They also banned my skull-fark the virgin mary app, but you didn't see me get a greenlight out of it.

can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face dick on in to various hot asian chick bodies?


Yes you can

Once again Apple shows its holier-than-thou attitude toward indy apps.

MugzyBrown: olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face dick on in to various hot asian chick bodies?

sweet. and thanks for FTFM
Yes you can

olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian Hungarian chick bodies?


FTFY

s

olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

/clicks profile.

Dammit.

I don't purchase apple products because I don't appreciate the weird way things hijack my PC when I plug them in.

I was born before 1990 and have gone to college so I can speak with some authority on the subject.

I prefer sansa myself.

What about the "me so holey" app that gives you stigmata?

Arkanaut: What about the "me so holey" app that gives you stigmata?

I'd see a doctor. One time I caught that, hurt like hell to piss for a month.

Apple bans "me so holy app" that insert your face on Jesus' body

Apple approves new app that inserts Steve Jobs face on Jesus' body

AnubisMan: Apple bans "me so holy app" that insert your face on Jesus' body

Apple approves new app that inserts Steve Jobs face on Jesus' body

Wonder how that Chinese liver he bought is workin' out for him? Do you think it came bundled with Quicktime and Safari?

eqtworld: If Microsoft banned you from running programs on their PCs based on religion..

you fanboys would have a field day

Pretty much this.

I love how things like this are considered controversial because they upset religious folks that think they are blasphemous, and then when they get denied, other religious folks claim discrimination.

Always the victim.

eqtworld: If Microsoft banned you from running programs on their PCs based on religion..

you fanboys would have a field day

if ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a wonderful christmas.

Bbbut, this is teh FREE MARKET in action!

It is a free market. Just because Apple makes a distinction as to what apps it allows in iTunes does NOT mean you can't still get those apps somewhere else.

Picture it like Wal-mart. They are a huge store, they make decisions as to what you can buy in that store. They don't allow controversial things in the store. You can still get those controversial things elsewhere.

impaler: I love how things like this are considered controversial because they upset religious folks that think they are blasphemous, and then when they get denied, other religious folks claim discrimination.

Always the victim.

From the article:
"An iPhone app called "Me So Holy," that allowed you take a face shot and insert it into a portrait of Jesus or some other religious figure, has been rejected by Apple's tasterati."

By this indication, it looks like it's not just Christianity that's affected. In Christianity, it's a tasteless but not particularly profane thing to mix your picture with Jesus'. In Islam, it is VERY profane to mix a picture with Muhammed's (remember the Danish newspaper mess?). The rules they stated are pretty clear in the TOS, if it's considered obscene or profane by a large number of users, they'll yank it. I doubt it had as much to do with religious people biatching as them just wanting to head off an A-class explosion of farktardery.

/I probably screwed up Muhammed's name horribly
//Don't particularly care either.
///Slashies make it all better!

Modest Proposal: eqtworld: If Microsoft banned you from running programs on their PCs based on religion..

you fanboys would have a field day

Pretty much this.

Lol. Steve Jobs is the Apple Pope?

/HTC ANYTHING FTW

darrent83: olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

After looking at your profile and picturing that I think I'm going to have to break into the barley wine early today.

/Bigfoot Ale FTW

jeezus guys. is not a mans love for his ipod combined with narcissism and a kogal fetish a sacred thing?

eqtworld: If Microsoft banned you from running programs on their PCs based on religion..

you fanboys would have a field day

Damn right. I like my religious experiences one at a time, and Mac itself is all the religion I can take in one sitting.

olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

suckie suckie 5 dollar

me luv you long time

I wonder if the Android Market would ban it too...

210Khamen: Picture it like Wal-mart. They are a huge store, they make decisions as to what you can buy in that store. They don't allow controversial things in the store. You can still get those controversial things elsewhere.

Kindly point to where you can get this app with a stock iPhone.

darrent83: olapbill: darrent83: olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

After looking at your profile and picturing that I think I'm going to have to break into the barley wine early today.

/Bigfoot Ale FTW

jeezus guys. is not a mans love for his ipod combined with narcissism and a kogal fetish a sacred thing?

Not when it makes me mentally picture your face on a hot asian chick's body.

well I do apologize for taking you to that point, I suppose.
I'll send you some Lagavulin. That should burn out the evil pictures from your brain.

210Khamen

It is a free market. Just because Apple makes a distinction as to what apps it allows in iTunes does NOT mean you can't still get those apps somewhere else.

Picture it like Wal-mart. They are a huge store, they make decisions as to what you can buy in that store. They don't allow controversial things in the store. You can still get those controversial things elsewhere.

I am not aware of any legal/supported way to load apps on an iPhone without going through their store. If you have one, let me know.

olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

Thank you, olapbill. That was the joke.

rpm: Kindly point to where you can get this app with a stock iPhone.

WayToBlue: I am not aware of any legal/supported way to load apps on an iPhone without going through their store. If you have one, let me know.

Let me know when it's an iPhone you absolutely need to have as your cell phone.

Don't like their policy on apps? Ditch the iPhone and get something else.

INTERTRON: olapbill: can I keep my "me so horny" app that inserts my face on to various hot asian chick bodies?

Thank you, olapbill. That was the joke.

happy to oblige. though I seem to have irreparably scarred some poor farkers with the set up.

Thorak: Let me know when it's an iPhone you absolutely need to have as your cell phone.

Don't like their policy on apps? Ditch the iPhone and get something else.

Wal-Mart is not the proper comparison, a company store is.

I often wonder what it would take before developers just don't want to deal with that platform anymore. Especially now that the iPhone app market is so crowded that making an app is far from the automatic cash cow it used to be.

Wow, f*ck Apple.

Showing once again that no one really owns an Apple product; you merely rent their products from them with the hopes that they will let you do what you want with it.

we need a new Statue of Liberty and my vote goes for one in detfrost1s post

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: Wow, f*ck Apple.

Too small. Cantaloupe better.

This is why I have never contributed to Apple's "iconomy" and I never will.

It is not that they have bad products ... it is because they control you and you pay a premium to put yourself under their thumb.

eqtworld: If Microsoft banned you from running programs on their PCs based on religion..

you fanboys would have a field day

I'm sure the length of the list of stuff Microsoft has banned on the Xbox is quite lengthy, and yet no one gives a shiat. Same with Sony and Nintendo and Sega and everyone else down through the years.

Stop thinking of it as a "PC"-like platform. A PC it is not. A Mac it is not. It's ultimately a console-like platform, and--in comparison--a lot more open.

Think about how Apple made its fortune with the iPod. Every single high school and middle school had to have one. When there was a new model, or even one that came in a new color they had to upgrade. They spent a lot of money on iTune musics (for every kid that can p2p there are five that can't).

Now for the iPod touch and iPhone (which pull from the same apps store) Apple needs to keep the store kid friendly. The last thing they need is the leadership of the religious right claiming Apple products will lead your kids astray, thus closing off the conservative parent market to Apple.

So they have a valid business to reject it here.

"May 11, 2009"

Old news is old.

Thorak

rpm: Kindly point to where you can get this app with a stock iPhone.

WayToBlue: I am not aware of any legal/supported way to load apps on an iPhone without going through their store. If you have one, let me know.

Let me know when it's an iPhone you absolutely need to have as your cell phone.

Don't like their policy on apps? Ditch the iPhone and get something else.

That addresses either of our questions, how? For the record, I don't own an iPhone, and this sort of thing is one of the chief reasons.

210Khamen suggested that there were legitimate alternative means to load these apps, which as I understand it is not the case. Your comments have no relevance to the issue.

cthellis: I'm sure the length of the list of stuff Microsoft has banned on the Xbox is quite lengthy, and yet no one gives a shiat. Same with Sony and Nintendo and Sega and everyone else down through the years.

Indeed, but we don't know the certification rules for those companies and they don't allow homebrew products anyway. Besides, you don't need to be 18 (or however old it is to get a cell phone contract these days) to get a console so the target market is also different.

I would agree that the iPhone is a similar structure to a console though, with the exception that anyone and his dog can create an app for it. Basically a known set of hardware tied to an Apple sanctioned store for that truly monopolistic experience. Honestly, I'm amazed I haven't seen a raft of app store lawsuits yet.

And lastly, the real test for all this is "is there a me so holy app for Windows Mobile?" Would people even buy it if there was?

King Keepo: Indeed, but we don't know the certification rules for those companies and they don't allow homebrew products anyway. Besides, you don't need to be 18 (or however old it is to get a cell phone contract these days) to get a console so the target market is also different.

A) http://creators.xna.com/en-US/ = homebrew
B) PSN, and now even WiiWare and DSi-ware have taken to pushing smaller games by smaller teams, though admittedly they don't have completely open development.
C) I wasn't talking only about homebrew, since what people seem to get flustered over is any restrictions from "mean ol' Apple."

D) You don't have to be 18+ to get an iPod Touch, either.
E) The average age of a console gamer has just gotten older and older. (Though the Wii has probably skewed those results lately.)


King Keepo: And lastly, the real test for all this is "is there a me so holy app for Windows Mobile?" Would people even buy it if there was?

Probably not. But the crapware space is filled with lots of silly freebies for pointless entertainment. (And the App Store is filled with that, too.)

People just like to act as if the iPhone must accommodate everything, or else Apple is Evil(TM), all the while likely picking and enjoy other products from even more restrictive markets without even thinking about it.

If something offers enough value to you to be worth the price of entry, feel free to buy it. The end.

Wasn't this greenlit a few months back? I could've sworn that I've read this before on Fark...

cthellis: People just like to act as if the iPhone must accommodate everything, or else Apple is Evil(TM)

Isn't that the same argument that people level against Microsoft though? And I'm fine if it is. It's just an interesting one, and as I see it, the App store is a monopoly. How can you have competition between app stores if no others can be accessed by the phone (legally).

A) Well I totally forgot about XNA (smacks forehead). Just went through that link and it looks like it's all peer reviewed which is cool, although it's still bound to certain rules.
B) I guess technically anyone could start a software house and release a game, but those games still go through the exact same certification procedures. You cannot release on any of the consoles without certification.
C) I'm not sure there should be restrictions. Within their own store, fine. But seeing as only their store is available legally they are censoring content for me, which I'm less keen on.
D) I forgot the Touch had access to the App Store
E) Target market isn't just age, there are more factors involved although age is a large part

The bit that boggles my mind is that people actually feel the need to pay for this my-head-on-Jesus's-body crap.

Easy solution: they should have an adult part of the app store that is only viewable and saleable to people who are over 18 and who click on a disclaimer saying that the content might be objectionable to some people.

They allow explicit music downloads for iPod, I'm sure they could allow tasteless iPhone apps. But you have to figure on where they'd still have to draw a line. Someone would want to develop a rape or a snuff app, you just know it.

Apple has always presented itself as family-friendly so this decision on their part shouldn't really be any surprise or source of indignant whining about censorship. They don't offer XXX-rated movie trailers on their website, either.

strothgar: I don't purchase apple products because I don't appreciate the weird way things hijack my PC when I plug them in.

I was born before 1990 and have gone to college so I can speak with some authority on the subject.

I prefer sansa myself.

Absolutely on both counts, I've great love for Sansa's habit of providing memory expansion slots too.

Arrrg...

Jailbreaking is not illegal. It's not illegitimate, and hell, if Apple refused you support because you jailbroke your phone, you could sue and most likely win. (Don't get me wrong, they don't have to support the jailbreak software, but they do have to support their software and the hardware) It's YOUR device. You decide what the heck you want to do with it. Installer.app and Cydia are both out there offering alternatives if you don't want to deal with Apple's closed system.

King Keepo: Isn't that the same argument that people level against Microsoft though? And I'm fine if it is.

Not really, no. What people level against Microsoft is getting to their position not through excellence in software creation, but through business savvy and timing and a willingness to exploit business advantages to get to a monopolistic position and leverage that position whenever possible. (Among other things, and one can certainly argue the impacts in each area.)

Since when do people go after Microsoft for the Xbox games they offer or don't? Hell, in Xbox-land, people seem perfectly thrilled to give them money to let them play games online, as well as clamp down on the service with an iron grip.

I have some problems with that myself, but I'm in no way a representative example of the general public... and even I don't make any sort of deal about what games they choose to sell or not.

King Keepo: It's just an interesting one, and as I see it, the App store is a monopoly. How can you have competition between app stores if no others can be accessed by the phone (legally).

Makes approximately as much sense as saying "I have a monopoly on cars that I own." One could say that TiVo has a monopoly on TiVo-licensed units, but you'd be pretty barmy to biatch about this when there's a large market for DVRs out there. Netflix has a "monopoly" on the movies that Netflix offers, but there are other sources for the media in the same form that Netflix directly offers (disk rentals or streaming), and there are many MORE sources for the media in formats that Netflix does NOT offer.

The App Store is Apple's distribution method for their own hardware, but the iPhone is far from the only smartphone out there, and the App Store is far from the only distribution method for software that can go to any matter of smartphone, feature-phone, and even Plain Jane phones. It's a "monopoly" only in the same way that Nintendo holds a "monopoly" for Wii gaming.

Meanwhile, not only does Apple NOT have a "monopoly" in the App Store, iTunes, with iPhones or even iPods (which they do have a larger marketshare), but they've never leveraged it anti-competitively in the same fashion that people criticize Microsoft for. Do they refuse to let stores carry iPods or iTunes gift cards if their competitors are sold alongside? Do they offer special "bargain prices" for ONLY carrying their products, compelling stores to have to follow suit to keep competing with each other?

Apple runs their own very-large-but-ultimately-still-closed system. There are innumerable examples of that that seemingly never attract an ounce of attention or giving-a-shiat-thereof.

King Keepo: A) Well I totally forgot about XNA (smacks forehead). Just went through that link and it looks like it's all peer reviewed which is cool, although it's still bound to certain rules.
B) I guess technically anyone could start a software house and release a game, but those games still go through the exact same certification procedures. You cannot release on any of the consoles without certification.

That's exactly what I mean. All the consoles ultimately have some sort of "rules" in place. One can easily criticize Apple for the uncertainty of their terms violation and arbitrary/hypocritical enforcement, but it's not a point to criticize it for being there at all. Many, MANY other examples exist, are purchased by millions, and loved to pieces--with no one bringing up a complaint from that angle. The case against the App Store seems to originate mainly from people who desire it to be what they think it should be.

No one's busy biatching at Nintendo for not making with the porn and heresy.

King Keepo: C) I'm not sure there should be restrictions. Within their own store, fine. But seeing as only their store is available legally they are censoring content for me, which I'm less keen on.

Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo all censor what content can be officially distributed through their channels. Walmart censors what products and be sold through their stores and what media content can be sold there. Television networks censor what shows will be aired, what specials produced, and what words can be spoken.

You may not be "keen" on it, but only the most hyperactively anti-censorship folk would go to the lengths necessary to avoid ALL of it. (In fact, they really can't avoid ALL... They can just take major pains to avoid MOST examples.) And considering most people aren't hyperactive anti-censorship nuts, I'm pretty sure the same folk who foam at the mouth regarding Apple's stance here are perfectly content to partake of the same thing from other sources.

Notice Apple doesn't give a shiat about the black market, either. They care about others trying to make money off their officially licensed content, but go ahead and hack your iPhones, stick Linux on your iPods, do whatever. They certainly don't pretend they'll stop anyone from jailbreaking their equipment (consider, by contrast, how often Sony updates the firmware in the PSP to try to cut down on all the hacking).

Apple just wants to run their own store. And since it's in no way the only store out there...

King Keepo: D) I forgot the Touch had access to the App Store
E) Target market isn't just age, there are more factors involved although age is a large part

Age also doesn't matter, in the end. It's not like being older or being more mature means you deserve to get whatever you want from a store. They sell what they want to sell, and you buy it or you don't.

I was mainly trying to figure out what you were getting at by pointing out other examples and prompting "...and then what?"

King Keepo: The bit that boggles my mind is that people actually feel the need to pay for this my-head-on-Jesus's-body crap.

Oh, I'm sure they didn't want to PAY for it... ;-)

I'll have to get back to you on this one in a bit, work is a little hectic at the mo :)

cthellis: Since when do people go after Microsoft for the Xbox games they offer or don't? Hell, in Xbox-land, people seem perfectly thrilled to give them money to let them play games online, as well as clamp down on the service with an iron grip.

Well it wasn't directed at games - but you're right, nobody goes after anybody for the games they don't produce.

I'm afraid I am one of the ones that is happy to give some cash for that system - Live is a great piece of work. IIRC the servers are hosted at MS and the service has an iron grip in order that they don't have to support a trillion different protocols (in the same way that with the XBox they have a known set of hardware to deal with). It's what kills them in the OS space - too many hardware and driver configurations causing instability, an area where Apple excel because they don't have to worry about it quite so much.

Regarding the Netflix argument, the comparison would be more like owning a Netflix DVD player that only plays DVDs from Netflix even though there are other DVDs and DVD players out there.

cthellis: It's a "monopoly" only in the same way that Nintendo holds a "monopoly" for Wii gaming.

Finally, an analogy amidst the prose that I can get my head round.

Regarding the censorship issue, in this particular case it seems more visible, less well defined, kneejerk and inconsistant compared to the other forms you list. Of course censorship is everywhere - I've even censored this post ;-)

cthellis: Age also doesn't matter, in the end.

It's extremely important for the marketing folk, and it really does matter. It can dictate content, the amount of certain types of content, the money availble to spend by certain age brackets and so on. It's not the be-all and end-all of the targetting aspect, but it's one of the most prominent.


Ok, I need to summarise before this gets any more mixed up. App store is not a monopoly, just part of a closed system that is artbitrarily policed based on a vague set of rules for the perceived greater good of their customers.

King Keepo: I'm afraid I am one of the ones that is happy to give some cash for that system - Live is a great piece of work. IIRC the servers are hosted at MS and the service has an iron grip in order that they don't have to support a trillion different protocols (in the same way that with the XBox they have a known set of hardware to deal with). It's what kills them in the OS space - too many hardware and driver configurations causing instability, an area where Apple excel because they don't have to worry about it quite so much.

Hence why "control" is not synonymous with "evil."

King Keepo: Regarding the Netflix argument, the comparison would be more like owning a Netflix DVD player that only plays DVDs from Netflix even though there are other DVDs and DVD players out there.

Like this? ;-) (Admittedly they did just add Amazon to the mix, but it was Netflix-only hardware for a while, and it's been well-received even in that light.)

King Keepo: Regarding the censorship issue, in this particular case it seems more visible, less well defined, kneejerk and inconsistant compared to the other forms you list. Of course censorship is everywhere - I've even censored this post ;-)

Hence why I said it's easy to criticize Apple for inconsistent application (Apple-ication?) and unclear policy. What does not follow is "ZOMG they didn't allow something?! BURRRRRN!" and "MONOPOLISTISTISTS!!!"

King Keepo: It's extremely important for the marketing folk, and it really does matter. It can dictate content, the amount of certain types of content, the money availble to spend by certain age brackets and so on. It's not the be-all and end-all of the targetting aspect, but it's one of the most prominent.

It doesn't "dictate content" so much as "helps to shape the community," and in the meanwhile Apple's marketing hasn't been focusing on "adult-y things" but rather "stuff for everyone."

Back to the Wii as an example, it's not like the explosive appeal to kids and women and casual gamers denies anything... you can still have your Manhunts and your Madworlds show up. But sales to tend to show that those games aren't well-received there. They don't bump against Nintendo policy regarding mature content, they just don't gel with the community breakdown.

At any rate, the iPod Touch and iPhone skew older mainly because of "money." They cost more (to start), and are generally regarded as less rugged products and more easily lost, which doesn't scream "kid toy!" to parents. But heck, even THAT is changing...

King Keepo: Ok, I need to summarise before this gets any more mixed up. App store is not a monopoly, just part of a closed system that is artbitrarily policed based on a vague set of rules for the perceived greater good of their customers.

Depends what you mean by "greater good." ;-) Ultimately a closed system with arbitrary policies and enforcement, but the value judgement still brings you right back to the Xbox Live example used earlier.

Ultimately I think Apple should just be cordoning content they don't like with "Mature" flags or what have you now that they have parental controls, and shift stuff into its own little corner. Don't advertise them or have them show up on "Top 50" lists and they'll exist, but they'll really only exist for the people who know they're there. I figure there's just really no point when you've given people an open web browser; they already have unlimited access to porn and other content. (Probably Apple's position as well; they assume they've already given you the tool to "do it for yourself" and therefore they don't have to tar the image of their service for others.)

At the same time, I don't think Microsoft should be forbidding all manner of communication to and from Live servers, shouldn't be doing their damndest to stand in the way of other companies hosting for themselves, shouldn't be making developers waste time supporting certain features that don't really matter for their game or are really stupid...

"Greater good" is ultimately greatly subjective. ;-)

cthellis: It doesn't "dictate content" so much as "helps to shape the community"

With a sentence like that are you sure you don't work in marketing? :)

cthellis: Depends what you mean by "greater good." ;-)

Ah, I chose my words carefully there - perceived greater good, as in the greater good that Appple (or MS with Live) feel is appropriate for us. This is based on the Government's definition of greater good and balanced by counter-culture who would rather have anything and everything available all the time regardless of content. Either way, it doesn't interrupt the discussion at all.

cthellis: you can still have your Manhunts and your Madworlds show up.

Now you're making me wonder what restrictions they do have on motion control and the games. Would you be allowed to have a control combo to lift someone's head and make a sawing motion to decapitate? It's not like there aren't games that feature decapitation already, but would the mechanism be deemed inappropriate (I'm guessing it would across all manufacturers). But I digress...

cthellis: Ultimately I think Apple should just be cordoning content they don't like with "Mature" flags

Or cordon it off in an area protected by parental controls and pick the best bits out for the App Store. As you point out though, it's negated by having a fully fledged browser that can access all the wonders and horrors the internet has to offer anyway.

cthellis: At the same time, I don't think Microsoft should be forbidding all manner of communication to and from Live servers

This I'm afraid I disagree with. They own the servers and I know from experience that letting anyone code what they want to a service like this just results in tears before bedtime. Unless tightly controlled someone will accidentally tear the whole system down in a heartbeat. And getting that same control distributed across other people's servers is also a technical nightmare.

The centralised nature of it also allows for stability, a similar game experience for all who access it and a familiar user experience for every player of every game attached to it. In many ways this is the reason that Live trumps the ever living hell out of Home, even if it is free. I find Home to be a scattered rag-tag effort in comparison, and while Sony will no doubt catch up, they have a lot to do get close to what Microsoft have managed.

EA seem to have broken that though, but only by leveraging their corporate mass to do so. Now I have to have an EA pass as well as a Microsoft one, which, if you play a lot of EA games is not so bad.

cthellis: "Greater good" is ultimately greatly subjective. ;-)

Absolutely :-)

King Keepo: With a sentence like that are you sure you don't work in marketing? :)

I frequently have to make up nice ways to say "your kids like to look at porn on your computer and pick up a lot of viruses," so... ;-)

King Keepo: Now you're making me wonder what restrictions they do have on motion control and the games. Would you be allowed to have a control combo to lift someone's head and make a sawing motion to decapitate? It's not like there aren't games that feature decapitation already, but would the mechanism be deemed inappropriate (I'm guessing it would across all manufacturers). But I digress...

I'm pretty sure Nintendo has no particular restrictions or forced use going on. So far as I can tell, you can exclude it to large degree (though if you don't use it for menu navigation you're kinda silly), and Manhunt takes make steps down the "hack/slash/stab/kill/strangle" direction, so we would have heard more if it were of issue.

King Keepo: Or cordon it off in an area protected by parental controls and pick the best bits out for the App Store. As you point out though, it's negated by having a fully fledged browser that can access all the wonders and horrors the internet has to offer anyway.

boytaur.net, baby!

Like I said, I think they get the best of both worlds, in their opinion. You're not REALLY restricted since your browser is fully functional (outside of Flash and Java), but it serves the "perceived greater good" by not having smut and stuff like that clogging up their App Store.

The news would occasionally titter at seeing kids use their PSP browsers to locate porn, but that provokes a much different reaction than, say, distributing "rape simulators" on your network.

Heck, people biatch up a storm about barely-perceptible lyrics in background music, so they'll cause a ruckus about anything slightly askew. It's bad press avoidance.

King Keepo: They own the servers and I know from experience that letting anyone code what they want to a service like this just results in tears before bedtime.

They own the servers that traffic passes through, but by and large Live doesn't actually HOST their own servers. That's why MS and EA were butting heads over early Madden versions, because EA wanted to run their own shiat their own way, but it was against MS policy to let them. (They ended up loosening some restrictions.)

The way they tend to run things makes it annoying-to-impossible for developers to line up their own forms of high score lists, pass communication between servers and clients and user accounts and web portals, to allow you to create servers to host clients from multiple different platforms...

In this case it's not "content" restriction but "communication" restriction, to a degree where it will interfere with developer creativity. It's fine to want to do things like, say, digitally sign your traffic to stop hackers and cheaters and the like, but it's annoying to put a ceiling on developer options.


Meanwhile, I'm not sure why you're comparing Home to anything... Home is a marketing effort and "amusing plaything," and has to go through a lot to prove itself. If you mean PSN in general, most people won't notice much of a difference, except that there's a lot less voice support. (Sony's going to have to patch that through PS3 firmware directly to get any kind of universal option going, really. Which is what they should have done to begin with; why bother requiring developers to do much coding specifically to begin with, when you can just have them patch into a system built right into each piece of hardware? They really needed to put more RAM into the system. ALWAYS go RAM-heavy. It drops in price quickly, and it gives way more future growth potential.)

Sure the matchup menus might look different, but menus look different between EVERY game. And yet they all pretty much function the same way between platforms: "Go into the multiplayer menu." ;-) (Few have learned to be seamlessly awesome in the way Criterion is with Burnout.) Sony needs to catch up in certain ways like "joining on your friends" and the Party System so friends can stick together, but that's not an aspect of closed architecture... It's one of Sony getting off their ass and delivering features like that BEFORE all the other distractions with a project like Home. (Notice that "getting a bunch of friends together and hopping into the same game" was part of Home's initial marketing to begin with, and hasn't yet been delivered well. Nor brought to the XMB, like it should have been first.)

King Keepo: EA seem to have broken that though, but only by leveraging their corporate mass to do so. Now I have to have an EA pass as well as a Microsoft one, which, if you play a lot of EA games is not so bad.

Separate logins is indeed annoying. (Thankfully Konami's dumb idea to do that as well seems to be going away.) TYING a Live account ID or a PSN ID to an inter-system one to do your own thing is fine, but requiring users to sign up for one that may-or-may-not have the same name as your Live/PSN ID is boneheaded. Companies need to figure out how to do things seamlessly.

cthellis: boytaur.net, baby!

My eyes! My pretty eyes! What have you done?

Well, it's been a pleasure chatting cthellis, but I'm going to have to sign off this thread due to work and flying. Great fun though, and I'll see you around.

King Keepo

Later, mon. I'm sure people will biatch about Apple again in the near future. ;-)