Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses Entertainment Games

Apple Console Rumour Resurfaces 201

1up has commentary on speculation from an industry analyst, which GamesIndustry.biz has published. Prudential analyst Jesse Tortora gesticulates wildly in the direction of renewed interest by Apple in the games market. From the GI.biz article: "We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store ... The game console device could be morphed out of some combination of the MacMini and iTV, while the handheld player could be developed as an enhancement for a future version of the widescreen iPod."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Console Rumour Resurfaces

Comments Filter:
  • by TheWoozle ( 984500 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @07:52PM (#17139136)
    The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.
  • by lpcustom ( 579886 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @08:14PM (#17139450)
    I think they just noticed how much the PS3s were going for on Ebay before they were release and thought "you mean we can get away with selling one for that". If they did release a game console:
    a.) it'd only play the games it wants to play, when it wants to play them
    b.) the retail price will match the PS3 pre-release ebay price. c.) no one will be lined up to get one
  • by Mike Blakemore ( 999177 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @08:21PM (#17139554) Homepage
    I agree, Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.

    As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware
    (unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market).
    There would have to be some major changes there.

    "We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store," - Yeah, cell phone quality video games bring forth a new age of gamming only made possible by Apple.

    And, consider the fact that most Mac users are old people [slashdot.org], any console they release will tank.

    They are using Intel chips now, so it is kind of feasible... Ok, maybe not.

  • by silentounce ( 1004459 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @08:42PM (#17139782) Homepage
    "As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware (unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market)."

    Last I checked, Sony and Microsoft were making hardware, too. The profits do come from the games. The game developers receive those profits and the hardware developers get a large cut. How many games do you see out there that are developed solely by the hardware manufacturer?

    Apple has a brand, a very popular one right now. If they can tie their gaming platform to the iPod it will definitely get their foot in the door. If Apple enters gaming it most likely won't be to compete head on with the 360 or PS3, at least to start. As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea. And although a lot of us do not like to admit it. Apple has been an incredible innovator in the past few years and their products are highly desired in the areas that they focus on. I guarantee that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have already considered Apple in their gaming business strategies.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @08:47PM (#17139842)
    Now that's what I call Big Pimpin'

    Do you get cash moeny for all that linking?
  • Re:don't forget (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @09:04PM (#17140008)
    That might be a welcome change from the 10+ buttons, plus joysticks, plus DPad that some of the current consoles have.
  • by Esc7 ( 996317 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @09:06PM (#17140018)
    There's a big problem that is brought up in the article: Console makers sell hardware at a loss. Yes, yes I know about the Wii and how it makes a "profit" but I doubt that is Nintendo's primary source of profit. It has been and always been the games. With Apple notorious for selling overvalued hardware in shiny plastic, this business model is something foreign to them. And then ponder this next point. So what GAMES is this iConsole going to have? If it just has ports of everything else no one in their right mind is going to buy it. It needs a killer app. Good luck Apple finding a developer to create a "must have game" on a new, possibly disastrous platform, for something you know absolutely nothing about. I detest companies trying to do everything for everyone. Do something and do it well dammit.
  • by tji ( 74570 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @09:15PM (#17140084)
    I think they're smarter than that. They wouldn't go after an entrenched market, where they have no particular skillset advantage, especially one that you need to throw tons of money at to get a foothold. Gaming has been done, by many more qualified competitors.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they offered a few simple games, for the casual gamer, on a device like the iTV. Similar to what they do for the iPod. But, I wouldn't call that going after the gaming market, any more than I would call the iPod a GameBoy/PSP competitor.
  • by poopdeville ( 841677 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @09:36PM (#17140302)

    As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea.

    This is certainly true, and your observation almost touches upon an interesting parallel.

    In some respects, Nintendo is the Apple of the console world. They produce quality hardware in an attractive package. They rely on interesting, well integrated features to sell their hardware. The Wii even looks like a MacMini on its side.

    I wouldn't suggest that Apple couldn't do as good a job as Nintendo. But is there really room for both in the market? Especially when on considers Nintendo's (and presumably Apple's) target audience? If Apple made a compelling feature, Nintendo would be forced to retaliate with another. Ideas are a scarce resource, and I doubt Nintendo or Apple has a large enough cache of them to avoid lame gimmicks. Kids might be fond of gimmicks, but grown ups usually aren't.

    In the end, this would erode both brands.

  • by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @09:58PM (#17140474) Homepage

    Despite what you may have read in the popular press, the Xbox isn't just a modified PC running Windows.

    You're right, it's not a modified PC running Windows. It's a PC running a modified version of Windows.

    If Apple were to try this themselves, they'd need to throw out most of OS X and drop back to just running the Darwin kernel. They'd need to pick a GPU and stick with it for a few years, and give the developers complete access to it's internals.

    Oh, gosh, there's no way Apple could do that.

  • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @10:07PM (#17140560)

    After the cell processor was more or less confirmed to win the battle for the console, but before Apple announced the switch to Intel this move seemed like a no-brainer. A virtual Nintendo console built into every mac would have been a real win. Now, however, the development for both the Wii and the Mac virtual console might be too hard. If Apple, Nintendo, and Sony were willing to shake hands in order to deliver a combined kick to Microsoft's groin they could to it as follows: build a single development platform on top of OpenGL and similar technologies that allow a game developer to target the Wii, Mac, Linux, Windows, and PS3 with minimal effort. Promote it like hell and hand it out to every college student everywhere. All the players are already behind OpenGL in one way or another. This would have a similar, but more widespread effect and threaten some of MS's lock-in with respect to their crown jewels (Windows). But then I've always been one of those "a strong offense..." types.

  • Re:don't forget (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @10:08PM (#17140572)
    I'm sure you typed that on a 10-key keyboard...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 06, 2006 @10:25PM (#17140688)
    I agree that it would be a wise move. With such a deal, Nintendo could perhaps get access to Apple's iTunes and then the Wii becomes a very solid media distribution system, make it even interface with iPods with an adapter or something.

    Lots to gain, almost nothing to lose from Nintendo's view.
    Where as Apple would have lots to gain, almost nothing to lose; and have to do very little work on their end, as the existing system is already there.
  • by despisethesun ( 880261 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @12:12AM (#17141522)
    Of course you can call the NeoGeo successful. It made SNK loads of money and had new games made for it for well over a decade. Unfortunately, SNK couldn't follow up its success and with the death of the old-school arcade, there wasn't a whole lot of new money to be made from the system.

    The Turbografx 16 was also hugely successful, just not in the American or European markets. In Japan, where it was known as the PC Engine, it was more popular than the Sega Mega Drive (aka Genesis) and was a legitimate competitor to both the NES and the SNES. Again, though, NEC and Hudson couldn't follow up on their success and exited the market. By your logic, the Genesis was a huge failure because Sega no longer makes consoles.
  • by Mattintosh ( 758112 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @12:27AM (#17141630)
    By your logic, the Genesis was a huge failure because Sega no longer makes consoles.

    No, by his logic, the Dreamcast was a failure, whereas the Saturn was a success. That's the "absurd" point you were aiming for.
  • by thermal_7 ( 929308 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @01:33AM (#17142124)
    So why not invest a couple of extra bucks and partner up with Nintendo so their living room device plays Gamecube and Revolution games?

    For the same reason that Nintendo don't release Nintendo franchise games to non-Nintendo consoles. Exclusivity drives people to buy Nintendo consoles, which they actually make money off as well as the games. In addition they also lose brand recognition as the Nintendo console is no longer seen as a magical wonderful box but as something easily emulated. And lastly, what happens if Apple take all the Nintendo consoles sales? They are suddenly essentially relegated to a software vendor despite all their investments in producing and marketing a console.

  • by truespin ( 807849 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @07:59AM (#17144104)
    "Which console manufacturer makes a console that not only can play AAC, can rip CD's into it? Sony."
    You do know AAC is not an Apple proprietry format? The iTunes Store uses AAC protected with their FairPlay DRM (creating a .m4p file). Sony does not (nor does anyone else) make hardware or software that will play iTunes Store files because Apple don't license out FairPlay.

    "Which console manufacture makes consoles and portables that can play iPod video content? Sony"
    You do know h264 is not an Apple proprietry format? The iTunes Store movies/videos are saved as h264 files and are once again protected with Fairplay and won't play on any other hardware than your iPods and on authorised machines running iTunes.

    "Which console manufacture makes a portable device that can play AAC? Sony"
    See my first point.

    "Which console manufacturer sucks at marketing which is why they haven't trounced everyone else with their technologically superior products? Sony."
    So now you're implying Apple sucks at marketing!?
    Or are you trying to say Sony has failed to trounce MS/Nintendo because of marketing and not the MASSIVE price tag of the PS3 and MASSIVE shortages of hardware? Let us not forget the PSX was inferior to the N64 but Sony certainly won that round. the PS2 was technologically inferior to the xbox and gamecube but again Sony definitely won that round too. Sony didn't win those rounds by technologically superior hardware.
  • by somersault ( 912633 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @09:47AM (#17144872) Homepage Journal

    I agree, Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.


    Just as Microsoft and Sony weren't really on the list when you think of gaming until they brought out their own consoles, and Apple weren't the first thing you thought of when you thought mp3 players a decade ago..
  • by silentounce ( 1004459 ) on Thursday December 07, 2006 @10:58AM (#17145782) Homepage
    Who dictates that law?
     
    I suppose Sega is supposed to be a gaming hardware company then, too. And Sony is a Betamax manufacturer. And what the hell does IBM think they are doing? They are a punch card manufacturing company for God's sake!

    A company that is just a ______ company is sure to die eventually, especially if they are not on the top of their market. Every company needs to find its segment of the market. Every company needs to adapt to survive. Apple may have been a "computer" company, but now they are evolving into something else. Would you rather they stagnate and die? I welcome any additions to the gaming world. Even if they don't fair well, the competition they provide will spur innovation in their competitors.

"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein

Working...