URU Live on iPhone

varian · **Joined:** Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:29 am **Posts:** 67

I'm going to say that Apple Inc's legal team didn't perform their due diligence in advance of the eve of Steve's presentation at CES. No wonder he mentioned he didn't get any sleep the night before - he was sweating an inevitable lawsuit.

killmoms · **Posted:** Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:45 am

Interesting trivia: lead lawyer for Cisco on this case is also a lead lawyer for Apple.

Can you say: settlement?

I will be paying Verizon $175 to stuff their expletive, locked, hacked down RAZR straight up their collective tushie, and signing up with Cingular for the first gen iPhone. The UI is that good.

tkwiggins · **Joined:** Tue May 09, 2006 8:26 pm **Posts:** 557

killmoms wrote:

Interesting trivia: lead lawyer for Cisco on this case is also a lead lawyer for Apple.

Can you say: settlement?

I will be paying Verizon $175 to stuff their expletive, locked, hacked down RAZR straight up their collective tushie, and signing up with Cingular for the first gen iPhone. The UI is that good.

Can you say: bad avvie name?
Can you say: bad language?
Can you say: reported?

chucker · **Posted:** Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:16 am

If you're gonna have a general discussion about the iPhone, it ought to be in Off-Topic, and a little more lightened up.

This thread is not about the merits, legalities and trivia of the iPhone, but about porting Uru Live to it. That, however, is an extremely unlikely endeavour, and currently completely impossible:

1) the specs of the device aren't revealed – not the CPU, not the GPU, not virtually anything else, and:
2) there is no SDK, and it currently looks, sadly, like there won't be one. That would require cracking the firmware for any serious development, and that seriously doesn't sound like something Cyan, let alone GameTap, would care to have anything to do with.

varian · **Joined:** Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:29 am **Posts:** 67

Quote:

If you're gonna have a general discussion about the iPhone, it ought to be in Off-Topic, and a little more lightened up. This thread is not about the merits, legalities and trivia of the iPhone, but about porting Uru Live to it.

I agree with the lighten up part, if you're pointing out a particular post above - the applicability to this particular forum is really within the realm of forum moderation at this point, which by page two would been just cause to move this topic to Off-Topic.

To reitterate a previous post, there are no provisions for third-party apps on the (apple)iPhone:

Quote:

“We define everything that is on the phone,” he said. “You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore. These are more like iPods than they are like computers.”

The iPhone, he insisted, would not look like the rest of the wireless industry.

“These are devices that need to work, and you can’t do that if you load any software on them,” he said. “That doesn’t mean there’s not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn’t mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment.”

(From here).

I haved a hard time believing that Cyan would seriously consider licensing Myst Live for a less than 1% cell phone marketspace hardware platform - there's no margin!

CPU? Intel has already stated it's not their processor. Most likely this is due to the fact the power drain would eliminate that "almost 5 hours talk time" performance spec (which I'm really interested in seeing if that's close to being true). The folks at Ars Technica proposed the idea it's a Samsung processor, which would make sense given that they, TI, and a few others offer mobile processor chipset solutions with low power consumption for embedded applications.

exial · **Posted:** Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:59 pm

So did anyone else spot that when this thread was started it was a JOKE?

just thought I would ask...

varian · **Joined:** Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:29 am **Posts:** 67

It was still topical, and if you didn't happen to know, something like what was originally proposed actually has been implemented (mulituser gaming on a mobile device). For instance, I can run Mystand Riven on my PocketPC Smartphone. It wasn't too much of a leap to take advantage of a Smartphone's packet data service capability along with one of many 3-D software emulation libraries for handhelds that are available out there. It would have been an interesting possibility if the hardware platform wasn't as locked down as it is, with a potentially odd-ball processor on-board.

maztec · **Joined:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 1:05 am **Posts:** 393

chucker wrote:

If you're gonna have a general discussion about the iPhone, it ought to be in Off-Topic, and a little more lightened up.

This thread is not about the merits, legalities and trivia of the iPhone, but about porting Uru Live to it. That, however, is an extremely unlikely endeavour, and currently completely impossible:

1) the specs of the device aren't revealed – not the CPU, not the GPU, not virtually anything else, and:
2) there is no SDK, and it currently looks, sadly, like there won't be one. That would require cracking the firmware for any serious development, and that seriously doesn't sound like something Cyan, let alone GameTap, would care to have anything to do with.

Translation: "Since I have nothing to input, other than this solution is unlikely or impossible, there should be no further discussion in this thread."

Response: "STEAKBODY!"

chucker · **Posted:** Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:41 pm

varian wrote:

I haved a hard time believing that Cyan would seriously consider licensing Myst Live for a less than 1% cell phone marketspace hardware platform - there's no margin!

1% of the cellphone market, but if you were to categorize the iPhone as a smartphone, that's still 20% of the smartphone market.

Not that I disagree that it's a pointless venture; just saying.

varian · **Joined:** Sat Nov 11, 2006 1:29 am **Posts:** 67

Well really less than 1% of the marketspace. Steve wants at least 1%, the analysts would be surprised if he gets something in the double tenths of a percent.

I think the thing worth mentioning here is that adding a multi-user gaming app to that phone is technically feasible if and only if the Apple Inc. business model and marketing engine allows for it.

Ed Oscuro · **Posted:** Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:15 am

maztec wrote:

They must have thrown something last-minute nasty into it to get Apple to refuse it, or someone had something wrong somewhere. My vote is they saw how immensely popular the iPhone was going to be and decided they wanted more money. Somewhere I smell breach of contract.

Oh the ironing!

Apple has been suing everybody, everywhere, for using i(whatever) trademarks. Basically, any word with 'i' in front of it, they want as a trademark, and they'll sue you for it. Read about it in a recent intellectual property magazine. Crazy.

chucker · **Posted:** Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:39 am

Ed Oscuro wrote:

maztec wrote:

They must have thrown something last-minute nasty into it to get Apple to refuse it, or someone had something wrong somewhere. My vote is they saw how immensely popular the iPhone was going to be and decided they wanted more money. Somewhere I smell breach of contract.

Oh the ironing!

Apple has been suing everybody, everywhere, for using i(whatever) trademarks. Basically, any word with 'i' in front of it, they want as a trademark, and they'll sue you for it. Read about it in a recent intellectual property magazine. Crazy.

That is one heck of a gross exaggeration.

JW · **Posted:** Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:42 am

You mean Irony?

Actually as far as I know Apple hasn't been going after people with the "i" prefix on their product, only people with "pod" in their product name.

killmoms · **Posted:** Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:47 am

tkwiggins wrote:

Can you say: bad avvie name?
Can you say: bad language?
Can you say: reported?

Can you say: prude?

Just so you know, killmoms is my username for a very specific reason, which has nothing to do with killing or mothers. You can read about it here. Way to make an assumption though. You're exactly the sort of person my username is supposed to identify—looks like it worked.

Chill out.

Ed Oscuro · **Posted:** Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:34 am

chucker wrote:

Ed Oscuro wrote:

maztec wrote:

They must have thrown something last-minute nasty into it to get Apple to refuse it, or someone had something wrong somewhere. My vote is they saw how immensely popular the iPhone was going to be and decided they wanted more money. Somewhere I smell breach of contract.

Oh the ironing!

Apple has been suing everybody, everywhere, for using i(whatever) trademarks. Basically, any word with 'i' in front of it, they want as a trademark, and they'll sue you for it. Read about it in a recent intellectual property magazine. Crazy.

That is one heck of a gross exaggeration.

Oh, I misspoke. It wasn't "i," it was Pod. A big difference (here, a 1/17576 chance you'll hit the trifecta if you were selecting three letters at random - nevermind that Pod is an English word, and generic too - as opposed to being restricted from using one of 26 letters at the beginning of your mark otherwise)

Source of that (I read it in the ABA Journal first, but whatever.)

Apologies that this wasn't directly relevant to the conversation at hand.

URU Live on iPhone

Who is online