agreements
Latest
Wikipad delayed on launch day, 'refined and upgraded bundles' to be announced soon
The upcoming Android gaming tablet Wikipad was set to launch today, but the company's representatives have sent along a statement from the development team (which you can read in full after the break) saying that the launch has been delayed. According to the statement, the device's release was moved in order to take advantage of a "last minute opportunity" to "ensure our first customers are completely satisfied with the Wikipad." Unfortunately, no new launch date has been set yet.The team says that it's working with GameStop on dealing with current pre-orders, and that anyone who's already pre-ordered the product will not only get the "refined and upgraded" bundle when it's eventually released, but "a special bonus gift" as well. Again, there's no indication when that might happen, so we'll just have to wait and see what Wikipad's plans are going forward.
More murmuring about 99 cent iTunes TV rentals
Well now. The previous rumor about 99 cent rentals for TV episodes on iTunes was just your average, but now that we know there's an Apple event just around the corner, it's time to start making hay out of all the chaff floating around. A source now tells the Wall Street Journal that Apple is pushing hard for a deal with Disney to nail down cheaper 48-hour rentals, presumably to come through iTunes and the revamped iTV service. Resistance to the deal is coming from TV companies (surprise, surprise), who are leery about putting too much content out through online services, fearing that people will leave their monthly cable bills behind if another service arises. What's funny about that, of course, is that Apple sees that's already happening. Services like Hulu Plus and Netflix are already making cable customers rethink their monthly fees, and so Apple is finding itself with a limited amount of time to get in on the action. The Wall Street Journal says the company is pushing for agreements "before the new television season starts," but now that we know there's an event planned for September 1st, it's more likely Apple is trying to get agreements set up before the announcement. Of course, as Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out, the real economic tradeoff isn't between the $0.99 rentals and a more lucrative plan the studios come up with -- it's between Apple's proven iTunes-based economy and the free-range TV programming on BitTorrent. And with its ties to Disney, odds are that Apple will definitely have enough to go forward, even if it doesn't have every channel signing on the dotted line just yet. So here's the question: if Apple does announce a new iTV, and a way to watch new television on demand right away, will you choose a system like that over whatever cable bill you're currently paying?
UK game retailer claims 7,500 souls with a legal agreement prank
Don't think about it, just answer: Do you really read all of those agreements and legal texts that you need to scroll through when installing a game, signing up for a service or buying something online? Really? 7,500 people either don't, or they don't care about their eternal salvation, because UK video game retailer Gamestation could now legally own 7,500 souls if it wanted to. On April 1, it added a clause to its legal purchase agreement that granted the company "a non transferable option to claim, for now and for ever more, your immortal soul," and 7,500 game buyers happily clicked to agree. The company was just April Fooling -- the claims have been legally renounced, and worried patrons can click through to the website to get their soul back (and a special discount code for their trouble). But next time, you should probably read the fine print a little more closely.
iPads sent out to select developers, kept under cover for now
Last week at GDC 2010, I talked to quite a few iPhone developers, big and small, and they all told me exactly the same thing when I asked about the iPad: "No, I haven't gotten my hands on one yet." But apparently there are at least a few developers out there who've gotten test models from Apple, according to Business Week, and the requirements that come with them are as strict as you can imagine. There are 10 pages of rules and regulations, and those include that the iPad has to be kept secured to a fixed object in a windowless room, and the company actually requires photographic proof of compliance before they'll actually ship the device out. Sounds crazy, but clearly there's reasons for such a strict agreement from both sides: developers really want to get a head start on what will surely be a huge market for apps and content starting on the iPad's release, and obviously Apple wants to make sure that the device stays under cover until it releases. You might think that they'd actually benefit from a little exposure, but don't forget: this is Apple -- they depend on the hype and interest that secrecy before release creates. After it comes out, seeing the iPad out in the world will likely sell even more units, but pre-release, Apple's customers are happy to stand in line to be the first to use the iPad. Of course, this is all from anonymous sources -- it'll be interesting to see if any of these "iPads in the wild" find their way out to the public in the form of pictures or video. Until then, the rest of us (including many developers who've played big parts in building up the App Store to where it is today) will have to wait until April 3rd. [via Engadget]
Google: Yeah, we did use an undocumented API. So what?
On last Sunday's talkcast, we all speculated on the situation behind Google's voice app using undocumented API calls on the iPhone. Either Google just went and did it themselves, or they got special permission from Apple to dive into places that most developers aren't really supposed to go. And it turns out that the former is true: Google says to CNET that, yeah, they used undocumented APIs. What are you going to do about it?They're not using private frameworks at all, and apparently Apple isn't even part of the situation -- Google's engineers just jumped on some extra, undocumented features in the API. The danger here for most devs, apparently, is that if Apple changes something in the undocumented stuff, it'll break the app. But Google seems unconcerned -- they have the resources, apparently, to change things if needed.As for Apple themselves, my guess is they'll do what they've been doing: stay hands-off until a smaller developer breaks something really important. If anyone is going to get special permission to bend the rules, it'll be Google, and given that Apple's API agreements are something they can choose to enforce (or not) as they see fit, Google likely has nothing to worry about.
Bornakk tries to clarify fair play in Arena PvP
Bornakk has laid down a "clarification" on what's fair in the Arenas over on the forums -- he says that there's been a lot of questions lately over what constitutes fair play in Arena PvP, especially in terms of win trading.Unfortunately, his clarification isn't all that clear -- he reiterates that win trading (the act of exploiting the queue in some way to face a chosen opponent, or face the same team multiple times) is against the spirit of the game and against Blizzard's wishes (though his wording gets a little strange when he brings the Terms of Service into it -- we think that by "these actions all fall in line with our fair use clause," he actually means that they violate the clause). He does, however, go on to say that there are certain places in the system where facing an opponent multiple times will happen, and that that's obviously not the fault of players. So that, it seems, is the confusion: players were worried that because of the lack of population in the queue or other factors, that they would be accused of win trading, and Bornakk is saying that's not the case.Not that Blizzard hasn't been cracking down on win trading as much as possible lately, but the fact is that if there's a way to exploit the system, players will find it and do it. Blizzard says they're working on squashing "agreements" between players, but even then, Arenas may never end up being completely fair.
Commissioner insists that NFL Network will be "a success"
It's no secret: the NFL Network isn't in nearly as many homes as the league had hoped when it launched in 2003. As it stands, the channel has only wiggled into 10 million abodes, whereas the NFL was estimating 32 million. At the network's third annual "upfront" presentation, commissioner Roger Goodell looked media buyers and advertisers in the eye and stated that it would "make the NFL Network a success." Not surprisingly, the biggest obstacle here is distribution, but it seems the league is adamant to find ways to broaden the channel's audience. We suppose the battles will live on, eh?
