digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Open Letter to Apple from Lifelong Gamer

fileplanet.com — Fileplanet Editor-in-Chief bemoans Apple's hands-off policy to securing great Mac game content, which he feels is costing the company. "For nearly a decade I've been a Mac fan who hasn't bought a Mac, solely because of the game situation." He makes some suggestions on what Apple should do, including - gasp - copying Microsoft. Just a little.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • nickbender, on 10/12/2007, -4/+77While I would argue that the *business factor* is probably much larger to do with PC's still having marketshare... the fact that most home users... ESPECIALLY in generation y... are very influenced by gaming, is something that apple really should take into consideration.

    The one thing that Apple hasn't really tried for either, is competition with directX. The reason most gamestudios don't code for mac is because they simply can't afford it. If MS comes along and holds your hand and gives you a great foundation for which to code your game around, rather than having to build from the ground up with OpenGL... of course they're going to take the easy route... because its more money.

    If Apple truly wants to attack the gamer market, they simply need to not only acquire some decent gaming studios... but also just flat out cater to more of developers period.

    A lot of it could very well be due to the Apple ego... i.e. not wanting to have any official apple games fall 'below the bar'. But time will tell... with apple recently releasing apple tv, and finally breaking down and trying the PDA market again... who knows what pond they'll toss their line out to next.
    • fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -39/+16Whatever they do in the future, I'm sure it'll have nothing to do with yet another open letter from some random guy. Didn't anyone learn from all the other open letters/challenges to [insert corporation or company]??
    • Dayyve, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24Whatever fkr3 says it won't stop random people from writing random letters to random companies expressing their opinions. Yay freedom.

      @nickbender

      Absolutely man. The only reason I don't own a Mac is because of the gaming factor and if they did venture into that territory I'm the type of guy that would own both computers, just cuz ;) (as sure a lot of you would)
    • playthev, on 10/12/2007, -35/+26it's not just gaming, windows just has more of any type of software compared to mac
    • Cwo655321, on 10/12/2007, -49/+16yeah, they'll get right on that.

      lol, bury if you want but apple has had ample time to get into shape for the gaming industry; THEY JUST CANT DO IT; why you ask? because they dont have anything on their own, they just copy everything created by others. Sure, sometimes they improve some things but they are in no way creators of technology. If you dont agree; just look at the features offered in windows 98, and xp and look at osx.
    • aussieNickuss, on 10/12/2007, -31/+17@playthev

      There is more of any kind of software on Windows, its just that most is crap. On a mac, if there is only one piece of software that does any one task, then it usually does it perfectly.
    • willynilly, on 10/12/2007, -27/+16^^ Oh yeah, like the Finder? Or iTunes?

      You're full of *****.
    • schoate09, on 10/12/2007, -28/+20Apple would only reach the tipping point, if their hardware wasn't such overpriced crap, and you don't feel like you have to be a 20 year old to buy one. Seriously, most people I see in Apple Stores are in their 20s, probably because older people don't feel to pay money to be part of some fake "social movement" as maddox calls it.
    • Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -21/+12schoate09, when was the last time you priced a Mac? A Mac almost identical in price to a PC with the same specs. Not to mention you're getting the OS and a handful of actually *useful* applications pre-installed.

      playthev is correct, to a degree. It's sort of a cause-effect thing - the vast majority of computers are still running Windows, and OS X is only (legally) available for Mac hardware... as a result, more people develop for Windows. There are plenty of great third-party apps for the Mac, though, and now that more people are switching, that number is growing.

      Up until a couple years back, I was a PC user, through and through. Any Mac I saw made me recoil. One button mice? OS 9?! Bleh! Things have changed quite a bit in the last few years... and now I'm ready to buy a Macbook Pro. Of course, when your job involves you using a Mac for 8 hours a day, that helps too.
    • DEIx15x8, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Can core animation help gaming at all and be used like DirectX?
    • msgyrd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16No, Core Animation isn't like DirectX at all. I suppose it would help if someone decided to write a game for the Mac, but it's not a "game API" like DirectX is.
    • frostieDude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26@nickbender
      Have you actually programmed with DirectX and/or OpenGL? I program with both of these every day (okay - maybe not both every day, but I work on an app every day that uses both). DirectX has some nice features, but it is not easier to program with than OpenGL. In fact, in some ways it gives you more low level control at the expense of having to do more work to specify more low level things.

      The Mac doesn't have a lot of games because Apple went out of their way for many years to discourage game development for the Mac. I'm not sure that they particularly want the Mac to be a major gaming platform. I'm not sure that it would really help them.
    • brundlefly76, on 10/12/2007, -9/+46This is what cracks me up about the Apple ads - it depicts the Mac as the 'fun' operating system and Windows as the 'no fun' operating system.

      It the complete opposite - I would guarantee you that the average Windows user spends more hours recreationally on their computer then on a Mac.

      In the ads, Apple pretty much considers anything that has to do with multimedia as 'fun', and everything else (including games), is a 'spreadsheet app'.
    • ScrumFritter, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16@brundlefly76

      I totally agree with you there, actually. I'm a Mac user, and those ads make me cringe, because although we may have you beat on all the other recreational stuff, our 'digital lifestyle' as they put it is sorely lacking in the one area I care about the most - GAMES! Is it enough to make me switch back to Windows? Ew, no. But still, it's enough to make those ads a bunch of *****.

      ***** Hell, does Apple even have a games division? And why not?
    • jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5the most played game in the world, comes bundled with which operating system. It sure as hell aint mac os.
    • ModernTenshi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10That's one of the things that's always sort of puzzled me about those "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC," commercials. While they're witty and point out the flaws of PC's nicely, they constantly say that PC's are for work and businesses, while Macs are for fun (and for business as well). However, the gaming aspect just isn't there, and that's in the fun area. I've decided to save up money this summer to finally buy a 20" iMac (video drivers don't play nicely with my laptop anymore), but I'm still going to have to dual boot the system to play all the PC games I own. Sure I can re-buy some for OS X, but if I can just install my current copy of Windows on it and play the games I already have, what's the point? I'm already set to save and then spend $1500 on an iMac (education discount), but the fact that I still can't completely get away from Windows like I'm wanting to is rather disappointing.

      I still plan on switching over to OS X, but I completely agree with this article: Apple needs to make my choice to switch complete, by letting me do exactly what I did on my Windows machine, including playing the latest games.

      Well, not exactly everything I did on my Windows machine; certain aspects of using Windows they can leave out . . . .
    • TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -19/+7As an Apple user I just don't care about gaming. That's what Wiis and 360s are for. It's not something I've ever missed on a computer. Should they worry about that niche just for a few people? I don't think the majority of Mac users are all that interested.
    • yournamehere, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16theworm:
      i would hardly call gaming a niche. it's even bigger than the movie industry now. Mac users make up a whopping 9% of the market. PC gaming make up a little more than that. It's the reason I have a PC. it's the reason many people have a MS PC. That in itself makes it something Apple should take seriously if they want to gain substantial ground over MS in the PC market.
    • thinsoldier, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2@playthev: that excuse is really overused and silly

      took a trip to the mall the other day
      walked though the software area in the office supplies store....
      hundreds and hundreds of boxes of unsold windows software. Most of these apps I've never heard of before. Most of these boxes smothered with dust. The only software that sells in these stores is #1 Games for windows and #2 MS Office for Mac (cuz everyone already got a bootleg copy of Office for windows)
    • TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3Speaking of console gaming, I've been (and still am) a hardcore computer gamer.....however.....

      my Wii is coming FRIDAY!!! w00t!!
    • shadgenki, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3I laugh every time I see the PC guy calculating how much time the Mac guy wasted on fun, creative things. It's so not true.
    • sgglynn, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7"On a mac, if there is only one piece of software that does any one task, then it usually does it perfectly."

      Yep, and you just have to buy it from the same company that you have to buy all your parts from, and get all your service done with, oh, and buy your music from, and your mp3 player....

      Congrats, you're now the tool of a single corporation. Like a lady that will ONLY buy her clothing from one store, or someone who will ONLY buy a car from one company. I'm sure you always laugh at those people, thinking how much smarter you can be by shopping around and finding a deal. Yet some how, you refuse to see that it's happening to you with Apple. Good move, way to be a ***** consumer. you're helping to lead the path to a society where we all where the same grey and white clothes, eating a grey and white sandwich for lunch. You just made the "Big brother" scenario come true......
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Why does Steve Jobs hate gaming? Do you people realize he once worked at Atari? Maybe he was beat up by Trip Hawkins or something and has had some sort of deep-rooted psychological trauma ever since then?

      I don't know if Steve realizes it or not, but lack of games (relatively speaking) is the last thing holding Macs back from mainstream success.
    • brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Apple's marketing reminds me of Tom Sawyer story. He convinced all his friends that painting a fence wasn't work, but a fun game instead. In the same way, Apple is trying to convince you that Photoshop and iMovie are not work, but fun games.

      Unfortunately for them, I've actually edited a few home movies and I found that playing Counterstrike is MUCH more fun than the former.

      "Do you people realize he once worked at Atari?"
      Steve never worked for Atari. Jobs and Wozniak created Breakout! for them but were never more than subcontractors.
    • intellimouse, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Haven't you noticed by now? Apple is afraid to lose so they always take the safe bet. They only want the low hanging fruit.

      For example: They don't cater to big corporations. Why? It's not as easy as you think it is. It's much easier to please the small segment of consumers who just want to do simple things like photo/music/web/mail. Corporations need things like database servers and really really good developer tools that Apple doesn't provide.
    • tyrione, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It's called Core Animation and OpenGL 2.1 fully exposed APIs for Cocoa in OS X Leopard.
    • tyrione, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Note: Digg editing sucks.

      Following up on my earlier comments.

      Apple will provide all the 2D & 3D APIs with direct GPU acceleration. Nvidia has its own libraries as well as ATI to optimize for their cards. They are C APIs. Objective-C just loves C.

      The Game Engines only need to be written in C and the front-end written in Cocoa; all the physics programming can be leveraged from various solutions available as C APIs.

      If game companies have a lot of their code written in C++ they can use ObjC++ to save time while they write their OS X specific Objective-C front-end in a parallel revision.

      They can always contact OmniGroup who has ported many a game to OS X.
    • brundlefly76, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@intellimouse

      omg that is so true, this is exactly what so many people don't understand about Apple vs Microsoft.
      Apple ignores the most difficult sectors of the market altogether - gamers, enterprise, even developers (compared to MS)
  • stewils, on 10/12/2007, -5/+79The man's right, gaming is the only reason I'm typing this on a pc, not a Mac....
    • IbnDigg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Same here! Infact it's the only reason why I'm still sticking with XP, though in dual boot. If either linux or mac can solve the gaming issue, goodbye windows
    • willynilly, on 10/12/2007, -25/+37The Mac IS a PC. Are you talking about Windows? Then say Windows.
    • davidrools, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I wouldn't necessarily switch, but competition would certainly be welcome.
    • gurm, on 10/12/2007, -18/+13@willynilly

      While you're right about Macs being PCs too (where PC stands for Personal Computer, a general term), a PC is also short for IBM PC, or more generally, IBM PC compatible hardware, which isn't a Mac.
    • Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6from wiki
      "Sometimes the term "Personal Computer" is used exclusively for computers running a Microsoft Windows operating system, but this is erroneous. For example, a Macintosh running Mac OS, or an IBM compatible PC running Linux, are also personal computers. This confusion stems from the fact that the term "PC" is often used as a shorthand form for "IBM compatible PC"'
      random definitions from google define:
      "Acronym for Personal Computer."
      "personal computer"
      "A computer designed for use by one person at a time."
      and then a few who use the incorrect definition that the wiki quote above debunked

      if you have a computer in your home, or it can fit in your bag (but not your pocket) and isnt running server software or hardware, or anything like that.
      as in its a standard computer, for general computing use, ITS A PC, no matter the OS that is running on it
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer
    • EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11"IBM PC compatible hardware, which isn't a Mac."

      Oh it's not. Damn, all this time I thought that second partition was running Windows. Guess it's just emulated.
    • NaziHatinChimp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Yeah, you would think they would come up with a solution to the problem, like being able to partition the hard drive so you can run windows or linux so you can play those games and keep your OS separate. Maybe even running them "parallel" to each other so you can switch between them. Then you could have the best of both worlds.

      Man how will Apple ever solve this problem?
    • jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11"from wiki"

      just because some tard whacked some text in to wikipedia, it doesn't make it true.
    • JibberGeorge, on 10/12/2007, -15/+11GUESS WHAT GENIUS..... If you have to make your system be forced to dual boot so it can run your biggest competitors OS that PROVES that your OS is inferior. Duh!

      It completely cracks me up when all the Mac users talk about what they can do to be more like Windows.

      FACT: If Macs were "better".... you wouldn't be worried about trying to be more like Windows.
    • skellener, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2> The man's right, gaming is the only reason I'm typing this on a pc, not a Mac....

      Lame.
    • BrewG0D, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0@ jibbergeorge

      So what you’re saying is that all those that Duel Boot must have a broken OS? You must not have much experience with the Penguin, or for that matter a computer. No OS is perfect, that is the very definition of why people Duel Boot.

      Your personal ignorance shows through in spades. Long Horn/Vista is just OSX re-warmed. You should really learn more about the competition before saying something stupid like that. Do a little research before you post on a digg article please.

      FACT: Mac has always dissuaded use of their systems as gaming machines. Now that they’re changing their image to be the Family Friendly & Family Central personal computer that is going to effect the availability of games on a Mac.

      Jobs may still want to keep games out of the equation but it's going to happen eventually. Who cares about market share, all I want is a good experience and I've always had a good one on the Macs I've owned in the past.
    • meshman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12"The Mac IS a PC. Are you talking about Windows? Then say Windows."

      Tell that to Apple. (Mac vs PC)
  • bradspry, on 10/12/2007, -47/+17Two words: Boot Camp. Bunch of whiners.
    • PATSCRU, on 10/12/2007, -35/+44Three words: get a PC. Bunch of whiners.
    • meepus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+62Having to install an entire other operating system in order to ensure the accessibility of games is a bit of an asinine work-around, wouldn't you say? Native support would be much, much better.
    • chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28what does bootcamp have to do with games on OS X?
    • HUKI365, on 10/12/2007, -14/+18Have you tried Bootcamp? It is quite simply the easiest machine to clean install. It is far easier to set up than a regular PC (all your drivers are garunteed to work, etc).
    • dgr814vr, on 10/12/2007, -15/+10Not the Same thing. RTFA He mentioned emulators. If I want to game I want to Game on a Whim not wait 7and a half minutes before starting.

      (BTW: Dont own a Mac, and never will, but the article did make sense)
    • Kurisuku, on 10/12/2007, -21/+45Hah.

      So... Instead of buying a PC for 500-800, being able to play all the latest games and applications, and also having the linux option if you really hate Windows....

      Instead, you'll buy a mac for 1500-3000, have inferior hardware (at a premium price), especially considering this is GAMING hardware we're talking about, and install Windows on it (or emulate it with a performance hit) and simply not be satisfied with your gaming experience since it just won't be as good as what you could of got at a much less cheaper price, all so.. What? You can claim you're a mac owner?

      Look, I love macs. I would only use a mac laptop. The OS is to die for. But it is NOT worth the extreme drawbacks when it comes to gaming.
    • Dayyve, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8@kurisuku

      But you don't need uber-hardware for second-life, which face it would probably be the biggest game by far. A million virtual look-a-like Steve Jobs running around with virtual macbook PRO dammits! creating boring virtual blogs about their virtual macbook PRO dammits!

      PS - I do wish they would get games though, I would buy a mac today.
    • stou, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14Why? Isn't the whole point of the Mac, the freaking OS? If you are going to install Windows, why not just save some money and buy a PC? I am not arguing OS X vs Wintendo here... just saying, I really like the fact that components for the PC are so "cheap" and widespread... sure Linux support kinda sucks for a lot of stuff... but there are infinite possibilities (combinations) with PC hardware, not just ram/hd in identical looking white boxes... Mac hardware was hella sweet back in the G4-G5 days (even before that, remember default SCSI disks and such).... now it's just a PC =(

      So why get the worst of both worlds by buying a mac and putting Windows on it? Limited / expensive (?) hardware and ***** OS... wtf for.
    • 2shae, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7@meepus:

      People with Macs don't care about gaming...
      Otherwise they wouldn't have bought a Mac

      it's mainly about being different, feeling as if you've made a better choice, design, OS X.
      And they are willing to pay the price premium for that
    • moisie, on 10/12/2007, -11/+29kurisuku, are you trying to tell me that the spec of an $800 pc is directly comparable to a $3000 Mac?
    • benitojuarez, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14In regards to gaming, yes strictly to spec an $800 pc will outperform a $3000 mac by virtue that the mac only has a choice of 3 graphics cards one (quattro) of which really isnt even for gaming.

      http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html

      However once mutlithreading in games becomes norm, which it STILL HASNT (WTF?!?!) The macs octo core will definitely help out but you still have the graphics card bottleneck.
    • Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10no, he is saying you could build a gaming rig for $800, to get the hardware you would need from apple you would need a $3000 computer, it may be superiour, but what if you dont have/dont want to spend the extra $2k for more fps?

      and about the multicore:reckon they will never come to non-mac PC's? or do you think game developers will start making games for them before windows based machines start using them in significant numbers?
    • EBFoxbat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9To have a rig built for gaming, you must build it yourself. However, it's not fair to say that you can't game on a Mac. A $3000 Mac Pro will game orgasmically. However you could build the equivalent performance for 1/3 the price if you want it yourself.
    • msgyrd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Thats part of why Apple will never be a strong gaming platform, they absolutely won't go near Mac clones / home built since it nearly destroyed their company once before. I have two Apple laptops, and probably wouldn't own any other laptop, but my desktop is home built and probably always will be, just because of the price/performance factor. In order for Apple to break into gaming, they would have to simultaneously release a "game API" like DirectX and announce either a plethora of graphics card and CPU custimization options at purchase, or roll out new models with upgraded parts every month or so. The cost for a smaller company to maintain a competitive edge in gaming hardware would also make Macs way more expensive and likely wouldn't bring in many more customers. Sorry gamers, you don't account for enough of the market to become a number one priority. It doesn't sound too likely to me, so I'll just stick to using my Macs for working, and my desktop for gaming. Native mac gaming would be nice, but I doubt it'll happen, and that doesn't really bother me.

      As for what *is* likely, is full featured virtualization. VMWare Fusion is already supporting DirectX8 3D graphics inside a virtual machine, which is still about 5/6 years behind what is current, but it's an exciting inroad towards full exploitation of a graphics card in a vm.
    • Squidly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ebfoxbat -

      You say: "To have a rig built for gaming, you must build it yourself."

      Do do it affordably, no doubt. Alienware and Falcon NW options will run you as much or more than a Mac Pro.

      You say: " However, it's not fair to say that you can't game on a Mac. A $3000 Mac Pro will game orgasmically."

      I'll vouch for that. I have a Mac Pro 2.66ghz machine with an ATI x1900, 2 gig of memory, and a Terabyte of disk. It games quite well both in OSX (World of Warcraft, Quake 4, etc) and in Bootcamp Vista (Supreme Commander, All the Half Life permutations via Steam, Oblivion, Stalker, etc.) Anything that I can throw at it. My frame rates are rocking. 2560x1600, all settings maxed, 60+fps in WoW as one example.

      You say: "However you could build the equivalent performance for 1/3 the price if you want it yourself."

      Thanks to the graphics card bottleneck, perhaps. You can get by with a non-cutting edge processor and memory pipeline.

      The caveat is, and always is, that such a machine has to run some flavor of Windows. Yeah yeah, MAC-FAN-BOI!"

      Yeah. I'm going to sound like a pundit when I say that the Mac has some important native strengths that should be considered in the balance to PC's native gaming skills. There's some stuff that we Mac user's enjoy that kind of offset that difference in price. Security, non-gaming apps, and an intangible way of doing things/"feel" that is hard to quantify until you dive in and experience the difference first hand.

      But anyway, there's room for everyone. Console Gamers, Windows gamers, Dual Boot Mac users. Rock on.


  • thanksgiving, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6I'd read this article but having to pass through 3 full screen flashing screaming ads is just unacceptable
    • sipsyrup, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14i bet you read it anyways
    • willynilly, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"its OSX that has the potential to make me to go Apple.... If I wanted to boot into Windows I would stick with building my own, bootcamp makes buying a Mac seem kind of redundant."

      That makes no goddamned sense; it's exactly backward. Boot Camp might make buying a Windows machine redundant for some people, but not the other way around.
  • theantirobot, on 10/12/2007, -39/+6Apple makes great gaming machines now, they just aren't marketed as such.

    and yeah, boot camp.
    • scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+42You clearly have no idea what a great gaming machine is.
    • JeffD, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Despite the fact that Apple hardware is great, its OSX that sells Macs and not the other way around. When the choice comes down to building a PC or buying a Mac, its OSX that has the potential to make me to go Apple (I like having control over everything that goes into my system). If I wanted to boot into Windows I would stick with building my own, bootcamp makes buying a Mac seem kind of redundant.
    • Kurisuku, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11You have to make a decision:

      Do you want mac's applications and OS, or do you want superior hardware for gaming? Do you want both?

      If you don't care about gaming, go mac.

      If you care about gaming, you're still PC.

      If you need both, then buy a desktop PC, and a mac laptop. It's the only work around to this problem. Mac's hardware is simply inferior to what you could get at a CHEAPER price on the PC. It is not gaming hardware. Period. You're paying a premium for the mac's applications and functionability, not particularly the hardware itself, which while is solid hardware, it's simply not going to touch what you need to game.

      I've heard so many people whine about bootcamp and emulation, but both are going to slam you with extreme performance hits. Most scream, "No, not bootcamp!" But yes, you paid 3000 for hardware that really isn't going to meet spec with modern games.
    • msgyrd, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Actually, that $3000 Mac desktop will blow away the spec needs for most games. The problem is barrier to entry. Their "consumer" models struggle to meet the needs of games (i.e. iMacs and Macbooks), and the cost difference to get gaming performance is much greater than the rest of the market. There is no middle ground from Apple, which is where most gamers spend their money.
    • Spuy767, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I don't play games with any kind of regularity. However, in the few times that I have, using a 4 core Mac Pro with a 7950GX2 installed outpaces most any non-sli solution out there. And in WoW, which has multi-core support, the framerates were obscene. Now, please, digg me down because WoW isn't a 'real' game and it doesn't have the latest gutting edge graphics, but I have never had any problems running any games on my Mac Pro.
    • Squidly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@kurisuku: You say "It is not gaming hardware. Period."

      I know what you're trying to get at, but lets clarify.

      My Quad Core Mac Pro with a ton of memory, disk, and high end ATI card is perfectly acceptable "gaming hardware".

      So you need to remove the word "Period" from that sentence at the very least.

      A better statement would be
      "An iMac is not an flexible, dirt-cheap and expandable gaming platform."
      or
      "A Mac Pro is an expensive gaming solution".
      or
      "A Mac-Mini SUCKS for gaming!!!!1111oneoneone"




  • popothebright, on 10/12/2007, -10/+36People... the problem is cost. Gamers are good at squeezing every last drop of speed and performance out of their dollar. Macs cost too much. If it came down to an Alienware vs some future "Gaming Mac" I'd go for whichever one gave me more fps for my buck -- and I guarantee it wouldn't be the Mac.

    This isn't a comment about Mac vs. PC -- its about who can deliver the most performance for the dollar. And frankly, Apple isn't good at that.

    Ok fanboys -- mod me down. But price isn't an opinion....
    • jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Having been to more than a handful of LAN's in the last two years I have been made to feel that in a very open way gamers are the highest margin of computer software pirates on the planet. Pub's with hundreds of gig's of software titles/keygens/cracks and usually these events attendee's are playing pirated games.

      To complain about Apple prices being priced so high that they are actually able to kill its appeal to a certain group then I think you have finally found that one group. Gamers are usually great guys though, Leeroy Jenkins aside.
    • Agret, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4Right on we're pirates, lanning rocks. Get to download several terabytes of stuff unmetered and uncapped. Awesome stuff, I spend more time leeching than I do playing games at LANs.
    • mahmoodsdotjpg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2leeroy jenkins is actually not a bad guy. i've met him!
      http://www.ggl.com/index.php?controller=News&method=article&id=3086
    • pixelfox, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5@popothebright

      this is frankly, false. Do consumer macs cost more? Indeed. But didn't you ever see the memo that a Mac Pro cost less than the comparably equipped Dell? The intel switch has cut down the cost to almost no difference in most cases- unless of course, you're paying an extra $100 for a black matte finish on your MacBook. Oh, yeah, and also if you upgrade from third-party vendors. Everyone knows that upgrading at the Apple Store will cost you a nice 15-20% markup...
  • bluesdealer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18I'd like to see both Linux and Mac OS on equal footing with MS in the gaming world. Yeah, it's just a fantasy, but I can dream.
  • catburton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I agree with IbnDigg - i won't buy a mac until i know i can play the latest games on it. I don't want to have to wait months for the Mac version either. They should be released at the same time on both Macs and PCs. The day that happens, i'd gladly switch over to a mac! Until then, i'll stick with my PC.
    • ActionableMango, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And how can Apple cause this to happen? After all, this is an open letter to Apple, not to the game developers.
  • clickmyface, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Well first Re: open letter, yep, duh.

    Second, Apple has other ventures such as iPhone that are taking up quite a lot of time. The reason why Vista fell on its face along with everything else but the Xbox lately is because Microsoft is spread too thin and only focuses on the bottom line.

    Apple became the leader in really great hardware and software design, Apple got really good at selling music, now they are ramping up at getting really good with phones. I don't want Apple to try this all at once or else we end up with Vista and Zune. Gaming seems like the potential next step, but theres a lot of things out there.

    That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the leopard secrets related directly to gaming.
  • jlebrech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Apple could pay to convert the source code themselves to Mac on a royalty basis.

    e.g. Apple asks Crytek to spend a few months with them to convert Crysis to Mac and then let Crytek bundle the binary along with the official box, and pay them an extra x% for each copy sold.

    Admitedly they would be paying for people with Vista buying copies, but they could find a good pricepoint.
    And that would be a great way for people to have compatible existing games, if they were already compatible at launch.

    Maybe a Cedega buy or something could be a good move.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Cedega would be a temp fix... but the real problem to address is building a toolkit as good as DirectX and Visual Studio. A OpenGL-Cocoa would be amazing... maybe thats a secret feature in Leopard?
    • prockcore, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2OpenGL+Cocoa wouldn't be very portable though.. how many companies are going to make mac only games? You can't write cocoa apps in C++, you must use ObjC, so a game company wouldn't be able to use all the libraries they've already built.. they'd have to start from scratch.
    • Ecco2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@prockcore
      It's pretty pathetic to see people arguing over technical details while they have NO idea of how things actually work. For instance, it's freaking easy to use a C++ library from a Cocoa app. Totally straightforward. Plus (this is a different thing) you can actually even mix Obj-C and C++ code in the same source file.
    • 5plic3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@jer2eydevil88
      FYI, Cocoa + OpenGL has been around for years. Ever heard of a Cocoa class named NSOpenGLView?
    • frostieDude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@jer2eydevil88
      If you think that programming with Visual Studio + DirectX is eassier than using NSOpenGLView, you obviously haven't programmed with both. I have.

      Don't get me wrong - I currently use DirectX and I don't use NSOpenGLView, but it isn't because it is EASIER (Cocoa is easier) - it is because I have to deploy on Win32. Turns out I also have to deploy on Mac, but the problem is that most people's Windows PCs aren't configured for an OpenGL application which would be OK if I was writing a game, but I'm not. I'm doing a multimedia app aimed at business end users. So, using DirectX is better because typically people's Windows computers are configured for DirectX and not OpenGL (customers hate fussing with drivers unless it is to play a game). On Mac, I've never had a config problem with OpenGL.
    • Spuy767, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The real reason that a lot of games aren't released for anything else but windows is the same reason that Dell will not include any OS other than windows on their machines. Microsoft. Microsoft throws around dollars, and then threatens to take them away if they don't get theri way. A company like Maxis or especially Bliz, who launches games on dual format discs, pays more to advertize their game as windows compatible, because every game maker in the workd wants that "Works with Windows." sticker on the front. A lot of developers don't have the financial resources to afford paying the premium that MS wants to charge a developer for making a cross platform game. And before someone brings up Halo, being a "Microsoft" game, Halo was runnin on the Mac long before it ever touched the XBox or PC, MS just happened to need a silver bullet for their console and purchased the entire company outright, most of the code was already there for the mac version which wasn't released until a year or more later. That is simply a case of minimum input from MS.
  • gnawph2, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4How come any standard rant becomes significant once "Open Letter" becomes part of its title?
  • snuf42, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I'd say that Apple would need to offer better options on the video card front. You just can't get a good mid-range Mac with a decent video card for gaming. I usually have about $1500 to spend on a new computer and on the PC side that's a good amount. Right now I have a Core2Duo 6600 2.4GHz with a 7900GT video card. Now the closest I can come on the Mac side is an iMac 24" Core2Duo 2.33GHz with a 7600GT card. Now thats a nice monitor but I'd be spending $1000 more than the PC and the lower end video card can't drive gaming on a 24" monitor at native resolution with effects turned up. Not too mention that monitor can't ever be moved to another computer.
    So the only step is to move up to a Mac Pro starting at $2500 for the base config (once more $1000 over the mid range PC although this time without monitor). It's overkill in the CPU dept for gaming but the video comes up lacking. You can upgrade to an X1900 but once again more money. So I'm up $1500 or double the cost of the PC. And there is currently no SLI or Crossfire support on Macs.
    It's not that the Macs aren't a good value - they are - it's that the limited configuration options prevent you from building a good performing gaming machine without spending an arm and a leg. My son's $700 AMD 4200 X2 with a 7600GT will outperform an iMac costing twice as much in gaming.
    I have a MacBook Pro and I've gamed on it using bootcamp. With newer games the detail has to be turned down a lot to drive the display at the native resolution.
    I'd love for Apple to release a non-all in one mid range Mac. Give me a PCI express x16 slot for video upgrades. I don't want an integrated monitor either. I don't need 4 CPUs for gaming at this time. I do need a good price point. I'd be happy with a more expandable Mac without monitor at the same price point as a mid-range iMac.
    • mfearby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Amen to that. The iMacs are nice machines if you want straight-forward, reliable, computing if you don't care about upgrade path and/or games. The Mac Pro machines are just overkill and are way too pricey for anybody but movie studios and publishing firms to consider. Apple need to release a semi-upgradable, non fully-integrated, Mac (with the gamer in mind) before they'll start winning over massive loads of Windows users.

      Even though I don't play games, I'm still holding out on becoming a switcher because of the lack of upgradeability and the (somewhat justified) name-calling that would ensue from my gaming friends (that, and the fact that Macs are generally double the price of what I would pay for a PC and also because the Dock and the Finder piss me off).
  • samuelcotterall, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I'm sure it's a lot to do with the fact that PC's dominate the gaming and general markets, and the time involved with developing for OSX simply isn't worth it for a lot of companies.
    • frostieDude, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@samuelcotterall
      Not to mention that most game developers aren't mac developers and vice versa. From what I understand (being a software developer who has never worked on games, but other multimedia and I've had friends who worked at Electronic Arts, 3DO, other game companies), gaming companies typically hire kids with little experience don't pay that well and work them to death. They can do this because there are tons of such kids whose dream it has been to work on video games.

      Most of the Mac programmers I know (myself included having been a Mac programmer for 10+ years): 1. Don't care about games that much. 2. Really "get" the Mac philosophy of aesthetics and usability. 3. Are on the more experienced side (older, more years of experience). 4. Get paid more than average. 5. Have experience doing cross platform development.

      So it is probably very hard for a game company to find, hire, and retain Mac programmers for the money they would like to pay. Someone wanting to break into Mac programming might take the job, but they would probably leave after one product to go do something that uses a similar skill set (such as scientific visualization) for 3X the money.
    • Mejogid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love the way you say 'mac programmer' as if it's some sort of exclusive cult. Any decent programmer can program on a variety of platforms in a variety of languages. Sure, they'll have preferences, but the fact is if demand for games on macs was greater than on windows, you'd see alot more OS X game programmerrs.
  • Beatmiser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20Truth of the matter is (and I am prepared to be dugg down for this), Apple doesn't particularly care about the gamer crowd. Apple is not geared that way. The company views itself as a slick machine designed for one thing- Creative Productivity. That's why you can't generally crack one open without major surgery. Apple doesn't want gamers ripping their machines apart to install the latest graphics card because Apple has a very specific and stylized design process.

    Apple know this. So should you. Want to game? That's cool- grab a PC.
    • snuf42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Well a Mac Pro is very easy to open up and upgrade. An iMac on the other hand. Well all you can do is RAM and that's easy enough. I think in addition to it's usual creative industry position Apple is very big after the average home user. Web browsing, email, sharing photos, making a templated website or DVD. I do agree that they aren't after gamers particularly. Certainly not hardcore gamers. I'm sure Apple thinks there are enough gaming options on the Mac and that it handles them decently well enough.
    • Beatmiser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sure but keep in mind, 3 of the 5 things you listed would be considered 'Creative Productivity' the others are standard issue regardless of platform.

      Web browsing, email, sharing photos, making a templated website or DVD.

    • snuf42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Fair enough. I would say though maybe a better term would be creative home productivity - just to distinguish it from the pro level Final Cut and such. You can do all of these things on a Windows PC you just don't get the applications free with computer purchase (as is the case with iLife). You most likely get some crappy demo versions of apps that don't easily do the job.
    • webmasterjoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@snuf42 "Apple is very big after the average home user. Web browsing, email, sharing photos, making a templated website or DVD. I do agree that they aren't after gamers particularly. Certainly not hardcore gamers. I'm sure Apple thinks there are enough gaming options on the Mac and that it handles them decently well enough."

      Apple is definitely not after gamers, because gamers have much more invested in the Windows platform and are more interested in cracking open the machines than typical users.

      When you consider that Apple, like any other company, has finite resources to dedicate to marketing, you can understand why they would market towards a demographic that would be more likely to consider switching platforms entirely. This demographic doesn't play a lot of games (and those they do play are of a simpler variety, including flash games). They use email, they browse the web, they listen to music, they IM with friends, they have a digital camera, and maybe they do some work from home occasionally using Word or Excel. Apple has a very compelling product for this market, and has been able to build the Apple user base significantly by marketing towards these people.

      Once the user base gets bigger, Apple will be able to attract more game developers. A game needs to bring in more money than it cost to make it, and that won't happen on OS X (at the scale it happens on Windows) until Apple can increase the user base enough. Apple is simply making the best of a catch-22.

      As an aside, console gaming is a lot bigger than PC gaming - the Digg demographic is skewed toward PC gamers, but in a more representative sample, there are more PS2's and XBox's than gaming PC's (meaning machines that are used for a significant amount of games, not just machines capable of games).
  • nathum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0lol, funny read I hope Linux pick up on his tip as well. For me... ill still be with Windows all the way.
  • mdavis, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4I really hate the idea of an "open letter to..."

    It's just so blatantly arrogant and smug. As if the "recipient" is actually going to read these "letters" from these nobodies. It reminds me of The Sopanos the other night when Uncle Junior was writing a letter to Dick Cheney.
  • oobie11, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2If Apple really wanted to do something smart and double their yearly income, they would release Mac OS as OEM software as well. Then any one that wanted apple could have it on their custom made system. That's why Microsoft is so big, hence why they get the game developers. it is not cost effective to develop for Mac. Now that Macs have Intel chips, they are the same as PCs, so why not Make your software available to every one instead of being stingy and making people pay $1000+ for your system.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Apple knows their "Macs" are nothing more than a PC with a flashy case. Seriously, the harddrive, the ram, the cpus, the graphics cards, nearly everything is standard PC hardware now. The only thing that makes a Mac a Mac is the OS. Apple selling a PC-installable OEM version of MacOSX would be the stupidest thing they could do, as nobody would need to buy their hardware anymore.

      Apple is already trying as hard as it can to make the x86 version of OSX NOT run on a standard PC. As AFAIK the only thing stopping it right now is a DRM chip on the motherboard that authenticates with the OS that its running on Apple hardware. Yep, OSX can natively run on a PC fine, its just specifically designed on purpose to refuse to run on one if it dosent detect that chip. Funny how if Microsoft specifically designed Windows to not run on a system they would get hell for it, yet Apple is getting praised for it.
    • cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The last time they tried that, Apple lost half their market share to their own clone industry; who could put the OS on a wider range of hardware than Apple themselves were ready to support.


    • ghoppe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Make your software available to every one instead of being stingy and making people pay $1000+ for your system."

      Perhaps you haven't noticed, but Apple is a hardware company not a software company.
  • Septimus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Yes as I really want to play games on my ***** iMac 20" (Core2 with an ancient ATI, good going Apple) which costs as much as any gaming rig I could ever need. /sarcasm

    Apple is not for gamers. Style over substance people remember that.

    /posted from my MacBook.
  • generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10A DirectX (are we talking Direct3d or DirectSound?, etc) competitor isn't needed, that would just fragment the market between Mac, Linux, and the game consoles even more.

    Direct3d is only used on the Microsoft products Windows and the Xboxes. Do you think PS3 and the Wii run DirectX? No, they use OpenGL and assorted toolkits.

    Anyone who thinks OpenGL is behind also missed the article where it was pointed out that OpenGL also has all the features of DirectX 10 due to nVidia's vendor extensions..
  • ThirdPrize, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3While its not quite the same, I got a 360 when they came out and that caters for all my gaming needs. Then last summer when the MacBooks came out I got one of them for my surfing needs. Combined they probably cost the same as a decent gaming PC.
    • ZergyPoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Uhm... no.

      You can get a very good gaming PC for far less than the 1,500 dollars it would cost to get both a 360 and a Macbook.

      Try again.
    • webmasterjoe, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0@ZergyPoo: I wish I could be as smug as you. "Try again"? Do you ever talk to people using your voice instead of a keyboard?
  • mitrovarr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I don't think Macs just fail to support games, I think Apple is openly against having games on the platform. Why? I think the image they're trying to maintain is an image that games are incompatible with. They want their products to be seen as sophisticated and adult, and computer games don't really agree with that image. Most of the Mac fans I've seen, or at least the most vocal ones, dislike games to the point of considering their absence on the platform to be a good thing.

    Think of this: When you ask a Mac fan about games on their platform, what do they say? Do they agree that it's a regrettably weak point to an otherwise good platform? Or do they sneer at you and tell you that you should find something better to do with your time? That's certainly the more common one I've heard. The majority of die-hard Mac fans hate games and the rest will probably pick up a Wii.
    • hunchback, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First, thank you for this open letter FileBlog, I agree wholeheartedly.

      @mitrovarr
      Those who dislike games have a choice to not buy any, whats one thing got to do with the other? With new Mac users, comes new usage patterns. However, the way Apple designs their mice, those are very anti-gaming mice, just way too uptight.
    • kettlehead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@mitrovarr:
      this isn't about current mac fans, it's about making new ones.
  • stevealford, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Okay, here's some hard truth for you: as long as Apple sees profit, we won't get better gaming platforms. The iPod and iPhone will profit on non-computer ventures. As long as Macs increase market share for computers, Apple will assume that all is well with the world, even if they only gain a tenth of a percent per quarter.

    Gaming and hardware will not be taken seriously until Mac LOSES profit on computer sales. The day that happens, Apple will revolutionize gaming... or at least they'll convince us they've done so. Until that day, they'll keep selling us the least gaming hardware for the highest price. (I have a Mac Pro Quad Xeon and a Dual Core XP Media Center... the Mac is for web development and mixing/editing, the XP MC is for gaming/entertainment/movies/TV). If my Mac was worth a ***** in gaming or had a good alternative to Media Center (MC is like tivo for me) then I might go all Mac. I love my Tiger, but I also love Media Center... each serves its own vital purpose in my life.
    • Mejogid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No idea what games you're playing, but the vast majority of modern games simply won't run maxed out - Age of Empires 3, counter strike source, all other source games, oblivion, FEAR, Medieval Total War and pretty much every game I play from time to time chokes on my macbook pro. X1600 are pretty mediocre, and the mobile versions are even worse.
  • iMoth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14get an snes if you want a real gaming machine.
  • danielcjtodd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Its funny that to make a mac usable, it had to get an Intel processor, and run windows. All these Mac users keep coming up to me with "BOOT CAMP!... now we can run all your programs". Not only have we been doing that for YEARS on a PC, but now you can get viruses too. OOPS! Someone please explain the advantage of a mac. All the amazing Mac only professional Apps? um... final cut pro is the only thing I can think of. ( I know there are more... i think)

    I'm so tired of mac guys coming up to me in the offices and preaching about how they are better. (yes I am aware that I am on my soap box here too) Its like being hounded by the cult of Scientology.

    Dint tell me, SHOW ME!

    Its pretty? Is that all? My alienware is pretty, so now where does that leave the Mac crowd?
    Pc's are cheaper (well.. alienware may not be the best comparison :P), run more programs, run games, are more readily upgradable, competitive hardware available, and have a larger user base.

    I'm glad boot camp can bring the Mac users up to speed, but we are setting the pace.
    (PS, I was a mac guy for 4 years until I needed to do 3D in 1996.)

    and the last words from my ranting soapbox:
    BOOM HEADSHOT! :P
    • airquotes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1So you can run windows on a Mac and there are hacks to run OSX on X86 not to mention countless mods to XP to make it look more like OSX. As far as the price difference.. First, lets pretend Mac is a Hardware company and Microsoft is An OS company.. So a retail version of Mac OS is like $99, and a retail copy of Windows OS is usually considerably more, like 2X more or so. Now the Mac hardware used is often higher end, and may come somewhat higher priced than similar hardware bought either as separate parts, or compiled by a company like Dell. The extra money goes into the fact that you now can run the Mac OS which comes in the price for this Mac computer, and that the hardware you are paying for has been well tested that all the components work together, with themselves, the OS and 3rd party apps.

      You are paying for stability, support and the ability to run their proprietary OS.
    • airquotes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"I'm glad boot camp can bring the Mac users up to speed, but we are setting the pace.
      (PS, I was a mac guy for 4 years until I needed to do 3D in 1996.)"

      Who is "WE" do you mean the windows using community? Unless youre a code monkey for wgiever youre talking about, i dont think youre setting any pace.. youre just buying the ***** that most people are. And about the 3D thing.. graphically, the Mac OS has always been superior.. thats like switching from windows to Mac for gaming. I have the feeling you dont know what you are talking about.
  • nealpolitan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Bottom line is that power gamers are not in Apples target audience. Why try and fit a square peg in a round hole? By making Macs as user upgradeable as Windows machines are is defeating the purpose of having a closed architecture to design your OS around.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"defeating the purpose of having a closed architecture to design your OS around."

      So you're saying that Macs are more like a console than a pc.... that cannot play games?
  • ilobmirt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I personally think that it's the third party developers that have decided to not develop gaming software for the mac. If that person really wished to make Mac more prominent in gaming, send each gaming company a letter about why they should support the Mac platform. However, I wouldn't be surprised if they reject the letter. There are countless variables at play here that count against the Mac as a viable gaming platform.

    I'd stick with emulation, or running a different operating system that was meant for gaming. :P
  • Apreche, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Apple isn't worried about gaming. Sure PC gaming is making a slight comeback in the US, but its a pittance compared to console gaming. Most people buy comptuers to compute, not to game. Most people who game on computers play flash games and other light stuff. WoW by itself is most of the PC gaming market in the US. It runs on Mac. Thanks to that, Apple doesn't need to care about games. Outside the US it's a different story, but in the US, Apple is gaming just fine.
    • Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8riiigght, because there are only 5 people from the US who play CS, or go to lans or anything.
      those gfx card companies, they are all going bust cause noone wants mid-high range gfx cards
      gaming keyboards and mice are a big money loser, but companies still make them for the hell of it
      steam, the us servers are empty, US devs never make PC games with massive budgets cause they just lose money
      do I really need to go on pointing out your massive ignorance?
  • siong1987, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5If there are only two choices in the world:

    1. A Gaming-enabled Mac with a few hundred bucks more expensive than PC
    2. A Gaming-enabled PC with a few hundred bucks cheaper than Mac

    I will still pick the first choice. I love Mac. It is not a matter of money.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That is pretty vague, care to go into detail why?
    • ghoppe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can't speak for that guy, but speaking for myself a couple hundred dollars is worth:

      1. Not having to deal with windows. (especially its terrible memory management, keeping anti-virus software up to date, malware, etc.)
      2. UNIX under the hood.
      3. Excellent innovative software without an acceptable replacement on the Windows side: iLife suite, TextMate, Quicksilver, Panic's Coda (woo!)

      And before someone jumps down my throat, yes I know there are/have been security flaws and shortcomings with MacOS X, and I do have a firewall... but let's be practical and realistic: The common problems I've seen on windows computers with viruses and malware/adware/othercrapthatembedsitselfinyourregistry simply do not occur on a Mac.

      (ps. I own a WinXP box and a Mac box)
  • Majin_Raditz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Or choice 3.

    Get a Mac and a 360 and not worry about it.
    • nuclearpenguins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not everyone enjoys console gaming. I know I sure don't.
  • chicofaraby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I use Macs for computing. I play games on PS2.

    I don't use a screwdriver to drive a nail.

    Why is this hard?
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Good luck using that nail gun to play Final Fantasy 12 or God of War :P

      The main reason I game on consoles is because of their exclusive games and they last longer, not because of ease of use or anything like that. A console I bought a decade ago will still play new games released for it perfectly. Good luck getting a pc from 2000 to play a game from 2010 above 2fps.

      Also, most of the types of games I like (platformers, action, JRPG especially) are almost always made for consoles, the PC is mostly famous for WRPG, RTS and of course FPS games, of which only FPS interest me, so its not hard to see why I prefer consoles for gaming.
  • Tinmanau, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Steve has said the Mac is not a toy and doesn't do games, so Apple fans should just give it up. If Steve doesn't want it, it won't happen...
    • jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5thus proving steve is a dick, and macs aren't fun afterall.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Funny, all the Mac demos I saw last time I was at BestBuy were running shareware games. That MacMini played Marble Blast pretty choppy, im hoping it was a very low-end model.
  • DoomII, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9pay more, get less

    Apple
  • Broccoli, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Use boot camp and install windows on your mac and your done. You have both os in one computer. My friend games on his macbook pro all the time and it works excellent.
    • jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4so, not only do i have to pay more for the hardware, but i then have to buy windows as well?

      alternatively, invest in a cheaper, but just as poweful, hardware platform that encourages competition, and run windows or linux. Job's (not steve) a good'un....
    • noopzilla!, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@jrbewin:

      who the ***** actually BUYS windows anymore? seriously, are you stupid as *****? why would you waste money on that *****?
    • jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1noopzilla!: http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=vista+20+million+&btnG=Google+Search

      but i'm sure a man of your brain capacity knew that already, but just chose to act like a arrogant foul-mouthed 12 year old for the hell of it.
  • mattverso, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I have a dream.

    In my dream, Apple and Nintendo merge, and become a behemoth that goes on to destroy all gaming platforms and personal computers before them, and render all competitors irrelevant.

    It could happen. And monkeys might fly out of my butt.
    • Oldschoolhack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I could see that...

      Nintendo is behind in graphics gaming wise....

      Apple is behind in gaming.... period.

      good vision. Maybe by 2050, they'll have apples able to run SNES games.
  • iRoy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Damn... I really should have submitted this yesterday when I read it...

    Oh well... Yeah we do need games on the Mac, much more stable platform. Macs really can do everything a PC can do and more. If Apple created a gaming department I would be almost completely broke but it would totally be worth it. Plus that would be another reason to buy one of those sexy-ass Mac Pros.

    Boot Camp is a waste of time... Unless you're booting Linux!
  • brentaun, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2You don't need games on a Mac. You don't need them at all. Do something meaningful with your computer and refrain from whining about the number of games available for it.

    Why did this make the front page?
    • shadgenki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I find your comment really funny because it reminds me of that assinine commercial with the Mac and PC guys, where the PC guy is calculating how much time the Mac guy is wasting on fun stuff.
  • crossmr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Unless apple is going to develop the games themselves, it won't happen. Game developers won't develop for such a small market share. Until Apple is sitting around 30% or more of the market share, its unlikely game developers will give two ***** about Mac users.
  • airquotes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4
    Yeah I agree, get a console for the games, and Mac for computing.. I can't fathom someone not being completely satisfied on all fronts with a Mac and a Wii
  • digitallysick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Whats a good gaming laptop?? My friend wants one, i read that alienware sucks now days
  • derekknight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Open letters" are a vain grab for attention by the author.
  • martyf, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Games and "Gamers" might be an important market, but, like pork belly futures and industrial adhesives, they are of no interest to me.
    I think that the "Gamer" culture (and to use the word "culture" is really not true, it's a "hobby", like ham radio or model trains) is, like all hobbyists, interested in killing time, either by playing games or by endlessly tweaking the machines that play the games.
    If you look to the "PC Games are dead" argument with the consoles and such, you hear the same arguments you would in any hobby (model airplanes: build your own or buy a ready made?).
    Apple started out as a hobby company, but over the years has become a maker of high-end consumer electronics for "Creative Productivity" as it was said earlier here. And, like a Bang & Olfson stereo, there's not a lot of reasons to crack open the case to "mod" it. Now you could argue that when it comes to games, Apple is seeing that Nintendo and Sony are the competitive set in the games console market. When you look at the PS3 and the dismal sales performance of that device, you have to take a strategic view. Do you go for a "hobby" market where things like spending 3.5 hours trying to get something to work is part of the experience, or enter the console market, where Sony has shown what happens to the "high-end" low margin products. Or, ignore the game market entirely and wait a few years.
    I know the gaming "culture" seems important, and as a market it seems big (over 7 Billion dollars in sales). But let's be realistic here - compared to say, the "Lawn and Garden" market (over 35 Billion in sales), or the "Craft and Hobby" market - you know, stuff like flower arranging, scrapbooking, polymer clay sculpting, which is over 25 Billion, it's not really that big a market to worry about. It's certainly a VOCAL market - and it is certainly a widespread market, but all in all, it's not that big a market at all. Heck, the ORANGE JUICE industry is bigger than gaming!
    So, while gaming is a fun, interesting market, if I ran Apple, I'd leave it to the console makers and hardware hobbyists, and just steer clear.
    • ElkorAlish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Hmmm.. you have a point on industry sales. However, Gaming probably (and I haven't checked) has a bigger $ amount in sales *per player* than most of those other industries. For instance the "Lawn and Garden" market quite literally has thousands of companies competing for that portion of 35 Billion, there probably isn't even close to that number competing for a share of the 7 Billion.

      just a thought.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Actually yes, I DO enjoy tweaking my system and messing around with it, it is a hobby and it is (unless im trying to find the one %^^#&^#$^ thing stopping it from working) usually fun for me. Games are a form of entertanment, just like music and movies, might as well just call any recreational activity on the planet a waste of time at this rate.

      And hey, forget orange juice, it turns out that the gas market is bigger than gaming too, huh, who knew that I could also compare two completely different markets that have absolutely nothing to do with each other too?
  • misfit410, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Since a $2000 mac has the parts of a $500 PC, I think you would need a second mortgage on your home to get a Mac gaming system.
    • airquotes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Wow, you're unoriginal and incorrect.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"You build any system current available by Apple with the exact same parts (obviously giving slightly on motherboard model, but ONLY that) for $500 and I'll give you a cookie."

      What about case?
    • ffejrey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2 @jarland

      It costs $299 to upgrade from 1GB to 2GB of DDR2-667 memory on a Mac Pro, with that kind of money I could buy 4GB of RAM myself.
    • ghoppe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Since a $2000 mac has the parts of a $500 PC, I think you would need a second mortgage on your home to get a Mac gaming system."

      If you're talking about a $1999 iMac, the best price I could find for the Intel Core 2 Duo T7400 is $438.44. With your "budget" that leaves you $62 for the motherboard, case, memory, hard drive, video card, 24" LCD monitor, operating system, DVD drive, etc...

      If you're talking about a $2499 Mac Pro tower, I found a Intel Xeon 5150 Woodcrest 2.66GHz processor for $689.00 at NewEgg. Maybe you'll find a better price, I dunno. Trouble is, you'll need TWO of them to match the Mac Pro.

      Clearly the only conclusion I can draw from your argument is that you are a time-traveller from the 1990s.
    • ghoppe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ffejrey

      While it's true I wouldn't pay Apple's premium for RAM and I'm confident and knowledgeable enough to buy and install my own, methinks you exaggerate a bit. Since the RAM upgrade price you mentioned is $299, I presume you're talking about upgrading memory on the Mac Pro. Perhaps you're not aware that the Mac Pro *requires* fully buffered ECC ram. The best price I could find for that is about $100/GB. The prices I found varied widely depending on brand, ranging from $100-$200 for a 1GB stick.

      I don't think Apple charging $299 for a 2GB upgrade is so unbelievable nor evidence of price-gouging.
  • Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The biggest problem with Macs and gaming is the fact that Apple still purposely undermines gaming by the selection of hand picked components for each model line of computers that are generally not upgradable.

    Consider a Mac Mini, iMac, and Mac Pro.

    While certainly the Mac Pro is completely upgradable (even supports up to 4 video cards, but does NOT support SLI) it is certainly capable for gaming, however nobody wants to spend $12,000 for a nicely equipped Mac Pro, or even a $2500 for a conservative Mac Pro.

    iMac is the only mid-level entry computer from Apple, however the video card selection is of middling performance (ATI x1600 or nVidia 7300 GT are only mid performance gaming cards, period). I also think they are mobile regardless of what Apple says, no way they have a full sized PCIExpress video card in the iMac's enclosure. In any case, the video is generally not upgradable which is the kiss of death for most gamers. Who wants a big beautifull 24" iMac that has video technology 3 generations behind. At least in the PC world, usually upgrading your video card is enough to squeeze out another year or so of life out of an aging box.

    The Mac Mini lineup only uses integrated Intel graphics. Mac Mini is a cute paper holder to gamers.

    When it comes to laptops, well, laptops are not good for gaming period. While you CAN play games on laptops MacBooks in particular tend to heat up very quickly and they sound like a jet engine about to take off once the fans kick in. Also Apple underclocks the video cards in their MacBooks in order to reduce power consumption and heat generation, and they use the same flavours of video cards as in the iMac lineup (ATI x1600, except they actually say its a mobile version).

    So the bottom line is that Apple really only sells one line of computers (Mac Pro) that would appeal to gamers wanting something that can actually handle todays games without sacrificing performance for cuteness and would allow them to upgrade. However, the CHEAPEST Mac Pro configured with a decent video card (x1900xt which is nearly 2 generations behind) comes out at $2,748.00. Even with a middling card (nVidia 7300 GT) it costs $2500. For that kind of change, PC gamers can equip a very nice custom box, complete with all the neon and led lights they want and current generation technology.

    Apple isn't into games not because they have discouraged game development, because they don't make compelling enough hardware to actually SUPPORT gaming.
    • kris33, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Heat? I have never noticed any high heat, all other laptops I have tested was much warmer at high load. In comparison, I would characterize my MB as quite cool. I have a Macbook Core 2 Duo BTW, so I think they have fixed it.
    • greenamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ Topher: you don't know what the hell you're even talking about. $12,000 for a nicely equipped Mac Pro? WTF is wrong with you? A nicely equipped Mac Pro can be had for $2500-3500, and it's even cheaper spec for spec than a similarly equipped Dell (search ancient Digg it's been proven).

      And criticizing the Mac Mini for not playing games well? It's a ***** low-level consumer computer for crying out loud.

      Seriously, you sound like a total idiot spewing fanboy garbage. Get your facts straight and quit lying.
  • skellener, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2> "For nearly a decade I've been a Mac fan who hasn't bought a Mac, solely because of the game situation."

    That is the most retraded thing I have ever heard. You haven't bought a Mac becuase of the gaming situation? Get over it dude! Go guy yourself a Mac allong with a Wii, PS3 or XBOX 360. There are plenty of ways to own a Mac and have great games. Especially now. You can run XP on your Mac and play any of the games you want.

    Dugg down for being lame.
    • mykotron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1haha, console gaming is still inferior to PC gaming.... if people want to play to be good. you NEED the keyboard. as is if PC gamers were to play against a console gamer in any FPS the PC gamer would win hands down.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hate elitest comments like this, whenever ANYBODY gets into a pc/console argument, I see "OMG teh Keyb0ard and teh mouse are superior!!!111oneoneone" thrown around.

      1. Using a controller in no way makes me an "inferior" gamer.

      2. I use consoles not because of the controller or ease of use (to me a pc game is just as easy to use) but because of the selection of games, consoles have much more of the game genras that I like, pcs rarely do.
  • Altotus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Apple doesn't focus on gaming, because it wouldn't be profitable for them. Think of it in business terms. This last quarter, Apple's net profit from computer sales tied that of the current #1 PC vendor, HP. Sure, HP sold many more PCs than Apple sold Macs, but Apple has much less overhead, higher margins, and by keeping themselves a distinct platform, essentially no competition in certain demographics/markets. Apple is sustaining year-over-year growth of 30% without addressing hardcore gaming. To expand into this area means inviting competition, lowering margins, developing new strategies, dilluting their development assets, etc. Why risk or expend the effort while you still continue outperform the sector?

    I think, from Apple's standpoint, the games will come to the Mac when the Mac hardware and user base becomes large enough. As long as it's growing relative to the PC user-base, particularly in the non-commercial segment, this will happen with time.

    Also, I'm not sure that partnering with game companies to port games is worth the effort. Most games for the PC are based on engines that are already ported to the Mac or are portable without much effort. The principle reason the games are not on the Mac are not technical in nature, but more related to marketing and resourcing issues.
  • h3xley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1***** hell, what is this - I'm watching a full screen ad now just to read a blog?
  • pixelfox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2All good games come to the mac... eventually. And that's the problem. Switching to intel will prolly help dev of mac games be much faster, but if Apple stays so hands-off, it won't happen anytime soon. Great link.
  • Dustin00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Apple is totally missing the oportunity.

    Microsoft is putting DirectX 10 on Vista, forcing people to upgrade if they want that DX10 game. For a LOT of people, that upgrade requires a new system.

    If Mac gets those games, they could start a sea change.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Porting game from Direct3d to OpenGL or vice versa isn't that easy as both OpenGL board and MS suggests.

      Same goes for Directsound and OpenAL.
  • noopzilla!, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2has this guy ever ***** heard of BOOT CAMP?

    on my mac i have a partitioned drive for windows that I use only when I feel like playing the 2 or 3 games I have installed on there. That's it. it works great, and i never feel like i'm 'missing out' by having to reboot to switch to windows. it takes like 10 seconds anyway.

    if you 'really want a mac', but don't want to deal with bootcamp (for whatever stupid reason), then you're just a picky bitch, or you're too hardcore of a gamer to need a mac. PCs are for hardcore gamers, macs aren't. prioritize and realize which is more important: a better OS and apps, or gaming. end of story, shut up, mac will never be for gaming, stop ***** complaining, steve jobs isn't listening.
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Or they could not want to jump through a hundred hoops to esentically turn their mac into a pc just to play the games that a much cheaper pc could play.
    • noopzilla!, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3wow, you completely missed my point. good job, OH, and your 'hundred' hoops is actually more like 5:
      get bootcamp, install bootcamp, get windows, install windows, restart computer.

      and how does installing windows on a mac make it a pc? are you retarded?
    • MonkeyFarts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Are you dense, noopzilla? First of all, installing Windows via Boot Camp means that Windows runs natively on the computer. Your Mac, then, _is_ a Windows PC, as well as an OS X PC.

      "if you 'really want a mac', but don't want to deal with bootcamp (for whatever stupid reason), then you're just a picky bitch, or you're too hardcore of a gamer to need a mac."

      I find the entire content of your post incredibly belligerent, close-minded, and ignorant. Some people want to have games that run natively on OS X, and why shouldn't they? If I had a choice of playing all my games on OS X, I'd remove that stupid Boot Camp partition from my Mac in a second. I find rebooting every time I want to play a game a massive pain in the ass. I want to have OS X at my finger tips _while_ I'm playing games. I hate dealing with this Boot Camp nonsense. And why shouldn't I? I bought this Mac for OS X, not Boot Camp.

      "PCs are for hardcore gamers, macs aren't. prioritize and realize which is more important: a better OS and apps, or gaming. end of story, shut up, mac will never be for gaming, stop ***** complaining, steve jobs isn't listening."

      Yeah, and PCs aren't for business, graphics, movies, entertainment (not games, but media), school, and the vast array of other things they (and all the other platforms in the world) are capable of? Oh, Windows was created _only_ for games. I see. Well sorry to refute your argument, but isn't that what Microsoft created the _X-Box_ for? And I think that you are completely wrong in saying that Macs "will never be for gaming." You do realize that the gaming industry is expanding at an alarming rate, don't you? And you do realize that Apple, as a business, is a money-making institution? If that's the case, then why wouldn't Jobs listen to his consumers when they want better support for video games? You need to pull your thumb out of your ass and develop an open mind.
  • Spuy767, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Funny, i didn't have any trouble dropping cash on my Mac Pro and I'm not a studio.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.