D’oh, but a problem of reacquiring content builder skills for some n percentage of content builders is a non-trivial market clot.

Styles and techniques for fast, professional production are intimately physically tied to the hand-to-eye actions of the content builders using given tools. Habituation is an amazingly dull but real impediment to looking at Adobe and saying “Screw you and your Lickety Street Flash!”

The Apple bet is the money is all in the big publishing houses and they are willing to help retrain there. It is similar to bets made in early WYSIWYG that all the money was in education of DoD. It was a reasonable bet for the markets at that precise time but that environment shifted radically to smaller shops and independents.

I’m just an observer to this one, but IME, it’s never been a good idea to short the authors in any hardware-centric business that requires content. It’s like building the best newest finest club on the strip: for a season or so, all the best acts go there but then it’s a bidding war for the acts and someone else has built a bigger room.

Running up costs to be in either room turns the first room into a pay-to-play. It’s a very West Coast concept.

all will have to spend more time (what you really lost, Len)

It wasn’t that much. Vivaty had easy DD&G tools. I had content. It snapped together like legos. Vivaty’s demise is symptomatic of the larger issue for VR worlds of doing exactly what Apple does: lock-in as a business model constraint on consumers.

Raph, I agree that Google’s data collection and resale is scarcy. It is as scary as Facebook, but here you’re talking to someone who started ringing that bell back in the 1980s prior to the web being launched when we realized what building integrated open hypermedia on the Internet entailed for privacy. It’s always been bloody apparent where we were going or at least for those of us inside the security conscious firewalls of DoD contracting at the time. As much as I enjoy the openness, I knew what would be done with it. I realized then that whatever I did or said would be collected, sliced, diced and recast in whatever terms a determined party wanted to do with it, so I set my values accordingly.

It isn’t a philosophical stance; it’s a practical one.

I worry a heckuva lot more about the implications of having 1 per cent owning 90 per cent of an economy and the class war brewing out here, but that’s an entirely different discussion best held elsewhere.

I’d argue that Apple wants Apple to be paid and is happy to cut anyone else out of the loop and let the content creators price war themselves into the ground. Who cares as long as Steve gets his 30%, eh?

This move is pretty clearly an attack against Adobe and other tool / middleware creators, but more importantly is an attempt to lock developers in to iPhone.

It’s clearly in the best interest of developers for their apps to run everywhere — the wider the market they have the better the chance they’re going to make some money. It’s not in the best interest of Apple for apps to run anywhere but their platform.

Can’t blame the devs for what Apple is doing (unless your answer is to ask all devs to boycott Apple which won’t happen).

I was astounded by the vote-with-your-feet response to similar moves by devs in the past. With Apple legislating languages and toolkits, any path of least resistence can be a voting booth. It might not be soon or as loud as the protests I’m reading elsewhere, but it can happen. What Apple will do is pursue the so-called thought leaders, make them feel good about themselves, and expect the rest to follow. So far the whole iPad launch has been a classic and lazy Apple operation based on past successes. There is far more resistance to it than I thought possible. They may have stumbled. The culture needs a New Evil Empire and it looked like it was going to be Google. Apple may have inadvertently sailed into the Google’s wind shadow and by adding this language debacle to the iPad launch misstep, accelerated that choice to their own detriment.

So now it’s shiny execution vs dogged openness.

It went well, Cube. I didn’t lose a dime or any of my own content. I’m losing a room given to me for free to use to display my songs and YouTube videos plus photos that belong to other people. They have good technology and a lousy business plan. They have a great editor but did little to support the content-generating users. Like Apple, they feared looking bad so they choked the chicken. They had a prime roost but never actually spend time collecting the eggs.

Without open formats, user-generated content is a work-for-nothing. As Tony points out on the X3D list, a JS programmer could screen scrape the content. Realistically, it isn’t worth the trouble because the rooms would not be that hard to duplicate. I used Jing to video sample the room which for documentation is fine.

As for Apple’s ethics, that’s been an oxymoron from Apple 1 forward.

len
howed that vivaty scene of yours go? not so much eh?

Its about licenses and copyright law.. len. not about another failed “open” file format. Its about ethics in business, not technoolgy.

all my content built or rededited in SL is backed up as xml- and its already all on a 25.00 buck a month server at Reaction Grid. which works just like any ISp for html content…

btw- Apple wont die- it just kills its children. its nothign new.-read.

http://www.fanboy.com/2010/04/is-apple-working-on-a-flash-killer.html

they own nothing of my work. Thye just rent me space on a server and maintain a network.

I’m tired of predicting the imminent demise of Apple. It’s been ignoring the fact that it’s doomed for what, thirty years now? I’m chalking it up to some quantum quirk of improbability.

Linden Labs is screwing the content makers, Cube? Wow. News at 11.

Virtual world customers are THE dumbest market in the business today.

Eolirin and other robot parrots.

its not about “technical” cants… its that LL now has taken it upon itself to, via a changed after the fact TOS, offer a LICENSE to copy and RESELL COMMERCIALLY images within its servers to any logged in user. And offer only a pay for protection(limited scheme based on renting servers space)method that dosnt allow the IP owner to enforce their rights, but another party without those rights.

i doubt either of you have even read the new or old TOS

copying has been around since the first images…laws are created for a reason. laws are now ignored by many who think “technology” and “PR” makes the laws- not apply to them – good luck with that pov.

Howed that investment in Napster and Veoh go?;)

No! No, Apple is banning FLESH.

Enemy–lol WHO OPEN SOURCED the Client..lol

Eolirin has already pointed out the flaw in your reasoning. When online-world people say that the client is in the hands of the enemy, they are talking about you. Go ahead and bless one version of the viewer, which DRMs up visual content as much as you could possibly desire, and condemn all the others as untrustworthy. Do you have a plan for preventing those untrusted viewers accessing Second Life?

Well, first off, you don’t, because you can’t prevent it.

But let’s imagine you did have such a plan, and now all communication to the SL servers can only be originated from a trusted viewer. Do you have a plan for preventing the computer the viewer is running on from running a proxy, packet sniffer, or memory inspector that intercepts the data the viewer sees, so that it can capture visual data before it even gets to the trusted viewer?

Well, second off, you don’t, because you can’t prevent that either.

But let’s imagine you did have such a plan, and now you know that the computer the viewer is running on is completely trustworthy and it is running a completely trustworthy viewer. Do you have a plan for preventing that computer from being on the other side of a router that intercepts all the traffic that goes through it and, completely undetectably by the trust mechanisms you’ve put in place, captures all of the user’s interaction with Second Life for later decoding?

Well, third off, you don’t. And we can do this dance for as many steps as you can imagine might work.

The client is in the hands of the enemy. Always has been.

“There are a TON of very small developers (eg, that 13 year old who released an app store game) who do very well using the obj-c/cocoatouch ecosystem.”

Apropos the 13-year-old developer: Isn’t it against the terms of Apple’s ADC for people under the age of 18 to join the program? Minors can’t agree to Apple’s NDA, which leads me to wonder how long until said developer is kicked off the program for being underage.

This is why I don’t like Apple.

“The client is in the hands of the enemy. Linden Labs have apparently decided to acknowledge that fact.”

Enemy–lol WHO OPEN SOURCED the Client..lol
This is always about money value and control.

All LL has done is attempt to protect themselves further for a sell off and redirection of business.

To the many who “paid” them and built their “value”- FU.

nothing new, except the delusion that USERS GEN meant Free value.

wont end up that way.. never does.. ask ye old south.:)

Linden has now turned SL into a “open free market on visual IP copying”

The client is in the hands of the enemy. Linden Labs have apparently decided to acknowledge that fact.

no surprise.

game developers/ 3dmedia folks left APPLE dev over a decade ago for similar treatment.

a generation without any experience or memory ( too brainswashed by wikis and bloggers ) has given Apple confidence to work this way again.
Even Adobe is guilty of content tie-up in on their ill fated “Web service apps” from 2008.- they ended up changing their TOS.

Linden has now turned SL into a “open free market on visual IP copying” and is feeling the hate from visual creatives “forced” into a new TOS..-so far. And EFF endorses such “revaluation” of others property. Shame on them.

Photogs and Illustrators have just filed suit against Google…- good for them.

None of these companies want anything but monopolies over content creation and distribution.

So much for any “new” media BS they newsspeak.;)

Queue FTC complaint. I expect the FTC to jump in on this one pretty heavily. If Microsoft did something like this, it would face DoJ and EU sanctions left and right.

Edwin, JavaScript is exempt from this.

Wilhelm, Middleware does not use Flash-runtime, and the resource hog thing is moot on an iPhone that doesn’t allow background tasks, and is only really true when flash can’t access hardware acceleration, which is Apple’s call.

I thought Edwin was being over-dramatic with his “Stockholm syndrome” comment, but the post below makes me less sure.

Plenty of people do want Flash-based apps. Apple has every right to lock down their store, but it’s bad for consumers and bad for developers. Apple is living off of marketing, not superior products. They are the new Microsoft.

Apple is declaring war on all Python, Ruby, JavaScript, Java, C#, Lua as well as Flash ActionScript developers and any other cool language you can think of that’s not Objective C.
No problem?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome