If you are a programmer, then you would understand that implementing code can have repercussions. Simply adding this in has the potential to break other bits of code. Thus, the code you are adding would need extensive testing. Even simple tasks require more time than people outside the industry realize.
If you aren't a programmer, then please take in to consideration the above statement.
Blizzard has said that there are tech limitations that stop them from allowing cross realm mail, to that point... none of us (well, none of us outside of Blizzard's Dev group) know how complex their code structure is.
Think of it this way, with the addition of mounts and pets being available across an entire account, Blizzard has laid the groundwork for truly BoA heirlooms. Look at the mounts/pets "tab" as a beta test for Heirlooms. With the tech that they have in place now, I would imagine that it wouldn't take too much more to make the system work. What you have to understand, is that Blizzard doesn't want to "half-ass" the solution. Your ideas, while working, may not be the way Blizzard envisions that system being implemented.
The last thing I want to touch on from your post is the final statement. "Give us shit we need". Technically, Blizzard has already provided you with a way to get your heirlooms to another server. Yes, it's not ideal, and it can be expensive, but the way exists. So, technically, you have been "given the shit you need".
---------- Post added 2012-11-10 at 11:06 AM ----------
TO add to this, this is also code that has been maintained modified and got stuff added for long years. Most of the time the more the code is modified touched and get something added the more clusterfucked it becomes and the more difficult is to add further stuff without breaking everything.
Major patches in programming (identified by this kind of enumeration 1.0/2.0/3.0/etc.) usually get used to try to take the chance to have a look at the code and try to rewrite it in an again user-friendly way and optimize it. I don't know how much it is possible to do so for a project so huge as a MMORPG and as delicate
BoA gear is has 0 endgame use. Tabard tab should be next imo.
Put OP to work at Blizzard and let him program the solution for it. Seriously, it's not as easy as people make it out to be. WoW has a codebase of possibly millions of lines of code. Each change affects a lot of other stuff and writing spaghetti code in order to accommodate changes like the one proposed by OP is never a good solution if you want to maintain a (relatively) bug-free code base.
this won't happen
x-server boas = loss in profits
why would they ever do this
---------- Post added 2012-11-10 at 01:25 PM ----------
that's how easy it is
99% of blizzard's issues, like every company, come down to money. you don't even need a basic understanding of coding to do this, you'd have to go into their wowtools program, check the flag that the account wide pets have and then save and hotfix
it would literally take 5 minutes. yes, it's that easy, yes i've seen it and yes i could do it right now if given the opportunity.
but it would cut into their profits.
Blizzard has said they are working on making BOAs transferrable, as well as other things. It is simply a matter of complexity of the problem versus what else is on the schedule.
Blizzard is running a game that probably still has lines of codes from 2004 (hence why the backpack has yet to get expanded) and it is utter impossible to predict what a seemingly simple change (larger backpack) might break. Don't blame it on money grabbing when you have zero idea on the work it involves to do something.
"Allons-y!" - David Tennant - 10th Doctor.
"Bow ties are cool." - Matt Smith - 11th Doctor.
From a programming perspective, BoA mounts is significantly easier to do than BoA heirlooms. Thus, it was done first.
---------- Post added 2012-11-11 at 07:45 AM ----------
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal.
boa should definatly of had prio over account wide mounts !!