Geek Bravado

The blown hard arrogance of Parallax Abstraction.

Tag Archives: iOS

Apple’s beginning to test the limits of their fans

Strap in, it’s another Apple post! It’s been a busy week for them so you know I had to get one in.

We had the announcements of the iPad Mini, a tablet that’s substantially more expensive than most of its rivals and inferior to many of them on features. We also got a new entry is the ludicrously overpriced segment of the MacBook line as opposed to just the normally overpriced segment and to the shock of pretty much everyone, a new full size iPad, a mere 7 months after they started pushing the iPad 3. This was all intentionally timed around the launch of Microsoft’s own Surface tablet as well as Windows 8. All that was followed up by Apple’s latest quarterly earnings which were still very rosy but had a few negative surprises. As usual, the fanboy press corps is spinning like a washing machine in a tornado to minimise the negatives as if it’s somehow their job to keep Apple elevated in the realm of public opinion. None of this is a surprise.

However, the reactions I’ve seen from many an hardcore Apple fan mostly this week but to a lesser extent in the last month as well have me very curious and wondering if the company everyone loves to love is beginning to test the limits of their fandom.

Whenever Apple has a press event or an earnings call, the most telling elements are never what they say but what they don’t say. They are masters of massaging their message and spinning without the appearance of doing so. It’s incredible and no one I’ve seen can do it like they can (though having most of the press never ask tough questions for fear of losing access certainly helps too). They will always hype up their successes and distort numbers into universal positives but they will simply avoid talking about things they can’t brag about. iAds, iCards, Siri, Apple TV sales and many more are all examples. The notable recent exception is Maps, only because it was so unbelievably terrible that they had to say something because even the press had a hard time defending them on it. Being a public company means they can’t hide sales figures though and this quarter, the shock was that while they still sold a boatload of iPads, it was noticeably lower than forecast. This was made up for and then some by iPhone sales that clobbered last year’s but there’s a telling omission in that stat as well. They never say how many of the new iPhones being sold are to new customers and how many are just existing customers replacing old handsets. A sale is a sale either way but the latter is a worse kind of sale because it indicates that they aren’t necessarily growing the user base as much, something that could be a long term challenge as other platforms like Android and Windows Phone rapidly start catching them in the app department.

Everyone, fan or no, was stunned to see them announce the iPad 4 (or the new New iPad). There’s been much speculation as to why they would replace their flagship tablet after such a short period as they have built their empire on relatively predictable yearly product cycles.

Some are claiming that the iPad 3 was actually not fully baked when it was shipped and that it was merely a stop gap measure until they could get this one out. I don’t go for this as there have been no major reported faults with the iPad 3 and it’s biggest new feature was the Retina display which impressed everyone and still hasn’t been matched elsewhere. The only real change in the iPad 4 is a faster processor which isn’t a big draw since barely anything’s making use of the iPad 3′s processor yet anyway.

Others speculate that Apple wants to put all their iOS products on the same refresh cycle so that they can have new iPhones and new iPads both come out in the Fall and have the same guts, rather than the iPhone always leapfrogging the iPad for six months. I don’t buy this either because people don’t have unlimited money and if you release both a new iPhone and iPad at the same time, I think you’re less likely to guarantee a sale of both as opposed to staggering the releases which makes it easier for consumers to justify the additional expense.

I speculated after the reveal that there may be an unannounced tablet coming from a competitor that destroys the iPad 3 and Apple was desperate to get something slightly better out ahead of it so they don’t get killed in the high-end segment this Christmas. That’s a long shot though. While the Surface looks promising, no one thinks it’s an iPad killer and if someone had an superior device coming for Christmas, a PR push would already be in full swing. It’s possible that Tim Cook is scared of Windows 8 and it’s potential impact among the crowd who still own PCs but don’t have a tablet yet. Given how much time he spends making snide remarks about the platform, it certainly seems to be on his mind a lot.

iPad sales do seem to be in decline and while it is modest, that the year of the iPad 3 is the first year of this decline could be a bad omen for the future. Does a slightly faster upgrade fix that though? At best, it puts a finger in the dyke.

Of course, I have no real idea what their motives were in doing this. What I do know is that a lot of iPad 3 owners feel burned, many of whom are hardcore iFaithful. Now, this is technology and one can say that getting upset because something you bought got upgraded is a classic example of First World Entitlement Syndrome. The thing is, this is the culture Apple has carefully cultivated for many years now. The yearly technolust and turning technology into fashion accessories is what’s driving their growth. For whatever reason, they feel the time is right to push the boundaries harder and try to get consumers to upgrade yet again. Maybe it’s out of arrogance (which they certainly have plenty of), maybe it’s out of fear of the real competition that’s coming and the inevitable race to the bottom that will ensue, maybe it’s just an experiment that they won’t repeat . Either way, I’ve seen more than a few people who have lined up to give them money for years now questioning if they want to as often and some are even saying they’ve had enough with Apple altogether. Take this quote from the iPad Mini thread on Gamers With Jobs:

“I am a longtime Apple guy – a musician, audio producer, and have been using them almost exclusively for the past 15 years. We have 2 iPhones, an iPad 3, & an iMac in our home, and I switched my dad over to OS X a few years ago and just recently bought my mom an iPad. The last 2 or 3 years have really disillusioned me, though, and I’m no longer viewing Apple as exclusive in my home. I’m considering my next PC purchase and highly suspect it will be a PC. I’m switching to WinPhone 8 when it launches, I’m getting a Surface, and will probably move my composing rig over to Windows soon, too. Maybe I’m unique, but Apple isn’t winning me over these days.”

Notice how this isn’t a decision he just reached, he said this has been building for the last couple of years. This is not the first such sentiment I’ve read either. I’ve seen blog posts (I unfortunately lost the links to them) from decades-long Apple users who have become disillusioned with the company’s recent direction. They say product quality has gone down (in stark contrast to the public perception about Apple stuff), their software has become much less reliable and buggy and that they seem more focused on cranking out expensive, consumable consumer electronics on a yearly basis than supporting their existing customers well and keeping everything polished to a mirror shine. Some have too much investment into Apple hardware and software to be able to switch, some still consider them a lesser evil than Microsoft and a few are actually considering dipping their toes in the other ocean. I’m not talking fickle mainstream customers here, I’m talking guys who have been using Macs since they were in black and white, since long before OS X and who stuck with the company even when they were on the brink of bankruptcy. These are the people who started the iCult. And they’re considering change.

Is this the majority of Apple customers? Of course not. It’s a tiny, infinitesimal slice of the user base and even for how much money they give the company, no one would notice if they went somewhere else. The thing is, these people are the taste makers. When Apple was almost dead and released the first iPod, these were the people who convinced the mainstream to try it. These are the people who stuck with the company through thick and thin and who were the first ones to preach the genius of Steve Jobs to the world. They may not mean much monetarily now but some of them questioning their long-time loyalty is a very telling sign.

Apple have purposefully created and curated monumental, astronomical and I believe unsustainable market expectations for themselves and while they’ve managed to capitalise on them so far, cracks are beginning to show. The “old guard” may be beginning to lose faith and while that’s not the end, it could be that the bubble is about to pop. When that happens, the reaction will be massive and will likely multiply exponentially as more of the mainstream public realises that the company’s image of infallibility is just that, an image. This won’t happen overnight, it won’t even happen in a year but their fortunes can still turn quickly. The “old guard” customers are not where Apple’s making most of their money right now and they shouldn’t necessarily be focusing on them. I do however believe that what these people have to say is a sign of potential major challenges ahead. Apple’s leadership should be paying close attention to what these people are saying and taking their words to heart before their sentiment expands and begins to run away from them.

I know this post sounds very doom and gloom and I’m sure more than a few of you dismissing it as “haters gonna’ hate.” I am not a fan of Apple and have very sound, legitimate reasons for that but I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I don’t want to see them fail or go away. Apple has woken up the rest of the technology industry from a stagnant slumber. They’re forcing others to think outside the box and innovate and it’s about damn time that happened. I guarantee that things like Surface and Windows 8 wouldn’t exist (or at least not in their current forms) were it not for Apple forcing the issue. I do believe Apple has gotten too big, too powerful and way too high on its own success. Their leadership is arrogant and greedy, their die hard fans are insufferable and they all need to be taken down a few pegs. Their growth needs to stabilise and they need to become one player in a vibrant, competitive market. Having one company so far out in front is not good for anyone, as Microsoft’s once near total dominance proved.

Despite Apple’s continued great successes, I believe some events in the last month or so are providing small signs of where things could be heading. The people leading Apple are much smarter than me and that they’ve managed to maintain this bubble as long as they have so far is remarkable and admirable. It can’t last forever though and if they don’t want it to burst suddenly, they need to reign themselves in a bit. Your most loyal fans are speaking Apple, you ignore them at your own peril.

Indie Hypocrisy Part Deux: Notch & Walled Gardens

The last time I wrote one of these types of posts, it ignited a bit of a firestorm on Twitter. While some of that was something I should of expected because of the personalities I was criticising, my post was also more mean spirited than it needed to be to make my point. I’m going to try to not be so harsh this time. Also, be aware that the things I’m levying my criticisms at happened a little while ago. I didn’t have any time to blog last month so this isn’t as topical as some of my other posts are.

Being as big a fan of the PC as I am, I’ve been paying close attention to Windows 8 which is due to launch later this week. My opinions of it have swung around quite a bit and I’m still in a bit of a weird place where I’m not sure what to think about it. It’s likely a number of posts in the near future will be talking about it in some way.

I am a huge admirer of both Minecraft and it’s creator Markus Persson (aka Notch). The game is not really my thing but I totally see what’s cool about it and why it’s become the viral sensation it is. Notch went from obscurity to overnight epic success and in my opinion, he deserves it. Not unlike myself and others I’ve both criticised and admired, he’s also known for speaking his mind bluntly, something he did when he took Microsoft to task over Windows 8. As I said in my last one of these posts, I like people who speak their mind, even when they know it will stir up controversy. This industry is too full of PR filtered crap and it needs more brutal honesty. But (and I say this as someone who still isn’t running Windows 8 and is very much on the fence about it), I think Notch’s slamming Windows 8 for being closed is both disingenuous and hypocritical.

Now, one of Neowin’s reporters already said to Notch a lot of what I wanted to say here. Basically, he slammed Windows 8 for being closed and the author called him a hypocrite because he happily embraces other ultra-closed platforms such as iOS and Microsoft’s own Xbox Live Arcade, both of which have seen great success with their respective versions of Minecraft. Unfortunately, Notch chose to respond as if he was personally attacked which I don’t think the tone of the article was doing. His statements against Windows 8 were his and the author responded to him. And the thing is, the author’s right.

What I find hypocritical is embracing platforms that are engineered from the ground up to be as closed and controlled by their creators as possible while simultaneously condemning a platform that is still one of the most open this side of Linux. Now it’s true, the new “Modern UI” (formerly Metro) component of Windows 8 does require that any software written for it be sold exclusively through Microsoft’s Windows Store and go through a certification process. Microsoft also gets a cut of those sales. I’m among those who see the potential in it but have strong reservations about what it can mean for Windows itself.

But here’s the thing: The wide open desktop component is still alive and well in Windows 8 and there’s zero evidence it’s going anywhere. Many doomsayers claim that the “Modern UI” is Microsoft trying to turn your PC into a closed tablet ecosystem where you can only run what they let you and only if they get their cut. I can understand there being concerns about that, I really can, but there is simply no proof that such a thing is their full intent or that the desktop will suddenly be gone in Windows 9. To do such a thing would be suicide for Windows and Microsoft knows it. Enterprise will never adopt a walled garden ecosystem, there are years of applications out there that require the desktop that will never get Modern UI versions and the way the environment is engineered will simply make a lot of specialised and high-end applications impossible. Most modern games and media creation software for example, simply can’t work as walled apps. These are just two of the segments that drive Windows dominance in the PC space and Microsoft’s not going to cut them off.

Should their intentions change, I’ll be right at the front of the hate line with my pitchfork and torch. I’m simply wanting to see evidence of intent before I get in that line and there isn’t any yet. Adding a new, closed layer on top of the desktop is certainly reason to raise an eyebrow and observe but it is proof of nothing. The fact is, Apple made super closed ecosystems popular, Google made them more popular and Microsoft is simply continuing on a trend that people want. And what many mainstream people are saying is that they don’t care about not owning content and having everything be controlled by a large company, so long as there’s an appearance of security and they don’t have to make any real effort to learn how to use a computing device. Not to put too fine a point on it but a lot of people are lazy and/or stupid and they have a lot of money. If Microsoft wants to be a part of that, I have no issue as long as the parts that I both know how to use and enjoy remain and continue to be supported. If I start to feel sidelined, I will look elsewhere but I don’t believe I have been yet.

Where I believe Notch really became disingenuous was when he claimed that Microsoft wanted to certify Minecraft for Windows 8, implying that if he didn’t certify it, his game wouldn’t work at all on the new OS. That’s simply not true. What they actually wanted to do was create a “Modern UI” version of Minecraft that would be sold in the Windows Store and which would likely work on the new Windows RT tablets in addition to Windows 8 on PCs. If he doesn’t want to do it, that’s his choice but the existing PC version of Minecraft works just fine in Windows 8′s desktop environment. I know, I just tried it on a test machine before I wrote this. There is no certification process for desktop software on Windows 8 and it’s just as open a platform as it ever was. Leaving out this detail was a critical omission on Notch’s part and I don’t think it helps his argument. Windows 8′s “Modern UI” environment is no different than the Mac App Store and just is as restrictive in many ways. But like the Mac App Store, it’s completely optional to use (though I admit, it’s much more in your face) and if you want your wild west environment that is the desktop, it’s still there and comes with a few improvements in Windows 8 to boot. Minecraft is not being shut out of Windows 8 because he chooses not to have a version of it in the Windows Store.

A lot of this fearmongering of Microsoft killing the desktop reminds me of a big controversy back when Windows Vista launched. A New Zealand based security researcher claimed that Vista had layers of DRM baked in that were designed to make it impossible to play unauthorised content on it and was closing large portions of Windows to protect the interests of content industries (i.e. Hollywood and the record companies). He got a lot of press and a lot of people condemned it as the beginning of the end for Windows. Long story short, his paper was proven to be poorly researched, biased garbage (see Response to Criticism section), none of what he predicted came true and he’s pretty much never been heard from since. Now, Windows Vista was a pile of burning garbage for other reasons but this chief scare tactic just wasn’t true but everyone still got riled up despite a lack of proper evidence.

Now I want to be clear, Minecraft is Notch’s game and he can choose to put it or not on whatever platforms he chooses. If he doesn’t want to be part of the Windows Store, I don’t hold that against him. Even if I end up installing Windows 8, I don’t see myself buying a lot of content from there. I do however believe that he doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on when he claims he’s against closed platforms while embracing some of the most closed ones around at the same time and I find it a disservice to his fans to phrase his objection like Microsoft is shutting Minecraft out of Windows 8 altogether when that’s simply not true and there’s no evidence whatsoever that they plan to go in the direction he claims they are.

I’m trying to keep an open mind about Windows 8 but I do have concerns about Microsoft’s long view of where Windows and the PC are going. But past evidence has shown that trying to guess motive and getting upset about it in advance usually just ends up making people look ridiculous. When Microsoft decides to deprecate the desktop, PC users should be upset and I’ll be right there with them but until then, can we base our criticisms on facts rather than wild speculation?

Notch, I highly doubt you’re ever going to read this but if you do, I hope you don’t also interpret it as a personal attack. I truly have a lot of respect for you and what you’ve accomplished. I don’t intend to insult you but as someone who does have a large pulpit from which to speak, I don’t believe what you’ve been claiming properly serves either your fans of the PC community as a whole. You may disagree and that’s cool but I hope you may understand where some people find issue with the position you’ve proffered. I’m not trying to convince you to like Windows 8 but if you’re going to hate it, please hate it based on what’s known rather than assumed and understand that when you embrace elsewhere what you rail against Windows 8 for, it causes some to ask why.

Apple’s (And Soon Microsoft’s) Big Threats to Choice

UPDATE: Since I posted this entry, Microsoft has decided to change the Metro-only restriction on their free development tools. A smart move on their part.

I make no secret of the fact that while there are many cool things Apple does, I am not a fan of many of the company’s practices nor the lazy, fanboy driven press that salivates and gives free PR to everything they do, usually free of criticism. The innovations made by Apple products in recent years are undeniable and they are finally pushing an otherwise stagnant tech industry forward with new ideas that involve more than just bumped specs. However, not all of these ideas are good ones and the success Apple is meeting with some are driving others like Microsoft towards similar models that while they are beneficial in some ways, also serve to greatly hurt consumers and the power we have to self-determine our experiences with technology. The biggest threat that Apple (and soon Microsoft) represent is the restriction and constriction of user choice.

I’ve said for a while now that Apple’s biggest failing as a company (from a consumer perspective, clearly not yet a financial one) is that their products are designed around limiting consumer options. You can only buy Mac and iOS hardware from one place, you have a very limited number of options for that hardware, it’s largely not upgradable (or in the case of iOS devices, not at all) and it’s purpose-designed to be a treadmill of forced obsolescence that requires users to upgrade their products on Apple’s desired schedule instead of theirs, creating huge amount of technological and monetary waste. With the App Store, they’ve taken this a step further by ensuring that all iOS devices only have one place where you can buy software for them. This is a place Apple controls in every way from approval of what software you can see to how add-ons for it can be purchased to how updates are delivered. They also get a 30% cut of every penny spent on this software, a fairly respectable number given how little they really offer developers beyond permission to list there.

Compare that to the PC landscape where you have dozens of vendors selling pre-built PCs with hundreds of options, you can custom build a system in just about any configuration you can fathom, you have multiple operating system choices and within those, hundreds of different ways to acquire both free and paid software. Many have criticised the PC as being the “wild west” and all the complexity and risks that come with that but I see that as its greatest trait. If you are a new user who needs to be guided by the hand, there are options for that. If you’re a power user like myself who likes to poke, prod and tweak every aspect of your computing experience, you can do that too. If your budget for a computer is $400 or $4,000, there’s options to suit what you want. This has never been the case with Apple and I find their furthering that to greater and greater extremes each year to be a dangerous precedent. For all of the failings of Windows (and there are many), it’s still my preferred OS because of the freedom it offers me while also giving me access to the widest array of software and tools available. When I use a Mac, I’m always feeling as if it’s trying to make me use it the way Apple feels is ideal as opposed to the way I feel is ideal which is how computing is supposed to be.

My biggest worry for the future of technology today is how Apple and now Microsoft with Windows 8 are aggressively pushing the vision of having stricter control over what you do with your computing devices. They are both heavily pushing native software stores that they control (and get a cut from), Apple is planning to make it much more frustrating to install non-App Store delivered content, Microsoft is pushing the new Metro app-driven Start Screen down people’s throats whether they want it or not, they tried to force PC manufacturers to lock out alternative operating systems (they backed off from that but only on the desktop side) and they’re restricting the free versions of development tools to Metro app development only. Much like iOS apps, Metro apps will only be deliverable through Microsoft’s proprietary store. To be fair, Microsoft isn’t trying to restrict or curtail traditional software development and delivery the way Apple seems to be but given the ability these two companies can have to get a piece of every piece of software sold for their respective systems, it stands to reason that they’ll continue to try to squeeze alternatives out more moving forward.

As someone who gets my free and paid software from a wide variety of different places (often depending on who is offering the best deal), this prospect terrifies me and it should terrify every other computer user as well. Both of these companies were already making a ton of money and will continue to without cornering the software delivery market. They are trying to change the value in what they offer us from being the platform on which a variety of things can run to create an experience ideal for each user to one where they are in charge of what we get to consume, how we get to consume it and all the while, taking their percentage from the software authors for the privilege of getting to play in their walled garden. This isn’t the way computers are supposed to be and there’s no need for it beyond enriching the platform holders at the expense of consumer interests.

They claim this is done under the guise of keeping things easy to use and secure but that’s frankly bollocks. Yes, there are a lot of stupid computer users out there and many security problems which largely result from that stupidity. Nonetheless, we’ve been managing fine up to this point and forcing us to get our software from your store where you can shove competition aside for any reason you choose and confine innovation only to that which doesn’t impeded your business interests is not going to improve that. Is iOS only easy to use and secure because the users don’t have access to third party app stores? To claim that position to me says that Apple doesn’t think very highly of their average user’s intelligence. And given that every iOS release gets jailbroken almost immediately, I would say the security claims have already been disproved repeatedly. But then, convincing people that Apple loves and respects its users while actively working against their interests has been among the company’s greatest achievements. I’ve embraced PCs and Windows, faults and all, because I never got the impression from Microsoft that they wanted things to act in a similar, at least not until now. They are a company that’s out to make money but they were already making lots and growing amounts of it and seemed fine with that. Now, having seen Apple’s insane (and unsustainable) profits made on the backs of monopolising the software delivery business as well, they’ve realised there’s a huge slice of the pie they could be getting and want it no matter what.

This greedy mindset represents one of the biggest threats to innovation and consumer freedom when it comes to technology in my opinion. The greatest thing technology has permitted is larger democratization, making it easier for people to create and express both in terms of what they make and do with their tools and how they are able to tailor those tools to their needs. When the two biggest players start locking the doors to their kingdoms and start to limit who gets keys to it based not on the needs and desires of their customers but of their own business interests, technology moves away from a democratic model to a totalitarian one. What if an app offends their corporate standards of taste that may not line up with yours or what if an app does something better than one of theirs which they are trying to sell for more? There are many examples of software that was denied by Apple for both of these reasons. Call my position hyperbolic if you want but when Apple and Microsoft are allowed to decide what gets to be installed on what is supposed to be your computer,  your tablet and your phone, who really owns that device you paid for?

I don’t know what the best solution is to this problem. I’m not normally a fan of governments telling businesses how to run themselves but ultimately, consumer interests are greater and these companies enjoy positions that don’t simply give people the ability to just “speak with their wallets”. When the platform holders are already making record profits, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to tell them that they need to keep improving their products to entice people to keep buying them, not start sapping away secondary revenue sources and forcing people to use them so they can keep making money after they’ve already made their money. If the only way you can keep making money for your business is by sticking your nose into other people’s, then your leadership is failing and you need fresh thinking. Keeping technology open and free for choices and the innovation that comes from them should be paramount and this is a vision that Apple and Microsoft no longer share. Consumers need and deserve a better solution that what we’re proposing, I just wonder if we’re too blinded by the new shiny to demand it.

On Gaming’s Future: Mobile Reality Check

In the last couple of weeks, we’ve had the launch of the iPad 3 and a slew of rumours about what we may see in the next-gen home consoles. As usual, the growing Apple-centric members of the enthusiast press were quick to chime in on how the iPad 3 is somehow revolutionising games yet again, how Apple are the only ones that get the future of games and how iPad specs are accelerating so rapidly that in a few years, it will not only have rendered dedicated handhelds obsolete but now home consoles as well.

Never mind the inherent dangers of Apple controlling the industry, this is where all gaming is going they say and somehow, a monopoly is now a good thing. I think the predictions as they lay them out are very much a result of the Apple reality distortion field that still permeates the press today. However, they’re not entirely off base and to say that the current AAA industry doesn’t have major problems that currently don’t have a clear path to being solved is also false. I think AAA games as they are today are in very real danger but I don’t think mobile games on your TV is where things are going either. As usual, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. I think if we’re going to answer the question on where gaming is going to be in a few years, it’s important to have a reality check of both sides of this debate as both are overstating their benefits and understating their weaknesses. Each have a lot of challenges both now and going forward and many of these are more similar between them than either would like to admit. This post is going to focus on the mobile space and the next one in a couple of days will focus on the AAA space.

When we hear the enthusiast press and Apple crusaders talk about mobile gaming (which is largely dominated by iOS, this can’t really be disputed yet), the talk is how it’s ushering a return to a golden era when games were less complicated, cheaper to create, the developers and not publishers controlled the content and innovation was encouraged and praised. Indeed, these are all generally good things. Games on iOS right now are low risk and every week, we hear stories about a small team having their project make a killing which leads to massive riches. Every time there are layoffs or departures from AAA studios, there’s usually a story the next day about how those people have gone off and formed new teams in the mobile and social spaces. Games on iOS are cheap to make, cheaper to buy and come with a massive and growing install base right out of the gate. It seems like the sector is in a stratospheric rise that has no limit and which will mean great things for innovation and new gaming experiences in the future.

That’s the reality for right now but the sad truth becoming more evident all the time is that mobile game development is quickly becoming as risky as other parts of the industry and will only get worse as the technology improves. There are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of games alone on the iTunes App Store right now and hundreds more being added every week. The better part of 90% of these offerings are garbage and not worth a second glance but the sheer volume makes it impossible to determine what’s good and what isn’t. iTunes has user reviews but like most other places, they often aren’t trustworthy and are dependent on personal taste. Even with many games selling for as little as a buck, people are being choosy because those bucks add up fast with that much choice and poor quality content out there.

So how does the average consumer decide what to buy? Usually by looking at the top seller or staff picks list, which are almost always dominated with the same few titles and rarely change. Unless a new game becomes a viral hit, has publisher and PR backing or gets co-promotion from Apple through one of these lists or placement in a TV ad, the chances of it becoming a huge seller are almost lottery-win thin. Apple has always thought of gaming as a red-headed stepchild and the revolution many say they started was something they fell into by accident and which has been perpetuated largely with their indifference. Steve Jobs believed computers were tools and that gaming was a waste of their potential and that’s still very much part of Apple’s culture.

The reality is that while we may always hear the press talk about runaway hits like Angry Birds or Draw Something, they are actually flukes and do not at all represent the norm. The makers of both of those titles had a string of releases prior to their seminal hits, most of which were flops. In fact, the often unspoken truth is that a tiny group of developers make almost all of the revenue on iOS and many respected developers are now seeing the platform becoming just like the rest of the industry it’s supposedly revolutionising. In other words, in only a few short years iOS has become almost entirely hit driven and dominated by a few key players who are following the money and not focusing on innovation or new ideas.

The one major advantage iOS has over home consoles and to a lesser extent PC is that the cost of entry is very low. One of the great things it has done has allowed the “bedroom programmers” to sweep back in and have a strong creative voice again. An individual or small team that would never be able to develop on a console can make an iOS game in their spare time, put it out there and maybe get rich from it. While there’s certainly a chance of that, the hard truths above make it a rare chance at best. Mark Rein, Vice-President of Epic Games who have released the very successful (and co-promoted by Apple) Infinity Blade series said on a podcast earlier this year that the average iOS game grosses $700 over its lifetime. Granted, he just threw that out with no citation but I’m going to assume given his position that he knows what he’s talking about.

$700 is nothing and makes even a part-time development endeavour a big financial risk. Even if we assume Rein is low-balling and the average return is ten to twenty times that, it’s still not enough for even one person to make a living on, let alone a team of people working full-time. For a lot of hobbyist developers, the risk may be worth it and I say more power to them. Some of the biggest successes and innovations in the world came from people with only a shoestring and a dream. But as a supposed new revolution that will bring with it a whole new facet of the industry, the picture is not super rosy. The press has people believing that the cost to get into iOS games is super low and because of that, it’s virtually a guarantee that you’ll get your investment back if not make a sizeable profit. That’s simply not the case and while the low cost of entry may allow a newly funded team to survive a flop or two, they can’t do so indefinitely until they get lucky enough to find their golden goose. Most of these people who are fleeing AAA development to make mobile games are going to fail and don’t have much greater a chance of success as they do in AAA, though getting funding to try is certainly easier. As tablets and phones get more powerful, it will only get worse.

The press is talking about how powerful the iPad 3 is and how it can rival the power of an Xbox 360. That’s actually not true at all right now but as these tablets continue to increase in power, there’s a good chance that in a few years, they will have similar graphical and processing capabilities as even the next-gen consoles. At that time, you could put your tablet down on a wireless video dock, pick up a Bluetooth game pad and play a AAA experience on your TV with a console you can pick up and take with you. Sounds pretty good from a user experience point of view and honestly, I really like the idea.

The danger is that the technical arms race is what made AAA games so incredibly expensive and risky and with iOS being fairly risky already, it will get even more so as power increases. This will quickly lead to the small developers being marginalised and forced out and the larger ones to need bigger and bigger budgets (and by extension more marketing which means even more money) to ensure that their games succeed. See where this is going? Right to where AAA games are now. Long development times, huge budgets and teams and few creative risks being taken. $1-$5 games won’t be possible anymore when they go from costing thousands to millions and then tens of millions to make and market. As prices go up, so do the apprehensions of customers to try out a bunch of games in succession to find out what they like. The marketing for these larger games will also drown out indie developers and push them back from the mainstream to a low-profit niche for enthusiasts only. Different form factor, same problems. This isn’t good for developers or gamers.

The raw fact is this: Publishers are desperate for new sustainable revenue streams right now and with a couple of exceptions like Electronic Arts, none of them have gotten behind iOS gaming in a big way. Some might say they’re just dinosaurs stuck in old ways and not embracing new things but these are large companies that are run by smart people in one of the most dynamic, rapidly changing industries in the world. They know fortunes in gaming can change overnight and how to latch on to things that have big success potential. With their resources, it wouldn’t be hard for them to try a few iOS games out and see what happens. Yet they largely aren’t and most of them are tie-ins to other properties, not original titles. Why is that? Is that because they simply don’t see them as big enough for their league or could it be that perhaps they don’t see the long-term potential in the segment and that it stands to be more of a fad than the wave of the future? The AAA industry is hurting right now but it still makes far more money per year than iOS gaming and it’s foolish to discount their knowledge and decisions. If they are lining up to back the Wii U but aren’t paying much attention to iOS, I think that says something significant.

So what needs to happen to prevent this platform from burning out and becoming like the AAA industry it’s trying to avoid? I honestly have more thoughts on this from the AAA side, only because that industry has been around much longer and isn’t in such a state of flux. I think the first and biggest thing is that Apple needs to take some pages from the book of Steam. They need to stop thinking of gaming as an afterthought and start embracing it. Rather than just letting games exist on iOS and having Darwin rule the ecosystem, they need to start showcasing titles and really giving attention and promotion to indies. Don’t just let the best selling or viral titles get noticed, start showing off the unique and creative experiences offered on your platform and show why sometimes the smaller games can be just as good or better than the technical show pieces like Infinity Blade. Steam is its own platform and owned by a company that makes games too but Valve don’t shy away from promoting the work of others and giving great projects from all levels of development the spotlight. If they want iOS to take over living rooms and become the next great force in gaming, they need to show everything that makes the platform great and ensure that it doesn’t just become about flashy graphics and big marketing budgets.

Even Apple must realise that iOS’s current growth is a fashion trend and is going to slow in the next couple of years. The platform’s not going anywhere but sales of new devices will taper and their user base will begin to plateau. If they don’t step up and start selling the benefits of their hardware as a gaming platform for all kinds of different experiences, they risk handing the keys of gaming back to the console makers before iOS gaming truly has rubber hit road. The small developers are fuelling the growth of iOS gaming and they’re the reason the enthusiast press is so infatuated with it right now. If it simply becomes about flashy graphics and style over substance, it will lose its lustre and the renaissance will fade. There’s great opportunity for creativity to shine here, Apple needs to get off the sidelines and start backing that. Otherwise gaming may go roaring right past them.

By the end of the week, I’ll have my next post up which will tackle this same issue but from the AAA side.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 369 other followers