Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Valve's Newell Thinks PS3 Needs To Be "Open Like a Mac"

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the open-like-something dept.

PlayStation (Games) 348

Eraesr writes "Apparently Valve boss Gabe Newell thinks the PS3 needs to be more of an open platform, drawing a comparison to Apple's Mac platform. In an interview with 5BY5.TV, he said he would like to see the PS3 be 'open like a Mac' instead of being 'more closed like a Gamecube.' 'Platform investments, like the Mac, are difficult because you have to be aware of what direction that platform is moving,' Newell said, referring to the firm's recent move onto Macs with its titles and distribution service Steam. 'We need to target platforms that do a better job of looking like where we want to be in a few years.'"

cancel ×

348 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yeah (4, Funny)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299630)

Open like a Mac, I get it,

kind of like, Secure like a Windows?

Re:Yeah (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299662)

Oh, and before I forget, if you think it's good to be Open like a Mac, why did it take you the better part of a decade to port all your games over?

Not that we're complaining, but I had to put up with years of Mac users complaining about it.

Re:Yeah (0)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300376)

Simple. Because open like a Mac means "lots of configurations to have to support". So far, in trying in vain to play Portal on my Mac, I found that:

  • It doesn't support case-sensitive HFS+, so for those of us who use a non-toy configuration, you have to throw it into a disk image and create dozens of symlinks all over your ~/Library folder just to make Steam launch.
  • The Portal game itself crashes on launch if you try to run it on anything other than the most recent GPUs.

So I'm just glad it was free, since at least I got exactly what I paid for.

Re:Yeah (2, Insightful)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299672)

Apple took some of the best of open source - and made sure they screwed with it enough that they could claim it as their own.

Re:Yeah (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299738)

Oh, and enough to make parts of it refuse to work right, regardless of one's prior UNIX knowledge. I'll never forgive them for the "Internet Sharing" setting, which regularly fails even between a pair of Macs...then when you start trying to troubleshoot it you find that while natd is running, there's no natd.conf ...those bastards have wrapped it up in some proprietary binary object. Thanks Apple; you've successfully reinvented the wheel, and made it square to boot.

Re:Yeah (-1, Troll)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300016)

If you have a hard time making OSX work right, than your prior Unix knowledge is not quite what you thought it was...

Re:Yeah (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300110)

Nothing like a completed unsubstantiated assertion in response to someone who not only gripped but supported his complaint with a specific example... an example you ignored/had no answer to.

Re:Yeah (2, Informative)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300328)

It sucks, but you need to make your own natd.conf, kill the process and restart natd with your configuration: sudo /usr/sbin/natd -alias_address x.x.x.x -interface en0 -use_sockets -same_ports -unregistered_only -dynamic -clamp_mss -f /Users/username/natd.conf

Obviously you'll need to put the whole thing into a script and run it after the system is up.

Your mileage may vary...

Re:Yeah (1)

james.mcarthur (154849) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299966)

Just the sort of "open" that big games companies love.

Re:Yeah (2, Funny)

figleaf (672550) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299712)

Mac and Open together in a sentence is a Oxymoron [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Yeah (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299744)

Maybe he was referring to the buttholes of Mac users.

Re:Yeah (2, Insightful)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299940)

Oh I don't know, it seems from my experience that anal retentiveness seems pretty evenly spread across the users of all operating systems.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300232)

Like Microsoft Works. Get's me every time.

Re:Yeah (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299826)

Don't confuse "open" with "free." They're not quite the same thing. Even Stallman knows the difference.

How much did Apple pay Valve for that endorsement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299962)

is all I want to know.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300080)

Windows are made of glass, I'm not sure what you were getting into buying them under the pretense that they're secure.

Re:Yeah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300128)

> Open like a Mac, I get it,

> kind of like, Secure like a Windows?

No, beautiful like me.

Re:Yeah (4, Insightful)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300284)

Open like a Mac, I get it,

kind of like, Secure like a Windows?

You realise that the comparison is against a PS3, right?

Besides, the Mac is a fairly open platform. You can get kernel code and Webkit code under a genuine open source license. Good luck getting Windows NT kernel code and IE rendering engine as open source projects. Apple's developer tools are built around gcc, and the default shell is bash. Apple provides X11 support out of the box, so you can build an app for a Mac, and trivially move it to another platform if you choose to rely only on open standards.

Apple as a company may be psychotic, but I don't know why people insist the Mac is so hilariously closed.

You have a strange definition of open (1, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300462)

I suppose in the OSS zealot definition maybe it is more open. There is more of the code that is available to the public. Not very much of it overall, certainly not enough to make a compatible system yourself, but whatever.

However in most other respects it is extremely closed. The biggest would be with regards to hardware. To run OS-X legally, you must use Apple's hardware. What's more, they have technical checks in there to try and force that. They do everything they can to close it down and lock you to their platform.

Well that is very different than Windows. It is open to run on any compatible hardware, and adding hardware compatibility is easy. The only thing that can't be added by companies other than MS is processor architectures. However, Windows itself is designed to be portable and indeed did run on Alpha and MIPS back in the day. There is every indication MS would port it to other architectures, given the demand. Regardless, anything else it is easy for third parties to add support for.

So that would be a major difference. You can crow on about the minor bits of OS-X that are open sourced, the OS itself requires Mac hardware. That isn't very open in most people's way of thinking. They aren't concerned with having access to code they don't understand, they are concerned with being able to run on the hardware they want.

Re:Yeah (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300302)

or easy and stable as Linux ;)

Re:Yeah (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300430)

At least the Ubuntu video player sorts out all of the necessary codec details by itself including "obscure" things like what you find on a commercial DVD (mpeg-ps container and AC3 audio).

Mac.. open? (1, Troll)

d_jedi (773213) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299640)

Wait.. what?!

FIRST (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299644)

Take that niggas!!

Open like a Mac? (4, Funny)

_pi-away (308135) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299646)

Sorry, my irony detector is overloading.

Re:Open like a Mac? (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299676)

Mine is pegged to 11 good fellow. Actually I think it just hit 12. So with that let me just say, WE'RE ALL DOOMED! Doomed, doomed, DOOOMED!

Re:Open like a Mac? (1)

DryGrian (1775520) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300394)

"Dooooooooooooooooooooooo-*cut scene*"
Bender Bending Rodriguez

Uhh.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299668)

I think I just fell out of my chair.

word association (1)

beefnog (718146) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299678)

open : mac
Gabe : thin

Re:word association (4, Funny)

Fross (83754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300096)

That's another month for Episode 3.

Thanks a lot buddy! >:|

How is a Mac open? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299708)

Open like a Mac? What does that mean? Its not like Apple is anymore open than MS is...and why compare to the Gamecube, a dead system. Seems like he's running his mouth for the sake of running his mouth.

Re:How is a Mac open? (4, Insightful)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299908)

I am fairly certain I can come up with the source for a lot more of OSX than you could for Windows 7...

Re:How is a Mac open? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300062)

That's because they nicked most of it from Linux

Re:How is a Mac open? (1)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300092)

I'd be surprised if there was any part of the Linux project in OS X.

Re:How is a Mac open? (1)

ArundelCastle (1581543) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300098)

That's because it is built on *nix.
I am fairly certain you could get Microsoft to share a larger percentage of their system level APIs (by asking, or court order) than you could from Apple.

Re:How is a Mac open? (4, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300262)

It's not just Unix-parts that are open sourced by Apple. There's a lot more [apple.com] .

Re:How is a Mac open? (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300468)

The fact that it is built on Unix doesn't matter so much when pretty much all
of the relevant bits that Valve might be interested in are proprietary and
Apple only.

Re:How is a Mac open? (4, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300090)

Open like a Mac? What does that mean? Its not like Apple is anymore open than MS is

Actually, Apple is a lot [apple.com] more open than MS is.

Well... (1, Insightful)

andrewme (1562981) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299716)

With Linux, of course, you don't have to pay anything, really, and the tools are free. But: To be fair, the developer tools on the Mac are free, unlike Microsoft's developer tools; the "native" language (Objective-C and the Cocoa frameworks) are usable by anybody who wants to learn (and even those who don't), provided that they're using a Mac (which still constitutes open, in the Mac ecosystem). The iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch, by comparison, also of course from Apple, is an entirely closed ecosystem. Just trying point out perhaps how Valve's person might be seeing it.

Re:Well... (5, Informative)

EvanED (569694) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299782)

To be fair, the developer tools on the Mac are free, unlike Microsoft's developer tools...

The Express Editions of Visual Studio are pretty darn usable; they're free. While what you said is not technically incorrect, it's also not being entirely honest IMO.

Re:Well... (4, Insightful)

Kwami (1104073) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300414)

Unless you want to compile native 64-bit binaries. In that case, Visual Studio Express Edition won't be sufficient.

Re:Well... (1)

Ziekheid (1427027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299790)

Unlike Microsoft's developer tools? You might want to check that again, things have changed.

Re:Well... (1)

andrewme (1562981) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299876)

Well, I'll be jiggered. I was not aware of that. How new are the Express Editions? While I stand corrected, my posture has not entirely improved: my original point remains about Apple's tools. Looks as though it was "redundant," though.

Not necessarily ironic (5, Insightful)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299718)

C'mon. It may be a legitimate comparison on the continuum of platform comparision.

"Sony, you've made the PS3 so closed and restrictive that you make the Mac look like Richard Stallman's promised land."

Re:Not necessarily ironic (4, Informative)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299806)

That and the Mac is pretty open. Darwin is open, and it's not restricted like an iPod/iPad or such. It's more open in many ways than Windows, though closed in some others (locked to apple hardware).

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299930)

It's more open in many ways than Windows, though closed in some others (locked to apple hardware).

It's a bit better than this heap of flaming dung... well except for the parts that are worse.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (2, Insightful)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299994)

It's open in many more ways than that... e.g. Apple wrote a BSD'd compiler for C like languages (clang) which for C and objective-c beats the pants of gcc in almost every way, and is getting *damn close* on the C++ front.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300038)

If OS X is open source, how come nobody's made some modifications to not check for Apple's BIOS, and then recompiled it to run on an IBM PC Clone?

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1)

bertoelcon (1557907) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300100)

Open Source is different than open.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300102)

Isn't that what the OSx86 project is doing? Also, part of it might be that Apple doesn't use a BIOS, they use Intel's EFI.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (2, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300140)

Because OS X isn't open source. Darwin is though and it runs fine on any IBM PC clone.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1)

jdigriz (676802) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300186)

Because Apple doesn't use BIOS. Apple uses EFI.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (2, Informative)

AresTheImpaler (570208) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300340)

If OS X is open source

Not "if," OSX has a lot of open source in it. You can download the kernel (named Darwin) and some utilities from their open source website [apple.com] . Another good web page with Apple's open source software information is http://www.apple.com/opensource/ [apple.com] . There you can see what project is being used by the different Apple applications or utilities.

how come nobody's made some modifications to not check for Apple's BIOS

Mac's do not use BIOS, they use EFI [wikipedia.org] .

and then recompiled it to run on an IBM PC Clone?

There are several websites out there with info and utilities to get OS X running on almost any PC out there (drivers can be a hassle tho). Apple has not done much to stop them, except of course of Psystar that was actually trying to run a business around cloning Macs. Try this one, I think it should send you in the right direction http://www.osx86project.org/ [osx86project.org]

Re:Not necessarily ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300412)

For now, i forsee the mac platform taking after the i platform sometime in the future, locked down apps, can only be obtained though the app store. Its coming, i guarantee it

Re:Not necessarily ironic (1)

Stan Vassilev (939229) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299978)

C'mon. It may be a legitimate comparison on the continuum of platform comparision.
"Sony, you've made the PS3 so closed and restrictive that you make the Mac look like Richard Stallman's promised land."

And Mac's also known to be mocked for its lack of games over the course of the last, well, 26 years, unlike Apple's closed iPlatforms, which are chock full of games only few years, even months from their introduction, including titles from big companies like EA.

It's just a really crappy comparison, don't try to rationalize it.

I doubt Gabe really thinks Sony's management would open up the PS3. Just venting hidden frustrations and a poor marketing shot at their Mac Steam port.

Re:Not necessarily ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300290)

Oh look, another episode of I Don't Understand What an Analogy Is.

I think I've seen this episode before...

Why listen to him? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299720)

Crap like this is why I gave up all hope of Valve competing against id Software in the terms tech. Gabe Newell is not a tech guy.

Gentle as an Elephant. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299764)

When you're soft as butter, tough as cheese sounds pretty tough. When you're as closed as sony, open as a mac sounds pretty open.

Like a Mac. A Big Mac? (2, Insightful)

zardozap (1812430) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299792)

Geez, Newell needs to stop hitting the burgers. Who has a neck like that? Seriously dude.

Re:Like a Mac. A Big Mac? (0, Troll)

ArundelCastle (1581543) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300146)

Who has a neck like that? Seriously dude.

Someone that makes a lot more money than you. I'm just guessing.

Complete the sequence of bad juxtapositions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299812)

Maybe Gabe Newell should make like a tree, and get out of here! Wait, it wasn't like that...

His assesment is accurate... (2, Insightful)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299840)

OSX is the most open operating system Steam currently delivers software for. OSX is the most open of the operating systems with a measurable desktop market share. OSX is the most open platform that runs Microsoft Windows. I could make up about 100 other items. The most important item however is this:

OSX is the most open platform any commercial software companies are writing consumer applications for.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299894)

There is commercial software on linux, for consumers even. I played native Quake 4 last night.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (2, Informative)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299976)

Really, where did you buy it? How much did it cost.. Choosing to do a free release of an old game on alternate platform as an experiment is not quite the same thing...It would be like if Steam had only ported portal to OSX and gave it away. Actually know, it does not even quite reach that level.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (2, Interesting)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300070)

In all fairness, a Linux client of Steam is on its way.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (0, Troll)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300160)

I bought it in the store, costs the same as every other version. Had to grab the binary from ID's site though.

This was not free you little dummy, I paid full fucking price for it. Deal with it your wrong. OSX might have more commercial software, but it is not the most open OS with commercial consumer software.

Here is another list of similar consumer software I bought for linux:
Doom 3
Vmware Workstation
Nero
UT2004
Postal 2 (will soon be getting Postal 3)

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300230)

I bought it in the store, costs the same as every other version. Had to grab the binary from ID's site though.

So the store doesn't sell a Linux version of the game. You bought a Windows version and used the resource files on the disc in combination with a Linux binary that wasn't on the disc you bought.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300264)

Indeed, for 1 game I did do that. You probably downloaded patches for you version too.

I still bought a game and use it on linux natively. The fact that the box only contained the resources and license changes nothing.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300346)

If that makes this one not count, then feel free to go down the list a little.

You can go buy vmware workstation for linux right now.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300350)

Does that matter? The Linux binaries are made by the same company, not by any third-party. Besides, there's plenty of content nowadays you get by downloading - free DLCs, new maps, etc. Aren't they part of the game?

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

Bobfrankly1 (1043848) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300464)

OSX is the most open platform any commercial software companies are writing consumer applications for.

Choosing to do a free release of an old game on alternate platform as an experiment is not quite the same thing

How about a new release of new software on an alternate platform AND providing support with it. From Microsoft no less. [microsoft.com] Too free for you? How about Sybase? They sell linux versions of thier database management software for linux on PPC and x86 platforms.

How about VMware? They sell virtualization solutions for...you guessed it, linux! Oh, and that brings us to another of your "points":

OSX is the most open platform that runs Microsoft Windows.

WRONG. Either you're running windows in a virtual app, or you're not running OSX. OSX itself does not run windows.
Maybe...and this might be a difficult concept for you, but maybe you should think before submitting comments. That preview button gives you a change to re-read. Use it.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (0, Flamebait)

unix1 (1667411) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300040)

OSX is the most open platform that runs Microsoft Windows. I could make up about 100 other items.

For arbitrary values of "open" and "runs."

How about these:

OSX is the most closed desktop OS platform Steam currently delivers software for. OSX is the most closed of the operating systems with a measurable desktop market share. OSX is the most closed platform that runs Microsoft Windows. I could make 100 other items too; including this one:

OSX is the most closed desktop platform any commercial software companies are writing consumer applications for.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (3, Interesting)

Ixokai (443555) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300292)

How do you get to this? How conceivably is OSX more closed then Windows?

Its extensively documented, the full suite of development tools needed to make software on it are provided for free by the vendor, and its *really* cheap to get beta/pre-releases to test against -- seriously, have you *seen* a MSDN license, vs the $99 Apple charges? (Yes, I'm aware of the Express editions MS has been offering)

Yes, the iPhone OS is closed as all hell. Mac != iPhone, even though they share a lot in common.

As a *platform*, the Mac is pretty open. Open as in there are very little barriers for entry for developers. Anyone can write software it, there's no licensing you need to get your software on it, all the tools are available to anyone, with everything documented well.

Windows, by comparison, is more open then iPhone OS, certainly... and of late its documentation is pretty good. But for the fully enabled toolchain and documentation set and access to beta-versions and everything is hundreds to thousands of dollars.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300056)

So open I can't install it (legally) on my hardware even though it can work on it. In other news, US laws are easy to read! They're in plain text!

Re:His assesment is accurate... (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300258)

OS X = Darwin + Aqua GUI+ other libraries. Darwin [wikipedia.org] is open source. Aqua is not. You can get Darwin and other open source projects like WebKit from Apple [apple.com] at no charge and install them on any computer that is within your abilities.

Re:His assesment is accurate... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300338)

OSX is the most open of the operating systems with a measurable desktop market share. OSX is the most open platform that runs Microsoft Windows. I could make up about 100 other items. The most important item however is this:

OSX is the most open platform any commercial software companies are writing consumer applications for.

Oh, Hi. I'm linux. Not to be rude or anything, but it looks like you kinda forgot me over here.

All those great MAC games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299844)

Yeah we are just stuck at our desks, playing all those great MAC titles.

Apple isn't really open source. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32299846)

Look at the iPhone. They want to lock developers in and make them code their way.

Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers.

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299888)

While the iPhone may run a derivative of OSX it is not a MAC....

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (3, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299896)

Look at the iPhone.

No, for a change, don't look at the iPhone. Look at what the man in the article is actually talking about: Mac OS X. Can you name one platform that is more open and runs commercial games?

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

sammyF70 (1154563) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300164)

Linux? Been playing The Penumbra Trilogy, World of Goo, Aquaria, Gish and Lugaru the last weeks .. and if I feel like it, I'll fire up wine and play some native windows games. Next question?

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300176)

Can you name one platform that is more open and runs commercial games?

Sure! Linux? BSD? Hell, even ReactOS?

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300460)

Commercial Games. You see the focus of the article is a guy who makes money selling games..(Selling , like people pay money for them!)

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (0, Flamebait)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300184)

Linux.

Here is a list of software I compiled for another mac dummy. This is the list of commercial software I bought in the past couple years for linux.

Quake 4
Doom 3
Vmware Workstation
Nero
UT2004
Postal 2 (will soon be getting Postal 3)

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300378)

Nero

Why, oh why?

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300444)

Workstation is free and the rest is pretty old. Which of those is a commercial product you paid money for again?

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300188)

Linux + Wine [winehq.org]

Re:Apple isn't really open source. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300342)

Linux?

360 (1)

mc moss (1163007) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299904)

Yet he has no trouble putting his games on the 360...

Re:360 (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32299988)

Those ports took almost no investment...

Re:360 (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300448)

Xbox 360 is more open than PLAYSTATION 3. Microsoft has the XNA Creators Club and Xbox Live Indie Games, a business model that is (coincidentally?) similar to Apple's later iPhone developer program and App Store. True, retail games and major-label download games aren't XNA, but does Sony have any counterpart to XNA?

Mac!=iPhone/iPad (5, Informative)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300136)

Judging by the sheer number of responses so far, many people here can't tell the different between iPhone/iPad and Mac. They are both made by Apple. Macs run OS X which is based on BSD. Mac OS X is composed of Darwin sub-system, Aqua GUI, and other libraries. Darwin is open source and is available under a BSD type license. Aqua is proprietary. Mac OS X runs on a lot of open source software such as BIND, bash, openSSH, etc. The Mac versions are available freely at http://www.opensource.apple.com/ [apple.com]

The iPhone/iPad uses a variant of OS X. It is not open source and the release of Apps is tightly controlled. Developers are free to release to their own devices but must abide by Apple guidelines if they want to publish in the Apple Store.

Valve is referring to Macs not iPhone/iPad.

Sony lost money on my PS3 since it sucks for dev (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300196)

I bought a PS3 with the intent to learn to program it. Even put on the version of Ubuntu for it. Then I found not only did the graphics access perform terribly (software framebuffer with no hardware acclerated rendering) but that was never going to change unless you paid US$10,000 and accepted their conditions of distribution. Double suck when despite Sony crowing about supporting Linux they actually never intended to make it truly open. Looked at XNA for Xbox360 but they had control over how you distributed your own work as well - so that was a non-starter.

After buying a MacBook Pro I also found that more open but Java updates were slow in coming (I mostly use JoGL OpenGL and Java2D since they're both portable between Linux, Mac, Windows, Solaris and I use all of these). So I gave my PS3 to my nephews - which means Sony loses money since they subsidized the cost of the PS3 but I bought only a few games for it (so they didn't recoup their subsidy). My main graphics development work is now being done on a PC running Ubuntu/Windows7. I not going to buy a PS4 when that comes out and probably won't buy another Mac.

Re:Sony lost money on my PS3 since it sucks for de (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300276)

I'm with you brother!

PS3 should be closed. (1)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300220)

Since they've decided not to allow other operating systems I think the PS3 should be closed, like an anchor.

I don't need to read the summary! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32300280)

Valve's Newell needs to tell us when FRICKIN' HALF LIFE TWO EPISODE THREE will be available - that's what he needs to do!

What (1)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300364)

Who paid this guy? (obvious question, my bad)
Good or bad, I won't judge it, but it's certainly not that open. No more than any other OS out there at least.

Not going to happen... (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300410)

Sony (SCEI) is paranoid about security. Everything technical about the PS3 is on a need-to-know basis.

From a marketing / developers point of view, I agree it would be nice to have something like XNA so more developers could write/port their games, but due to the above, that is not going to happen. By keeping the system closed to even authorized developers they are going after the assumption that they will keep the quality of games high. In contrast to the DS which has a ton of "shovelware" games.

Open (1)

God_TM (770659) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300450)

Hey Gabe,
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Cue insane laughter in three...two...one. (1)

Chas (5144) | more than 4 years ago | (#32300452)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Damn! That's some GOOD Joker Venom you have there Gabe!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>