Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hey all - just published a detailed article about this on my blog, as a preparatory piece to preparing a proposal to GW about how they could open up their codexes to anyone who had access to a web browser.

Here's the article:
http://www.tetsugaku.info/why-havent-games-workshop-published-their-digital-codexes-on-android-as-well-as-iosipad/

And here's an excerpt:

A great many reasons. I grew tired of explaining them to fanboys on the internet so I’ll explain the problems here. Your comments are more than welcome, as is your feedback on my proposed solution.

1) Market Share.
The tablet market is split 60%/40% – IOS / Android according to the latest figures I could track down. This means that the largest single chunk, is resoundingly in Apples garden.

2) Fragmentation
Apple tablets are a single system. They all have the same size screen, one of two resolutions and predictable hardware. Android devices do not have *any* of these benefits as you can see in these info graphics. Designign for them is much, much harder as you have to account for so many more variables.

I'd really appreciate your comments on the article as everything I can get from real gamers (you lot) helps me out with my user research.

Cheers

Most likely becase of one of Android's biggest advantages for its customers:

piracy.

Not going to elaborate further on the issue, but to me, it's the main reason.

It is easier to jailbreak an Iphone/pad then to root a android imo.

That article is on point. If you have never developed for androids, you will never understand what utter garbage technology they are and the drastic moneypit app developers engage in when they decide to develop for all the 'flavours' of android.

The proprietary differences between NOOK and androids is enough to make someone want to never support androids. The old devices unable to upgrade but are still being sold as new are even worse... it is like having to make websites support IE7.


I do like the solution, as unfeasible as it is... I would gladly pay a subscription fee for access to a web-based army builder and rules access. They could even have you register units and stuff online. Too bad that is a huge technology investment for almost minimal gain due to the industry they are in, but it is a neat concept.

What's not to understand. A secure site can be downloaded to a hard drive and then viewed and distributed locally without any payments. There are solutions to that, but they only prevent you from copy-pasting the text; you can still use network diagnostics software to intercept and save the content downloaded to your browser. On iOS, you can't steal the content without jailbreak.

hmm.. i think there are several reasons:

1. Apple has some of the best tools ... no.. the best developer kits in the world for apps. this allowed GW to make the codex's not just a pdf file but they have some interaction features to..

2. Apple i think gives the developer a lot more control over the apps, in terms of monitoring it and where it sells how it sells all the developer control stuff.

3. could come down to somthing more simple like GW didnt want to invest in creating two development teams fir two seperate apps.. you cant just port these apps like you can video games they are all very unique file types.

Sigvatr wrote:Most likely becase of one of Android's biggest advantages for its customers:

piracy.

Not going to elaborate further on the issue, but to me, it's the main reason.

i dont think GW thought about that at all considering i can go on my ipad right now, google jail break ipad, take myself to the first website and let the website crack my ipad in about 20 mintues i dont even have to do anything. i then get cydia and from cydia i can download an app store where every app is free. doing this is illegal however even though it is untraceable... also jailbreaking iphone or ipad or any apple device is the best thing in the world because you can always always always always always always plug it into itunes and restore it even if you hack it to the point of the whole phone crashing and dying! and it will fix it 100 percent or just hold down sleep 10 seconds then home for 5 then release sleep keep holding home YOU CANNOT EVER break your iphone or ipad by jailbreaking it is impossible

1. Apple has some of the best tools ... no.. the best developer kits in the world for apps.

Certainly not. And I do use these professionally.

2. Apple i think gives the developer a lot more control over the apps, in terms of monitoring it and where it sells how it sells all the developer control stuff.

In fact, appstore is extremely limiting for developers, and iOS-targeted apps can only be distributed via appstore, unlike android apps or any other software for that matter.

YOU CANNOT EVER break your iphone or ipad by jailbreaking it is impossible

Oh but you can. It was a very possible situation when iPhones just came out, now jailbreaking is much more reliable, but still not 100%.

nkelsch wrote:That article is on point. If you have never developed for androids, you will never understand what utter garbage technology they are and the drastic moneypit app developers engage in when they decide to develop for all the 'flavours' of android.

The proprietary differences between NOOK and androids is enough to make someone want to never support androids. The old devices unable to upgrade but are still being sold as new are even worse... it is like having to make websites support IE7.

Yeah. I've spent some time looking into doing Android development. It's not very encouraging, to say the least. I've never done any work on the iPhone side, so I have no point of reference, but I can handle C.

I do like the solution, as unfeasible as it is... I would gladly pay a subscription fee for access to a web-based army builder and rules access. They could even have you register units and stuff online. Too bad that is a huge technology investment for almost minimal gain due to the industry they are in, but it is a neat concept.

It's an idea, but for something as complex as list building I don't think it would be viable.

Frankly, I think the reason is simple: GW has always been myopic concerning technology. I kind of hope that they eventually push a crossplatform version of their documents, otherwise they'll always be excluding me, at a minimum, from their market.

Because android hardware, software and format capabilities are ludicrously fragmented.



Because developing for the android marketplace is a difficult to monetize hell and Ebooks can't really do Freemium.

I can't help but be at least a little skeptical over the latter point. The point of anything GW released on to any electronic medium (in this context) is simply as value-add. GW isn't competing with Angry Birds here. They're not even competing with Hasbro/WotC. The percentage of free versus paid products doesn't really show that it is difficult to monetize a product, without making certain assumptions about the underlying markets.

I completely agree with the fragmentation/formatting issues though.

daedalus wrote:I can't help but be at least a little skeptical over the latter point. The point of anything GW released on to any electronic medium (in this context) is simply as value-add. GW isn't competing with Angry Birds here. They're not even competing with Hasbro/WotC. The percentage of free versus paid products doesn't really show that it is difficult to monetize a product, without making certain assumptions about the underlying markets.

I completely agree with the fragmentation/formatting issues though.

The fremium issue isn't so much an evaluation of an apps worth as it is the reluctance of android owners to pay full prices on apps. I know several people who do work in both app markets and typically all effort goes toward delivering fremium microtransaction products since the market doesn't tend to support paid content very well. Most market statistics show a notable difference in how people prefer to pay in both markets.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Because developing for the android marketplace is a difficult to monetize hell and Ebooks can't really do Freemium.

On the other hand, suppose a game company did a 'Game Access App' that had a main page with a news feed, tabs for various tools (Dice Roller), and a Library that had some free stuff (Main rules, maybe) as well as DLC for 'Codex' releases (Most expensive) and other useful 'stuff' like scenarios, trial/experimental stuff, etc.

Some Tools might link to the Library as well: An Army Builder Tool might get the data files as part of purchasing the Codex for the Library, as well as an app skin including custom dice, some widgets for a 'Tracker' tool, etc.

Without paying for anything, J. Random Gamer would get a die roller app with some adds for the game line and maybe some samples.

However, this sounds like it'd take a dedicated (and likely expensive) developer to do right. It'd be a complex interface, need to reinvent several wheels (re-implement or reuse an eBook format) and would be kind of a 'long tail' project as the up-front app would take a lot of dev time and be a giveaway, with the real effort coming in the Codex DLC and other add-on content.

But it could be done, I guess. the iBooks publisher tool is a lot quicker route, though.

The topic which mentions android is somewhat different than the first post which mentions availability on web browsers.

I very much would like to see GW make the codicies available in a web browser. It makes too much sense for GW to do it.

spaceelf wrote:The topic which mentions android is somewhat different than the first post which mentions availability on web browsers.

I very much would like to see GW make the codicies available in a web browser. It makes too much sense for GW to do it.

The codices are already available in web browsers.

Apple knob gobling aside, I am sure it came down to the guys at GW all having iPads. They could have gone with Amazon and covered all platforms and laid the cross platform development issues in someone elses lap. Instead, they bought into the marketing bs apple spews about having a more secure platform when jailbreaking them is so easy that everyone just assumes it to be standard practice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Failing that, they could sell login subscriptions to a web browser for web based codexes and rulebooks, which would let any platform access it. Limit it to one simultaneous login and you avoid the piracy issue.

Apple and GW have a semi-partnership/deal going. All (most?)of the Mangers as well as corporate get iPads as one part of the deal.

According to some internal emails, we will never see any GW app outside of the iTunes app store.

Sucks, but that's currently how it is.

[quote=wraith[cs]]Apple and GW have a semi-partnership/deal going. All (most?)of the Mangers as well as corporate get iPads as one part of the deal.

According to some internal emails, we will never see any GW app outside of the iTunes app store.

Sucks, but that's currently how it is.

[quote=wraith[cs]]Apple and GW have a semi-partnership/deal going. All (most?)of the Mangers as well as corporate get iPads as one part of the deal.

According to some internal emails, we will never see any GW app outside of the iTunes app store.

Sucks, but that's currently how it is.

Why does it sound far fetched ? Convert the GW staff to Ipad users and they'll naturally flock to support it.

I've seen contracts go to the third best option after they schmoozed the top brass.

They tap into an Alpha Consumer Crowd who' s willing to pay top dollar for name brand, reguardless of actual value.

adamsouza wrote:Why does it sound far fetched ? Convert the GW staff to Ipad users and they'll naturally flock to support it.

I've seen contracts go to the third best option after they schmoozed the top brass.

They tap into an Alpha Consumer Crowd who' s willing to pay top dollar for name brand, reguardless of actual value.

So who determines this "actual value". And likening the iPad to the "third best option" is just ignorant.

Kanluwen wrote:[quote=wraith[cs]]Apple and GW have a semi-partnership/deal going. All (most?)of the Mangers as well as corporate get iPads as one part of the deal.

According to some internal emails, we will never see any GW app outside of the iTunes app store.

Sucks, but that's currently how it is.

Proof of these "internal emails"?

This sounds like one of those bizarre conspiracy theories that comes up every so often.

adamsouza wrote:Why does it sound far fetched ? Convert the GW staff to Ipad users and they'll naturally flock to support it.

I've seen contracts go to the third best option after they schmoozed the top brass.

They tap into an Alpha Consumer Crowd who' s willing to pay top dollar for name brand, reguardless of actual value.

Because GW isn't on apples radar. It would also bring up a lot of antitrust issues if apple started to sign exclusivity deals with app developers (kinda like the price fixing and antitrust suits they're currently engaged in concerning ebooks). GWs typo filled books aren't worth that risk.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Phazael wrote:Apple knob gobling aside, I am sure it came down to the guys at GW all having iPads. They could have gone with Amazon and covered all platforms and laid the cross platform development issues in someone elses lap. Instead, they bought into the marketing bs apple spews about having a more secure platform when jailbreaking them is so easy that everyone just assumes it to be standard practice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Failing that, they could sell login subscriptions to a web browser for web based codexes and rulebooks, which would let any platform access it. Limit it to one simultaneous login and you avoid the piracy issue.

They could of covered all platforms with an RTT or PDF, but they wanted to give a value add that would bring them in money. If all they did was sell a PDF scan people would just use the PDF scans they already have. The lack of interactivity and ability to push updates would also make the app less of an enticing offer when compared to the physical book copy. If you want amazons market you can't do interactive content since the vast majority of their market is Eink users.

As an aside, it's not that easy to jailbreak an iphone and to keep it rooted and up to date while avoiding being bricked. The vast majority of users have no idea how to do it and even those with a modicum of skill can still have their units bricked when they try to update between OS versions. It also voids the warranty of a 200+ dollar item.

cincydooley wrote:
So who determines this "actual value".

Value is subjective. I suspect your just being snarky and needed a setup so you call me ignorant in your next line.

I was refering to Apple products in general. They sell like hot cakes, especially to afluent and the less tech savy.
You can find a competitors product for less that does the same thing, some times better, and for less money.

Well, with the exception of a tablet that handles GW's new ICodex, but you get the picture.

And likening the iPad to the "third best option" is just ignorant.

Actually you just did that. My point was that business is often swayed by freebies/bribes.

Value is subjective. I suspect your just being snarky and needed a setup so you call me ignorant in your next line.

I was refering to Apple products in general. They sell like hot cakes, especially to afluent and the less tech savy.
You can find a competitors product for less that does the same thing, some times better, and for less money.

What does what the current iPad does better for less money?

Actually you just did that. My point was that business is often swayed by freebies/bribes.

Your point was conspiratorial and silly.

adamsouza wrote:[My point was that business is often swayed by freebies/bribes.

Yes, but your point is stupid and crazy, especially compared to explanations that actually make sense. I've never seen anyone on these boards claiming knowledge of sooper sekkrit internal communications who was actually telling the truth.

OMFG the only stupid and crazy conspiracy is the amount of crap people are reading inbetween the lines.

I'm out of this conversation.

Three simple reasons.

1) Apple is much easyer to write for than android
2) Apple has much less piracy than android
3) App sales by apple are 6 times that of google play

Nothing to do with free iPads or hating people who don't have an iPad. Quite frankly some of the theorys contain some strong accusations without any substance.

For example:

adamsouza wrote:
Actually you just did that. My point was that business is often swayed by freebies/bribes.

Any type of freebie or bribe is illigal under EU law with very stiff penaltys. The rules are very strict and even the slightest wiff of a bribe is enough to have the police looking in to it. There is no way either Apple or GW would take that risk. The Bribery Act 2010 is very high profile in business at the moment and is very strict on anything even close to what you are talking about.

Something I don't understand is why Macbooks don't get access to iBooks 2, it's the same basic system, isn't it? At least that would somewhat widen the availability of these new eCodicies.

Point 3 talks about how their is a single point of payment associated with the App Store (Itunes) but implies there isn't for Android. This is a little disingenuous; Google Play is already set up for this functionality by default and is the equivalent. While there are competing venues on Android its still a central nexus.

Point 5 can use some expanding. You talk about the percentage of profit Apple eats but don't talk about how much Android eats. The article could be improved if you could find out this data. If this is a persuasive essay rather then a pure analysis, and it turns out that Android is cheaper, you might want to bury this fact or remove it. I don't know the answers to either the first or latter sentences, by the way, I'm speaking generally.

We can do without the insults and name calling please.
Thanks.