Why Apple is no PC Killer (yet) November 22, 2008
Posted by checarlos87 in Computers.Tags: Apple, computer market, Computers, gaming, iphone, ipod, mac, mac os, mac os x, microsoft, objective-c, pc, programming, programming languages, videogames, windows, xbox 360
5 comments
First of all, let me state that I agree that Microsoft has indeed employed many questionable tactics in the past, especially in developing its Windows OS. I agree that Apple (and UNIX, for that matter) should at the very least have an equal market share with Microsoft because of its sheer product quality. Now that that’s out the way, let’s ask ourselves: why doesn’t Apple have a larger market share? Is it really just evil Microsoft’s fault for copying Mac design patterns?
The answer is no. It is not just Microsoft’s fault.
While Microsoft is infamous for its faulted products, there is no denying that Microsoft knows how to please customers. Don’t believe it? Take the following example: why is the Xbox 360 the “hardcore gamer” console of choice? Since it entered the market, it has been plagued with problems, the most infamous of which is the “Red Ring of Death”. Note that Apple has nothing to do with the console market, and yet Micorsoft managed to pull it off again: it took a faulted product and turned it into the industry leader.
This occurred mainly because Sony overlooked an opportunity that Microsoft exploited: online console gaming. After that, even though Sony brought a far superior product to the market in the form of the PS3, consumers just didn’t care enough to switch back.
Can we find an equivalent situation in the computer market? Certainly. Apple has constantly ignored the opportunity of opening up its products, while Microsoft has no problem in handing them out like hotcakes.
Classic example: Mac OS must run on an Apple system, while your microwave oven could probably run on Windows if it had a microprocessor. This behavior extends beyond the operating system market, though, and sometimes in markets where Microsoft is no clear competitor. The iPod, for example requires iTunes to manage media. And now, as I was searching for an API for development of iPhone apps, I stumbled upon an iPhone SDK.
An API (Application Programming Interface) is usually a library which contains documentation on how to program certain behavior on a particular programming language. An SDK (Software Development Kit) is usually a single program or software suite (a bundle of related programs) that aid in the rapid development of computer applications. And while I was hoping to find an iPhone API on a language such as Java or C++ or Python, I ended up with an SDK for an iPhone-specific language based on Objective-C (a minor programming language on its own).
Why? Why must Apple hold such a tight leash on its products? Apple marketing is quick to point out that if you switch from PC to Mac, you get both Mac OS and Windows, instead of just Windows. But the argument actually cuts the opposite way: if lifelong non-tech-savvy Windows users are going to end up using Windows anyway, why switch to (the much more expensive) Mac in the first place?
Why can’t Apple learn from its own success? It’s no exaggeration to say that Apple only came into the mainstream because of the iPod. And why did the iPod become the most successful Apple item to date? Because while it does need iTunes, iTunes can be run on Windows! Yet they expect to use this as a hook for people to switch over.
If they really want that strategy to work, why not open up Mac OS? Most of Microsoft’s success lies in that it doesn’t always create the hardware for its software to run on. That’s why Windows-capable hardware is so cheap in the first place: economic competition forces competitive prices on hardware. If Apple doesn’t compete, sure it’ll always be king of its hill, but people won’t really care.
I’m not one to ally myself to a specific camp. I’m not a die-hard PC fan nor am I an Apple advocate. I do however love the computer market, and within it, variety can only bring good things to the table, and that’s why I want Apple to reach its potential. But until Apple gives me a good reason to switch over, I (and millions of others) will just keep happily being Windows users. Windows may be faulted, but it provides what I need at a reasonable price, and that is Microsoft’s key to success.
Miyamoto’s Midlife Crisis November 18, 2008
Posted by checarlos87 in Nintendo, Videogame Industry.Tags: Donkey Kong, Mario, Miyamoto, Nintendo, Nintendo Wii, Shigeru Miyamoto, Wii, Wii Fit, Wii Music, Zelda
1 comment so far
Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong: these names have long been revered among the gaming community. They are all great, and they all share one man in common: Shigeru Miyamoto.
Donkey Kong and Mario both debuted in the arcade game Donkey Kong in 1981. Mario was then known as Jumpman, though (the popular Pac Man had started a trend of naming characters as something-man). The arcade game was a sensation and is still hailed by many as one of the best of all time, as evidenced by the 2007 movie The King of Kong: A Fistfull of Quarters. And while games are built by a team, it would be no exaggeration to say that the man responsible for such a game was Shigeru Miyamoto. He not only crafted an incredibly challenging, smart, and addictive game; but he also was the first to ever incorporate the concept of a story in a videogame (read Chris Kohler’s Power-Up: How Japanese Video Games Gave the World an Extra Life). Donkey Kong captures the damsel, Jumpman must then rescue her. Simple as it was, it was a story, and the first one in videogame history.
Mario came to be better loved than his apish counterpart, though (mainly because Mario was the character controlled by the player, and Donkey Kong the bad guy), and soon got some games of his own. Most memorable among them is 1985’s Super Mario Bros., which is currently still the best-selling game of all time (over 40 million copies to date). It’s simple mechanics yet deep gameplay were an instant hit, and it’s no exaggeration to say that it alone restored the videogame industry from its ashes after the death of Atari. Miyamoto had done it again.
Then came The Legend of Zelda. The original NES game, while popular was too difficult (at the time) to become as mainstream as other Miyamoto franchises, but it was nontheless great. But after SNES’s The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, and of course, N64’s The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, currently the best rated game of all time, Zelda had become a juggernaut all on its own. Through the Zelda series, Miyamoto has crafted a timeless gameplay formula with a timeless story to match.
But what of Miyamoto now? Since the inception of the Wii into the industry, Miyamoto has dedicated his time to such projects as Wii Fit and most recently Wii Music, the latter of which has sold under 81,000 copies in October (according to GameSpot). Truly he did also give us Super Mario Galaxy (curently the third best rated game of all time), but titles like the Marios and Zeldas of old are becoming few and far between. Miyamoto’s (and Nintendo’s) current projects are constantly leaving something to be desired.
Where do Miyamoto and Nintendo wish to head? The industry has changed drastically in the last few years, and Miyamoto seems to have changed with them.
Miyamoto is acting as if though he’s hit a midlife crisis. He’s trying new, unwieldy videogame designs; he’s leaving behind the things he’s most known for; he seems out of focus; he’s even dressing like a midlife crisis (a tacky combination of colorful T-shirts with a sports coat on top).
Regardless of what is driving Miyamoto (and Nintendo) right now, it is clear he must refocus. We owe most of what the videogame industry is right now to him and his franchises, and we can’t afford to lose him. Sure, we’ll have Calls of Duty and Gears of Wars for some time to come, but where will the Marios, Donkey Kongs, and Zeldas be?
The industry needs you, Miyamoto-sensei. Please, come back to us.
The 64-bit Golden Era November 15, 2008
Posted by checarlos87 in Nintendo, Videogame Industry.Tags: games, Nintendo 64, videogames
1 comment so far
I miss the times of the Nintendo 64. Don’t get me wrong; I’m not some some cynical old geezer that believes all past times were better than today. The current videogame industry is full of awesome games, and they are coming out much more frequently than some ten years ago.
But… obviously, they’re different games than those we used to play back in the late 90’s. And while no era is better than the other, I personally really miss those games of the 64 and PSX era.
Games from those times were simpler and had a much more cult feel to them. The general experience had a lot of charm. Super Mario 64, Star Fox 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII – IX. Somehow, these games were deep and complex, yet were simple in design and gameplay. The characters in these games were unique and memorable; and the gameplay managed to strike a perfect balance between classical, simple 2D mechanics and 3D graphics and physics.
Today, however games are highly complicated, with über-budgets and a much more mainstream feel. Again, this is not a bad thing by any means. We have games such as Call of Duty, Gears of War, Mass Effect, and even Rock Band and Guitar Hero. They are all great games… they just don’t have that old charm.
While things change with time, and upgrades replace the old, I see no reason to leave behind these semi-old school design patterns. I think they can coexist with the new patterns and focuses of the industry. We have a great recent example of the old not necessarily being outdated in Mega Man 9. It is built as a fully 8-bit game, and still feels absolutely fresh.
The main disadvantage of current-day, mainstream, über-budget design patterns is that they make the industry exclusive: it makes developers and designers rely on whatever is popular at the moment, to make sure a multi-million game investment is not left to waste away on store shelves. The industry excludes most things that don’t fit within typical mainstream tastes. It would be nice, though, to incorporate different design patterns along with the mainstream ones, so as to appeal to a wider variety of tastes.
Ah, to hear Peppy’s “Do a barrell roll!” once again… Wishful thinking, perhaps…
