Why does WotC hate Macs?

[Alan Shutko]

Actually... Fantasy Grounds really isn't that polished. It provides a very minimal level of what you need to play at a virtual tabletop. The level of interoperability with the system rules is virtually non-existent.

The DDI VTT will have no interoperability with the system rules. They've ruled that out.

 

[Relique du Madde]

One reason:

WoTC is opposed to the idea of giving out free "software" upgrades and thus they chose to support windows PC becuase Microsoft's upgrade policy is similar to their own..

 

[Dire Bare]

Blizzard: yeah, there's so horrible, they do such silly things as make sure everyone can play their games, and gee-whiz, they're head and shoulders above their competition. Those jerks.

Way to twist the point made into something entirely different. The poster that said that Blizzard is wierd to support Macs is totally spot on. But he's not making a judgement call, he's not saying Blizzard is stupid or jerky to support Macs. He's simply saying they are outside of the norm, that most software companies (especially for games) don't support the Mac.

It's simple really. The added costs of Mac support are not worth the added revenue of Mac users. Or at least that's the way WotC and the majority of the software industry sees it. Perhaps they have misjudged this, but I think not.

Macs are certainly more popular than ever and continue to grow their market share, so it might not be too long before this equation shifts. But as of today, it's just not worth it for many software publishers.

I think it's AWESOME that Blizzard supports Macs. Blizzard is known for being a software company that does things differently than industry standard, and it is certainly a part of their appeal. But are they wildly successful because of this? Maybe in part. But I think the major reason why Blizzard owns the PC gaming market right now is that they simply make incredibly awesome and addicting games. That they support Macs is simply icing on their already awesome cake.

 

[Elephant]

I don't know anything about software development but what would it cost to write the whole DDI to be both PC and Mac (and while your at it Linux!) compat? Too much, I guess, for the 10% or so to be a worthwhile market.
As for Gleemax, I have never had any problems on it (and I use IE, FF and Opera) so are all the Gleemax complaints from Mac/ Safari users? Just because I am nosey Any issue with Safari is probably the same as you get some issues on other sites with FF, IE is the most 'slack' browser when it comes to reading your web page therefore will accept a lot more 'not wuite right' stuff. I would imagine Safari is quite strict. Who's fault is this? Well both Safari (because it is no use being too strict if it reduces your usefulness) and WotC (for not making Gleemax more compliant with web standards). Just IMO, and a guess from experience, rather than a fact from real knowledge about these things

Speaking as a professional programmer, nothing I've heard announced for the DDI needs any features that they can't accomplish with a decently-designed website and perhaps some Flash programming. They're doing one or more of:

Using a bad design (hmm, look at Gleemax. This one's a gimme.)
Using inept programmers
Mandating stupid decisions in the development process

 

[Elephant]

.NET isn't platform independent and when doing anything with graphics processing it relies on DirectX (Windows only) graphics tools and libraries. Since they started in a Windows environment their code only runs in a Windows environment.

If they were doing something platform independent it would take longer be more expensive and require more time to get the "polish" they have already achieved. It isn't impossible just harder and with the already spotty track record of WotC web initiatives failing I can understand why they made the decision they made. I don't agree with it but management can be blind to the advantages of taking the slightly harder route.

What is this "polish" you speak of? We ARE talking about WOTC's software, right?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Speaking as a professional programmer, nothing I've heard announced for the DDI needs any features that they can't accomplish with a decently-designed website and perhaps some Flash programming. They're doing one or more of:

Using a bad design (hmm, look at Gleemax. This one's a gimme.)
Using inept programmers
Mandating stupid decisions in the development process

So, you haven't heard about the Virtual Game Table yet? Or the character visualizer?

 

[Mercule]

Speaking as a professional programmer, nothing I've heard announced for the DDI needs any features that they can't accomplish with a decently-designed website and perhaps some Flash programming. They're doing one or more of:

Speaking as a professional web programmer, the first sign of an inept programmer is to make something that doesn't need Internet connection into a web application.

Personally, things like the Google word processing app and it's ilk annoy the crap out of me. If there is no good reason for me to not be able to take my laptop to a mountain shack and do whatever it is the app's main purpose is, then the app should be built to allow it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Speaking as a professional web programmer, the first sign of an inept programmer is to make something that doesn't need Internet connection into a web application.

Personally, things like the Google word processing app and it's ilk annoy the crap out of me. If there is no good reason for me to not be able to take my laptop to a mountain shack and do whatever it is the app's main purpose is, then the app should be built to allow it.

The only benefit I see for something like Google Apps is that your documents are available anywhere (at least to you). But I'd prefer to be able to work offline. At least as long as I can't take my DSL flat rate with me everywhere

 

[Felon]

The mac users I know personally are a peculiar lot. They spend equal amounts of time expressing their smug self-satisfaction over joining in the minority of folks who have escaped the terrible clutches of Windows and expressing their bitter resentment that they don't enjoy all the perks of belonging to the majority. "Yay, my computer never freezes up. Boo, I can't play City of Heroes".

Anyway, just run a virtual Windows session and be done with it.

 

[Alan Shutko]

The only benefit I see for something like Google Apps is that your documents are available anywhere (at least to you). But I'd prefer to be able to work offline. At least as long as I can't take my DSL flat rate with me everywhere

Google Apps is currently deploying offline access, phasing it in over their account base. I just got it this week....

Will DDI support it?