backtop


Print 115 comment(s) - last by johnsmith9875.. on Oct 19 at 10:06 AM


  (Source: Haloz)
"They build a shiny sparkling thing that attracts users and then they control people's access to those things"

You may recall that top video game maker Valve Corp., makers of the Half-LifeCounterstrikePortal, and Left 4 Dead series, as well as the hit video-game distribution client Steam, recently aired some of its titles on Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) Mac computers for the first time following some teasers.

But while Valve now is vending products for Apple's personal computer platform, it appears like there's little love between the firms.  Valve president and owner Gabe Newell blasted the Cupertino tech giant for its dictatorial approach to the mobile market.

He comments, "I suspect Apple will launch a living room product that redefines people's expectations really strongly and the notion of a separate console platform will disappear.  I'm worried that the things that traditionally have been the source of a lot of innovation are going - there's going to be an attempt to close those off so somebody will say 'I'm tired of competing with Google, I'm tired of competing with Facebook, I'll apply a console model and exclude the competitors I don't like from my world.'"

He continues, commenting that Apple has the "wrong philosophical approach" in its closed model.  

He adds, "I consider Apple to be very closed.  Let's say you have a book business and you are charging 5 to 7 percent gross margins. You can't exist in an Apple world because they want 30 percent and they don't care that you only have 7 percent to play with." 

To be fair, Valve might be being a bit hypocritical here as its Steam is also a closed platform, as the interviewer challenged.  Mr. Newell brushed this question aside, saying that while Steam isn't free, Valve does offer much free engine code and other tools to developers.

David Bluhm, president and chief executive of game company Z2Live, a mobile-focused gamemaker, jumped to Apple's defense after Mr. Newell's remarks, commenting, "I would argue Apple's system is very open but very proprietary ... it's open with their rules."

Source: TechNW: Best and worst of times for games, Valve vs. Apple



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Glad someone sees this...
By quiksilvr on 10/13/2011 11:34:25 AM , Rating: 5
Seriously, 30% is ball-constricting high, and on top of that they're tighter than a nun with their rules and regulations.

Oh, you made an app that can sync to iTunes via Wifi? No you didn't!

Oh, you made an app that toggles Flash support? Nope.

Oh, you made copy and paste app (yes, this also happened)? No.




RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Flunk on 10/13/2011 11:45:32 AM , Rating: 5
Microsoft and Google's Marketplaces also charge a 30% fee. Microsoft's is locked as tightly as the iPhone too. I'm not an Apple fan but this is common for smartphones.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By davepermen on 10/13/11, Rating: -1
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By augiem on 10/13/2011 1:34:45 PM , Rating: 5
Xbox live existed long before Apple's app store. Same model. People need to quit giving apple credit for everything they did not invent. Apple refines, not invents.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By augiem on 10/13/2011 1:40:44 PM , Rating: 4
oh and gee every single feature phone with java since god knows when has had verizon/sprint/att store where you buy your software... There was no other way!. This was nothing new. Another example of Apple coming to the game late and marketing the hell out of it to the point the ignorant people don't know any better and think they invented it. People have such short memories.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Solandri on 10/13/2011 3:22:51 PM , Rating: 5
The model is older than that. Back in the late 1980s, before the Internet really took off, people were getting their online apps and services via walled gardens like AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy, and DELPHI. Once you signed up with one, everything you saw, everything you could do, the people you could interact with, was basically controlled by the company you signed up with.

Then came the Internet, which broke down all those walls. It eliminated the vendor lock-in, made it useless for them to charge extra for their (usually inferior) services, allowed anyone and everyone to see and participate in anything and everything. You could even make your own net-based service if you wanted, which many did with great success (Google, Yahoo, Amazon, eBay, etc).

This was why Windows didn't get a TCP/IP stack until 1995 (a year after the Internet went mainstream) - Bill Gates was convinced the walled garden network model would win out (Microsoft's horse in the race was MSN), and the Internet was just a passing fad. He did what he could to make it harder for Windows users to get on the Internet. After the great networking liberation we experienced in 1994-1995 when the Internet became mainstream, it's really sad to see people flocking back to the walled gardens, not knowing nor understanding what it is they're giving up. At least with Android you can choose to install a different market or download apps and files from the net.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By MrBlastman on 10/13/2011 5:07:35 PM , Rating: 5
Not all of us were stuck in walled gardens back in the late 80's/early 90's. There were many of us that freely participated in the BBS system, dialing into hundreds or even thousands of different home-built and home-run BBS's, sharing ideas (through message boards!) and sharing software/pictures/audio etc. via the file section... and... get this, even gaming via door games.

BBS's were great, 2400 bps was not. Even still, we learned to live with and love it.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By MrBlastman on 10/13/2011 5:09:32 PM , Rating: 3
Oh and I forgot to mention that some of these boards even had backdoor access to usenet (through delayed feeds) and... sub-boards that were underground to even the mainstream BBS community that had its own unique community. If you knew the right people or information, you could open those doors too.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By FaaR on 10/14/11, Rating: -1
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Dradien on 10/18/2011 10:57:11 AM , Rating: 1
"subject to some random Android manufacturer's good will to update my phone with security patches (often never happens, even on phones as new as just 6 months old),"

..What? My Droid Incredible came out April, 2010, and it just got an upgrade.

Might want to check your facts.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By MartyLK on 10/13/2011 10:08:36 PM , Rating: 1
Nah...we all prefer to believe Apple created it all and the others are copying them. In fact, Apple has been very lenient with the companies they are suing.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Wolfpup on 10/14/2011 10:55:35 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree. PalmOS was completely open-so was Windows Mobile. I guess Windows Phone 7 isn't? Everything has to go through their store?

Android is at least open, usually (except I guess for AT&T phones...)


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By dark matter on 10/13/2011 12:25:59 PM , Rating: 4
Ask yourself "why is it common for smartphones"

The answer = Apple.

RDF makes you forget.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By lecanard on 10/14/2011 2:39:19 PM , Rating: 3
Apps are 30%, but WP7 and Android let you link to your own store for content (e.g., Kindle books) without demanding 30% of any purchase. Apple doesn't.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/15/2011 2:43:34 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft's systems are the most locked down if we're talking about XBox Live. Certification is the hardest, it is harder for indie developers to get their games on it than Steam or iOS, and it doesn't allow for cross-platform multiplayer while Steam allows for PC/Mac/PS3 multiplayer and iOS has cross-platform multiplayer with Android.

If we're talking about WP7 then yes, its policies are about as restrictive as iOS, which isn't bad at all considering that iOS has the biggest selection of mobile software right now. WP7 is certainly more open then the 360, so I'm not sure it is right to criticize it.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By davepermen on 10/13/2011 12:06:56 PM , Rating: 3
or remove the existing (and on all phones working) Siri from the marketplace and block any existing customers from the Siri servers to have a new feature to sell for the iPhone 4s?


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/13/2011 12:21:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Oh, you made an app that can sync to iTunes via Wifi? No you didn't!


Wait...are you serious? Can someone confirm this. I cannot believe that's blocked! I know I shouldn't be shocked, because it's Apple, but why the hell can't you do something this benign!

See that's why I went Android. I literally would rage if I had to deal with restrictions like this on simple everyday stuff.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By dark matter on 10/13/2011 12:28:08 PM , Rating: 5
You'll do as you'll told in LaLaApple land.

I can only conclude that Apple owners must be the submissive kind.

Use that to your advantage, if you were so inclined.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By tayb on 10/13/11, Rating: -1
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Manch on 10/14/2011 2:34:16 AM , Rating: 3
Based off of your conclusion, I postulate that chicks with iphones have daddy issues.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By lagomorpha on 10/15/2011 8:23:52 AM , Rating: 3
Well we already know they're easier to get into bed.

http://cdn.okcimg.com/blog/camera/SexAndSmartPhone...


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By quiksilvr on 10/13/2011 2:58:14 PM , Rating: 3
This was blocked on previous iterations. I believe NOW (as in within the past couple weeks), iOS5 and iTunes 10.5 lets you do Wifi sync. But last year when iPhone 4 came out, this feature was not available. So someone made it, asked for approval, and Apple promptly said NO.

http://www.iphonehacks.com/2010/05/wifi-sync-iphon...


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By tayb on 10/13/2011 9:29:49 PM , Rating: 2
You can. It exists as a feature of iOS 5 which is most likely why it is blocked.

I left iOS to go to Android but I wish I hadn't. I don't know what everyone else sees in Android but I certainly don't see it. Sluggish UI, weak app store, and the added bonus of carriers putting un-removable crapware on your phone.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By RjBass on 10/13/2011 11:24:35 PM , Rating: 5
Ya, that is why we flash our OS to a stock OS or go with a new mod like Cyanogen. If we don't like the selection of Apps from the market we then go to Amazon, or find the app we want on the internet and side load it.

If we are power users, we don't buy old outdated sluggish phones, we get the newer ones like the Galaxy S II, Infuse etc...

We have selection, expandable storage, replaceable battery, more app stores, more choices, more choices and more choices.

Ya I can see why you don't like Android, it's because your a moron.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Alphafox78 on 10/14/2011 10:07:42 AM , Rating: 2
Sonds like a big hassle... who wants to reflash a phone to a non supported rom an void their warranty on day one?


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By RjBass on 10/14/2011 10:56:36 AM , Rating: 2
When I got my original Galaxy S, I flashed it from Android 2.1 to stock Android 2.2. Not long after I started having hardware issues, mainly the well known GPS issue that plagued early Galaxy S phones. I then reflashed it back to the original ROM from AT&T, brought it back to the store, and when asked about it, I told them I reset the phone back to original settings in hopes of curing the problem to no avail. The clerk then handed me a new phone.

Flashing a Samsung Android phone is easy, only takes about 30 minutes and does WONDERS for the phone. My son has become an expert in the subject and flashes his fellow students phones for about $50 each.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By corduroygt on 10/13/2011 12:41:45 PM , Rating: 3
You realize Steam takes a similar cut from its online store, right?


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/13/2011 1:18:34 PM , Rating: 5
So? That doesn't make what Valve said any less true. I'm not even sure if they are directly comparable. Developers are free to publish their games on the Internet for everyone and anyone to use if they so choose. However if you want to develop iOS apps, you HAVE to go through the App Store.

Valve is offering a service and therefore should expect some compensation. They aren't forcing game dev's to use Steam are they?


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By corduroygt on 10/13/11, Rating: -1
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/13/2011 1:30:12 PM , Rating: 2
Because Valve doesn't control the Windows operating system and the entire Internet?

You do NOT need Steam to get your game out there. Hello? Comparing this to Apple is a flawed analogy. Valve doesn't sell consumer devices or hardware of any kind.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By MrBlastman on 10/13/2011 1:56:04 PM , Rating: 5
Very true, I don't need Steam at all to get my game out there. There are other places like Direc2drive and Gog.com for instance.

Steam does provide a lot of value, though (unlike Apple's store) with their sales. I'd say the bulk of my gaming purchases in the last couple of years have been through Steam (quantity-wise, not dollar wise) through these sales. When they start offering games for 2.50 - 5.00, I find myself giving in. In fact, I've built up such a backlog of titles now I have no reason at all to buy anything new for years to come.

That doesn't mean I won't though. Note I said quantity-wise. I've probably spent more dollars outside of Steam in the occasional purchase I make; mostly it is money spent on flight simulators as I feel the developers need every cent due to the small niche market it caters to.

I like Steam. I hate Apple's store and i-tunes. No, I loathe i-tunes. Anything that is invasive enough to brake my capability to burn CD's is bad enough I don't want it ever again.

I do feel a little bit like though that Valve is worried about what Apple might do in the future. As they should be. Apple, as much as I hate them along with everyone else, probably still has a few Steve tricks left up their sleeves and with marketing muscle, might put a dent in some markets (like Steam) that we don't see yet. The only problem is, they lack Steve, which, I feel was the true magician behind the magic show. The stagehands can only pull so much off once the magician has left the show...


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/13/11, Rating: -1
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/13/2011 5:45:01 PM , Rating: 1
Shut up Tony. You don't get the point, as usual.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/13/11, Rating: 0
RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/14/2011 8:47:26 AM , Rating: 2
You must be a miserable person, the name calling, that only serves to show how small minded you really are. Grow up. Seriously.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2011 5:57:54 PM , Rating: 2
I'm one of the happiest people you'll ever meet. Trolling horrible posters like Leroy is hilarious


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/15/2011 6:46:00 PM , Rating: 1
Note that he started the name calling in every single case. He's one of the most short-fused and vicious posters here. If he wants to sling shit then he should be ready to get it back instead of crying like a little baby.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/15/2011 11:24:38 PM , Rating: 2
No, I don't believe he did. Calling him trailer trash, redneck and other various names, that's you. Like I said, grow up.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2011 6:01:21 AM , Rating: 2
Oh no, that was loooong after he started with me....


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Reclaimer77 on 10/16/2011 12:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
Give me a break, you can't be THAT thin skinned. The worst I have ever called you was the occasional "idiot", as I do with almost everyone I argue with here. I've never gone into your background, or made stupid assumptions about you based on where you live, or anything like that.

Your attacks don't bother me, but they're really mean spirited and just kind of immature. It makes it seem like I'm debating with someone in middle school. I'm half expecting you to resort to "yo momma" jokes soon.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/19/2011 6:33:03 AM , Rating: 1
"Idiot" opens up the gate to mean spirited, sorry dude. Don't sling shit if you're not ready to get it back.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Netscorer on 10/13/2011 1:32:29 PM , Rating: 3
That is true, but Steam does not require that vendor can not sell their product elsewhere for whatever price fancies them at the moment. As a result, gamers can often have a choice to purchase game on Steam or go to other sellers for a smaller price. This is true even for Steamwork-only games.
Apple dictates that you can not sell your goods elsewhere for a lower price then what you charge via iPhone/iPad. This rule is what prompted Amazon to start their own Tablet and Marketplace.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/13/2011 5:34:39 PM , Rating: 1
Apple doesn't enforce pricing for applications on other platforms. You are getting confused with subscription and in-app sales.

As it stands, they revoked that change a few months ago: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20070258-17/appl...

Clearly it was a terrible idea. Either way, Apple doesn't control app pricing on other platforms. To go beyond the policies of other closed systems like XBox Live (which is COMPLETELY locked down), iOS apps have no restrictions talking to apps on other platforms either. This means cross-platform multiplayer between iOS and Android handsets.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/13/2011 5:34:39 PM , Rating: 1
Apple doesn't enforce pricing for applications on other platforms. You are getting confused with subscription and in-app sales.

As it stands, they revoked that change a few months ago: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20070258-17/appl...

Clearly it was a terrible idea. Either way, Apple doesn't control app pricing on other platforms. To go beyond the policies of other closed systems like XBox Live (which is COMPLETELY locked down), iOS apps have no restrictions talking to apps on other platforms either. This means cross-platform multiplayer between iOS and Android handsets.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By kleinma on 10/14/2011 10:07:04 AM , Rating: 2
Steam as an actual platform is totally free though. Sure you pay for the content, but with apple you pay for the platform and the content. with apple raking in HUGE margins all along the way, sitting on tons of cash, and doing nothing with it except flaunting a high market cap.


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/14/2011 6:38:31 PM , Rating: 2
There is tons of free content on iTunes. I'd wager that most of the applications that people buy on any mobile device is free.

The business models are different. Valve primarily makes money from software sales while Apple and some other companies make the money from selling hardware. Software is very secondary to them. iTunes is the largest seller of digital music and applications in the world and its net profit is only around 10%, well below the average 25% for all of their products. Gross revenue for iTunes is also far below the rest of Apple's products, so again, it isn't really where they make money. So why do apps in the first place?

Applications are obviously there to give value to the product, but from a pure financial standpoint they increase the cost of switching platforms. To entirely switch platforms whether it is Windows/OS X/PS3/360/Android/iPhone/Windows Phone 7 has cost involved because they all hook the customer in with purchases made for that one platform.

On a side note, it is awesome that with Steamplay you automatically get both OS X and Windows versions from a single purchase, same with Blizzard and Battlenet. But again, that's one more incentive to stay on the Steam platform. Valve's intention is for the Steam platform to be completely hardware agnostic. It's been on OS X for well over a year, and putting it on PS3 and the failed attempt to get it on XBox is just the beginning. If they see a reason to put it on mobile devices they will.

It is a very different approach, a completely closed system based around DRM that they intend to have on multiple hardware platforms and operating systems.

It totally makes sense since Steam's profit is entirely based on the sale of software. As you said, they give away the platform for free and then sell goods within it. It's just like people who say that TF2 or League Of Legends are free. Yeah, they're "free-to-play", but companies make a fortune from transactions made within the game. Riot isn't sponsoring half a million in tournament prizes this year because customers aren't buying characters and skins. :)


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/15/2011 6:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'd wager that most of the applications that people buy on any mobile device is free.
How can something you buy, be free?


RE: Glad someone sees this...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/15/2011 7:16:04 PM , Rating: 2
Whoops, good catch. :)

I'd wager that most of the applications people DOWNLOAD on any mobile device is free.

There, corrected. :)

The point still stands, there are very different business models at work here. Software gives very little profit to Apple as the bulk of revenue goes to software developers, music publishers, and movie studios. They make their money selling hardware. Software partly serving to increase the cost of switching platforms.

It is the opposite with Steam. Valve makes the bulk of their income from selling software, particularly their own, so it is in their interest to be as hardware agnostic as possible. They're on both Mac and PC, and they're just starting to be on console with PS3.

What is similar is that there is an increased cost to stop using Steam or switch away from it entirely since that software can only be used when running it.

I have over 250 titles on Steam at this point. There is no chance I'm buying a game from another download service unless a publisher runs their own, like Blizzard does with Battlenet for Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3.

In the end they are all closed systems based around DRM of some sort, they just go about it in different ways because of their different business models.


By TakinYourPoints on 10/15/2011 7:18:50 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I just checked and I have closer to 340 games in my Steam library. WTF, jeez, those cheap Christmas bundles threw a lot of stuff in I had no idea about and will probably never play. :)


By TakinYourPoints on 10/16/2011 6:59:41 AM , Rating: 3
70% profit is an awesome split for developers if you consider that traditional retail/publisher deals were closer to 20% profit. This is amazing if you're an independent, and the distribution platform puts you on even footing with all of the other applications out there.

I don't know what benchmark you're using to determine that 70% profit is too low considering how much worse and cumbersome it used to be.

John Carmack has gone over this several times: http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG.Biz/id+Software+ne...

http://www.industrygamers.com/news/app-store-is-th...

quote:
"You know, I really, really like the app store platform as far as being able to remove obstacles to getting your product out," he told The Telegraph.

"You don't have to cut deals with publishers. It's almost completely egalitarian on there. It's great to see all the small teams that wind up making these breakout hit games for the Apple devices," he said.


I'm sorry, but 70% on these "flat" platforms is WAY better than it used to be. People forget that developers were chomping at the bit once Apple announced their split. One of the better deals out there that is now a widely accepted standard on mobile.


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki