features taken out." They measure it with a different ruler, because as somebody said in the thread already, most people don't know what it is yet.

Hell, I didn't mind the same damn thing with iPhone and I even signed up for the development program, because I see iPhone as a "cell phone, but with a bunch of features added!"

(edit: it's a bit of a lie... I did mind it, but not enough to shy away from developing on the platform )

it's in apple's full right to allow or reject apps from their store. I wish it wasn't like that (want to try out that mobile opera!) but I do understand.

[toblix]

I find it extremely frustrating that this attitude is coming out so loudly from the gamer community. Why the hell are you guys all buying consoles and downloading from XBLA/PSN/WiiWare then?

I have many principles, but break them all to get games.

[syntheticgerbil]

My boss made me start drawing on this thing earlier with a program called Sketchbook Pro and I was making this awesome fish and then the program crashed and erased my progress since my last save.

I got fed up and went to lunch.

Still haven't played any of them there vidya gaems.

Also, am I supposed to be getting my fingerprints all over this screen? Everyone else in the office has been messing with it, but it seems like I'm the only one with fingers that drip with oil. I feel disgusting.

[Erkki]

I think I found a perfectly good solution to my personal dilemma with it: I'm going to get one for my mom (some other people have also said they plan to do that).

[toblix]

For the sake of seriousness (being a fan of serious debate, although rarely a participant), and also since I was quoted in Jake's post: I'm not of the opinion that Apple shouldn't be able to run the App Store like they are (or Microsoft or Sony). My main problems with it are not in principle, but regarding practical stuff like inconsistent refusals and that sort of thing. My post was more meant to explain what I thought was "most people's" reasoning for not immediately being an iPad fan.

As for the iPad itself, I'm getting one first thing, but I'm worried that the missing Flash will get very annoying over time, as I fail to see a bunch of videos and play a bunch of games.

[Nicholololas]

As for the iPad itself, I'm getting one first thing, but I'm worried that the missing Flash will get very annoying over time, as I fail to see a bunch of videos and play a bunch of games.

Did you see this? http://www.hegnar.no/it/article417357.ece (Norsemen link)

[JonCole]

I think the reason which these are commonly accepted is due to the nature of consoles, they tend to be locked down. Most people who make the argument to me seem to be PC users, those who know that the PC is completely open, from here they see Apple, traditionally a builder of computers releasing something which has a lite version of the authorisation to release a program for it. They follow the view that you should have a system completely locked down or one that is completely open.

People had similar sentiments about the original Xbox, with views that it was just a plug and play PC. Though about midway through it's life it became apparent to nay-sayers that Microsoft were serious about becoming involved in the console market.

That probably makes between little and no sense, for which I am truly sorry

I think it makes a lot of sense, but what you're saying absolutely confirms what I think to be the silliest latent assumption that people seem to love to latch onto - that the iPad should be judged on the desktop end of the computer spectrum.

Consoles may be more locked down, as you said, but I would say that almost every console is technologically closer to what we consider a desktop computer to be than what the iPad is. If anything, the iPad is far more like a smartphone than anything else... and by that comparison, the iPad actually has far more features than one should really "expect".

The people who are complaining about the concept of this device largely want a tablet device that emulates the desktop computer paradigm, similar to how a netbook mimics the functionality of a fully-fledged desktop though not nearly at the same level of power. The problem is, Apple doesn't want to deliver that experience, they want to put out an iPhone with expanded functionality.

[Hermie]

We are again on the path of trying to compare it to completely different groups of hardware. I still say we call "tablet" it's own category, and then focus on if the price to feature-set ratio is something that appeals to you personally.

As far as the app store goes, I think the negative view a lot of people have of it stems from the fact that we just hear the horror stories about how arbitrary the approval (app-proval?) process is, like the guy who got denied simply because he mentioned in the description that the app had been successful on the android. While that is bullshit and shouldn't happen, there are still hundreds of apps that make it through just fine every day, but we don't hear about their process, because it went fine.

I think I will usually have a pretty positive view on the app store, because despite all the problems, it has still made a completely new market for developers, one that's low-risk, low investment needed, and low barrier to entry. This means that people curious about game development can try something like this on the side of a different job, alone, without having to abandon everything and investing savings in starting a studio. And if they then want to go further into game development, they have a fully shipped game on their resume.

I have seen several Thumbs saying they either are or want to try out being app developers. Are you reading this thread? What are your thoughts on the app store? On the iPad?

[Erkki]

I think I will usually have a pretty positive view on the app store, because despite all the problems, it has still made a completely new market for developers, one that's low-risk, low investment needed, and low barrier to entry. This means that people curious about game development can try something like this on the side of a different job, alone, without having to abandon everything and investing savings in starting a studio. And if they then want to go further into game development, they have a fully shipped game on their resume.

I have seen several Thumbs saying they either are or want to try out being app developers. Are you reading this thread? What are your thoughts on the app store? On the iPad?

Well, I personally would like to be able to develop for it on the PC. I don't want to get a Mac (or I do a little bit, but if then a laptop and I want to do development on a desktop, not a laptop). Then I'd like it to be easier to get a developer's license. Until recently, you couldn't really get one in Estonia without cheating.

I don't know the exact requirements for the dev. kit, but I think you have to have a company? I don't have my own company (yet), and I'd rather not register one until at least I'm actually ready to publish something. I would also like it if it ran Java, but I guess that's too much to want.

[edit] On your note about people getting into game development through this -- why would it be better in any way than doing that on the PC and self-publish it only as a downloadable game? (unless you want to do something that fits that device better than the PC)

[SiN]

Thanks for saying all of that out Jake ... my thoughts on the subject are similar.

The people who are complaining about the concept of this device largely want a tablet device that emulates the desktop computer paradigm, similar to how a netbook mimics the functionality of a fully-fledged desktop though not nearly at the same level of power. The problem is, Apple doesn't want to deliver that experience, they want to put out an iPhone with expanded functionality.

Problem: People don't really know what they want. What they want is out there, pick up a Windows Tablet PC and use it for 30 minutes. You'll understand why a "full OS" on a tablet is an awful idea. And that's with a stylus... it'd be impossible to use without one.

I have seen several Thumbs saying they either are or want to try out being app developers. Are you reading this thread? What are your thoughts on the app store? On the iPad?

I'd like to see an AppStore-less world, but I understand why Apple did what they did. The deal on the AppStore (70/30) is the best in the business. The SDK is solid... not *quite* upto Microsoft standards, but pretty close. Documentation is excellent. Honestly, I don't have too many complaints. I think you'll find *most* iPhone game developers feel the same way.

Mo

[Hermie]

Well, I personally would like to be able to develop for it on the PC. I don't want to get a Mac (or I do a little bit, but if then a laptop and I want to do development on a desktop, not a laptop). Then I'd like it to be easier to get a developer's license. Until recently, you couldn't really get one in Estonia without cheating.

I don't know the exact requirements for the dev. kit, but I think you have to have a company? I don't have my own company (yet), and I'd rather not register one until at least I'm actually ready to publish something. I would also like it if it ran Java, but I guess that's too much to want.

[edit] On your note about people getting into game development through this -- why would it be better in any way than doing that on the PC and self-publish it only as a downloadable game? (unless you want to do something that fits that device better than the PC)

I really know absolutely nothing about the development process, which is why I asked for you guys' opinion. And I'm already learning!

As for the iPhone vs. PC, I don't know much, but I imagine it can be easier to have it on a known service rather than on a website you have to self-promote? I'll trawl the app store from time to time for random apps, but I rarely seek out indie games randomly on the internet, unless they come recommended by f. ex. this forum, at which point someone else must have heard about it/tried it first.

Again, I'm talking straight out of my ass, so feel free to enlighten me, people that actually know Things. \o/

[Lu]

I don't know the exact requirements for the dev. kit, but I think you have to have a company?

You can actually apply for a personal license. I think one of the only differences is the credit underneath your app name. If it's a personal license, it'll have your name under it; if it's a company license, it'll have the company name under it.

I think if you apply for the individual license, the only barrier to entry is the 100 dollar a year dev kit fee. That's about it.

[Erkki]

As for the iPhone vs. PC, I don't know much, but I imagine it can be easier to have it on a known service rather than on a website you have to self-promote? I'll trawl the app store from time to time for random apps, but I rarely seek out indie games randomly on the internet, unless they come recommended by f. ex. this forum, at which point someone else must have heard about it/tried it first.

Again, I'm talking straight out of my ass, so feel free to enlighten me, people that actually know Things. \o/

i don't know much about that either, but I think there are some download services where it's easier to get your game up than Steam for example. And the PC might have bigger long tail potential than the App Store. Also I never buy games completely randomly for my iPhone, always based on review or recommendation. But I'm talking out of my ass as well.

[Jayel]

I don't know the exact requirements for the dev. kit, but I think you have to have a company? I don't have my own company (yet), and I'd rather not register one until at least I'm actually ready to publish something. I would also like it if it ran Java, but I guess that's too much to want.

Of course this is different from app to app, but as a game developer, you can simply develop on other platform and port it later. I stick to opengl es 1.1 standards (ie no immediate mode, no shaders, no glu, etc) and use bare minimal openAL for audio, so that they are cross-compilable on 4 different platforms (though there are some platform-specific code as well). I'd totally recommend that route if you want to get into iphone game development and don't want to make big initial investment (i regret doing that). Porting job shouldn't be that difficult... Optimizing and re-thinking controls is another story...

I don't really have a lot of valuable opinions because I haven't published anything on the appstore yet (i lose motivation very quickly ). But I work with a quite a few programmers who have, and their opinions reflect SiN's. Tools aren't as nice as MS's but much better than Android's (their NDK doesn't even support STL). Appstore approval process sucks, and how apple chooses the lucky few to feature on front page sucks, but they are minor nuisance.

But I don't know... looking at the problems they had getting their apps approved (rejected because of screenshot, rejected because of description, rejected because interface looks like apple's, rejected because it has the word "gay" in the title, etc etc etc), I don't know how they are not bothered more by it. It's very discouraging looking at it as an outsider who wants in on it. I suppose it's easy to overlook its problems when it makes you 200k richer. "Walmart of mobile apps" they say.

[edit] On your note about people getting into game development through this -- why would it be better in any way than doing that on the PC and self-publish it only as a downloadable game? (unless you want to do something that fits that device better than the PC)

I personally want in because, frankly, the standards are far lower in terms of production value (kinda like a dollar store). It gives me a fighting chance at an audience as a one-man team who's doing this as a pure hobby in his spare time. Not saying it's impossible on PC or anything, but well, I'm lazy.

edit: I forgot to mention that there are game engines out there (like Unity3d) that's free and cross-platform including iphone/ipad. I suppose it's a very valid option if you're serious about iphone game development but not want to buy apple hardware just yet.

i don't know much about that either, but I think there are some download services where it's easier to get your game up than Steam for example.

Not sure about e-tailers like steam, but there are quite a few online services that handle transactions/registrations/downloads for a reasonable fee if you simply want to sell it on your own without a lot of hassle. For some reason I can only think of esellerate, but I know there are many more... Edited April 7, 2010 by Jayel

[ThunderPeel2001]

Let me ask you think, Jake, do you feel the same way about the HP Slate? It's the same price (roughly) and has four times the RAM and 50% more processing power, supports Flash and isn't locked down.

Q3MSjwUrxT0

Given the choice (and if the Slate does everything HP promises), which would you pick?

Also, Ars Technica have just published their (18,000 word(!)) review of the iPad. Here's their conclusion...

The iPad is many different things to many different people, and writing a conclusion that sums it up for everyone is impossible (in fact, it's pretty difficult to write one just summing up the Ars staff's feelings alone, and we're a pretty tight-knit group). Though we only highlighted a small handful of apps in this review, it's important to note that most of us think that the software makes the iPad. This first round of applications is quite good overall, but what comes in the future from Apple and third-parties alike will likely take the iPad to much greater heights.

Truthfully, this is device is one that can only really be understood by playing with it firsthand (we know, it took us more than 18,000 words to tell you that). No matter how many words get spilled on the iPad around the Web, there's still no simple way to describe how it feels and how it's different from a typical computing experience or a smartphone experience. Those of us on staff who were highly skeptical about the iPad before having touched it had a very different understanding of it afterward spending some serious time with it. This is likely to be the case with most users.

The iPad has numerous flaws—most of which can be fixed with software updates, and we hope that they will be—but it's still a device that will undoubtedly kick off a shift in how the general population interacts with software and content. As pointed out by Omni Group CEO Ken Case at the Macworld Expo, even if the first iPad doesn't end up being a hit, multitouch devices where users interact directly with what's on the screen is the future. "In five to ten years, there will be really big multitouch screens, like on an iMac or something, and we'll be touching and moving things around instead of clicking and dragging. This effort is an investment in the future. It's forcing us to look at our applications—for the iPad and the Mac—in a completely different way and improve upon it as user interaction changes," he said. We agree.

But for today: can the iPad replace a netbook or a laptop? For some of you hardcore users, probably not. For those who use netbooks as a lightweight way to browse the Web, chat a bit, and do some light work: yes, it can. Does the iPad make a good weekending/vacationing computer? Sure. The way the iPad is designed, you are less likely to get sucked into doing work or accidentally wasting away hours of your life online than you would on a "normal" computer, but it's mostly capable enough so that you can do some work when necessary. Is the iPad easy and foolproof enough for your technologically challenged family member? Yes, if that person has at least $500 to burn. Does it make a good e-book reader? Depends on your definition of "good." Readers that use e-ink (such as the Kindle) may still be better in some situations, but for gadget consolidation's sake, the iPad as an e-reader is decent enough, even for those of us with sensitive eyes.

Five hundred dollars (or more) is a lot of money to spend on a device that some people still can't figure out how to fit into their lives. So at this point, it's hard to say whether anyone should get an iPad, but for those of us on staff, even the most skeptical of us don't regret it.

The best way for us to sum up our collective and unanimous conclusion on the iPad, is to say that it's the first device to substantially deliver on the promise made by the iPhone and, in some respects, the Newton. Both of these earlier Apple products gave us glimpses at what a real, usable, purpose-built tablet computer might one day look like, and the iPad at long last gives us the complete picture. So in a sense, the iPad is both the end of a long journey and the start of a new one. We can't wait to see where it takes us next.

It's interesting that they seem to like it, but aren't completely sure why.

[Patters]

Let me ask you think, Jake, do you feel the same way about the HP Slate? It's the same price (roughly) and has four times the RAM and 50% more processing power, supports Flash and isn't locked down.

Q3MSjwUrxT0

Given the choice (and if the Slate does everything HP promises), which would you pick?

That thing would be ideal for a photographer, the SD card support along with being fully open could lead to a lot of good things. I doubt it will be successful though. I just want touch screens similar to those in minority report.

[JonCole]

Let me ask you think, Jake, do you feel the same way about the HP Slate? It's the same price (roughly) and has four times the RAM and 50% more processing power, supports Flash and isn't locked down.

My name's not Jake, but if you'd be so kind, I'd like to throw in my two cents on the Slate, since I think it's a reasonable point that I feel you're trying to make.

One of my major problems with the Slate is that it sticks with the shitty 1024x600 resolution that I honestly don't think is worth the purchase. One of the biggest selling points of the Slate is the Broadcom Crystal HD chip in there that allows for Flash acceleration supporting up to 1080p video, but with that screen you're farther away from 720p than even the iPad is.

Furthermore, the tablet is running Windows 7 Home Premium, which is definitely nice if you like multitasking and all of that. But your mention of the specs makes me wary about the performance of the machine, because Windows 7 Home Premium simply doesn't run fantastically on 1GB of RAM and an Atom processor.

Finally, I'm not sure whether not being "locked down" in this case is a good thing. Are there really going to be game developers out there who are going to develop for a non-iPad touchscreen interface in any great numbers? I honestly don't think so, and speaking as a gamer, that doesn't really make me optimistic.

[Scrobbs]

I don't really like the closed platform - but then I have an iphone, so I guess I've already accepted that part and got over it.

If I had a job and the disposable money, I'd get one. Otherwise, it's non-essential

I think they look mint.