Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

benfry.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#51

Post by bphogan »

orangecat wrote: post #48
rauljara wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only true of the iPad/iPhone ecosystem. For OSX, they give away development tools better than the ones microsoft charges ridiculous amounts of money for. Almost all apple-made software (even the kind they sell) doesn't even make you enter a license key. If you are honestly worried about a closed app store coming to OSX based on what Apple does with phones and devices that they clearly think of as large phones…

If you are honestly worried about a closed app store coming to OSX based on what Apple does with phones and devices that they clearly think of as large phones, you are paranoid. Then I'm paranoid. Like Mark Pilgrim ( http://diveintomark.org/archives/2010/01/29/tinkerers-sunset ), I don't believe Apple will be selling general purpose computers to consumers in 10 years. Remember Steve Jobs's plan for Apple: "milk the M…

I've seen that argument before, and I have to tell you, it's a bit of overdramatization from someone I respect a lot, who should know better. Apple has to sell unlocked Macs, because that's how you develop software for their closed platforms. Nobody mentions this much, but if you want to develop an iPhone app, you need a Mac, and you need the iPhone SDK, compilers, etc. The average person does not need an unlocked Mac. Developers like us do, and Apple will have to provide that. Choice is great for consumers, and not everyone needs a computer to write code on. We developers do, and we're really the only ones constantly beating this dead horse. Consumers don't want to hack their own devices, they just expect it to work.

Apple isn't the only one doing this. I don't know much C# and I don't run Windows anymore, but I want to write XBOX games. Should I be mad at MS for making me buy Windows, learn Visual Studio + C#, and pay a membership fee to write games for my XBOX? They have a developer program too, and a completely closed system. They take a cut of sales. They don't review your apps though, but honestly I like the fact that through the Appstore on my iPod, stuff isn't gonna trash my iPod like it did when I used to have it jailbroken.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#52

Post by tree_of_item »

pvg wrote: post #38
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you couldn't install any applications on the device, which is the ultimate control. You can easily argue that the device is much more open now that developers are able to create the 150,000 apps that have been downloaded more than 3 billion times.

You still can't install any application on the device. You could easily argue a lot of things but what on earth are you talking about, as far as the initial success of the iPhone is concerned?

You're confusing the use of the word "any" here. In the previous post, it was used to mean that there were _no_ applications available for the iPhone.

You're using it here to mean "you can't install arbitrary applications" which is something different.

As far as the initial success of the iPhone is concerned, the device gaining traction without "any" applications (in the first sense) is largely important when speaking of the necessity of the App Store.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#53

Post by muhfuhkuh »

Sephr wrote: post #23
upinsmoke wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can freely distribute Mac OS X software. Why are you comparing Windows with iPhone/iPad? I'm going to compare games on Mac OS X and Xbox, why can't I make Xbox games and distribute them freely, when I can do that on Mac OS X?

I think he means Windows Phone 7 and Windows Mobile.

Windows 7 isn't out yet (and, if Zune HDs Marketplace for apps is any indication, it will be just as closed as Apple's), and WinMo 6.x has approximately no real app store. Look:

http://client.marketplace.windowsmobile.com/

It's been that way since early 2009. Is it going to be yet another thing like Origami, Courier, Surface, et al. that Microsoft hypes up only to abandon or leave stillborn?

Bottom line, Apple, not without corner-case controversies, is far more flexible in 3rd party Smartphone development than Microsoft has or could ever be.

Now, Google Android, on the other hand... that's like the Wild Wild West of device freedom. So much so, that hardly anyone makes money. Where are the big-time devs creating world-beating technology on the platform and sopping up revenue like crusty bread at the bottom of a steak dish? I've looked EVERYWHERE for it, I even have "android marketplace revenue" bookmarked in Google News and check that every once in awhile. I see people selling 20k units a month at #1 on the entire Android store, which is what Apple top tens sell in less than a week or even a days worth of sales. That's a marketplace estimated at 10 Million users, and only a few hundred thousand are actually buying anything. In fact, android users buy about $1 on average of apps per month, while iPhone/iPod Touch users spend about $5 a month, and that's an ecosystem with fast-approaching 100 Million users hungry (and more importantly, willing to pay) for content. It's a no-brainer for any developer.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#54

Post by stanleydrew »

glhaynes wrote: post #46
CrLf wrote: post #4

The control that Apple has over the iPhone and the application distribution channel does contribute greatly to the iPhone's success. It makes the platform easily accessible to people who aren't inclined to search the internet for apps and are, in fact, afraid of doing it for all the malware experiences they have on their PCs. They know the App Store has everything, and that they can reasonably expect that the apps wo…

It is a beautiful device, but if the average Joe expects it to behave more like a standard computer than an iPhone, and if Apple doesn't make it more open, it may very well end up a failure. Exactly what's appealing to the average Joe about the iPad IS that it acts more like an iPhone than a standard computer.

I'm not sure we know that's true yet.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#56

Post by jsz0 »

CrLf wrote: post #4

The control that Apple has over the iPhone and the application distribution channel does contribute greatly to the iPhone's success. It makes the platform easily accessible to people who aren't inclined to search the internet for apps and are, in fact, afraid of doing it for all the malware experiences they have on their PCs. They know the App Store has everything, and that they can reasonably expect that the apps wo…

I voted your comment up but I could not disagree more with your assessment of how people are using their iPhones. We know from real data that the iPhone dominates mobile web usage. We know people are downloading and buying a ton of apps -- it's really unthinkable to believe they don't use any of them more than a couple times. If so they wouldn't keep buying/downloading them.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#57

Post by grinich »

alain wrote: post #3

The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Microsoft, it's Apple. You're pretty free to develop and distribute software as you want on Windows. On new Apple devices, they control the way the software is distributed, they tax you, they make you obey their rules. Imagine a world with appstore as the main way of distributing software for any kind of devices. This would be hell. This is where Apple is going. Stop usin…

Have you built and sold any iPhone apps?

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#58

Post by grinich »

rimantas wrote: post #28
alain wrote: post #3

The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Microsoft, it's Apple. You're pretty free to develop and distribute software as you want on Windows. On new Apple devices, they control the way the software is distributed, they tax you, they make you obey their rules. Imagine a world with appstore as the main way of distributing software for any kind of devices. This would be hell. This is where Apple is going. Stop usin…

Sad to see so logically flawed argument getting upvoted—that means many of us don't bother to think any more and vote purely on "four legs good, two legs bad" mentality. The worst enemy of freedom in software is not Microsoft, it's Apple. Makes no sense. Neither MS nor Apple are enemies of freedom of software. Apple is using a lot of OSS, contributes a lot to several projects, pushes for open web. You're pretty free…

... Then worry more about making linux more useable to ordinary people, who care about usability, not some fuzzy freedom ideals.

This has huge potential.

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#59

Post by grinich »

sjs wrote: post #33
bad_user wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but having worked with both, Visual Studio is miles ahead of Xcode. I even did an app for a client in C++/Qt that wanted it running in OS X ... developed 100% in Visual Studio. That's because at the time (at least) Xcode wasn't even having Intellisense (and Visual C++ does have the best intellisense available). Visual Studio Express is free to use ... and it's enough for almost every need you might have. And b…

> Of course Mono for Apple would be an abomination that had to be destroyed (considering how they sued Psystar and even Wired on publishing an article about hackitoshes) Cocoa is a direct descendent of NEXTStep which is an open spec. Hence the NS prefix on class names. Here's "Mono for Apple": http://www.cocotron.org/ http://etoileos.com/ http://www.gnustep.org/ You mention MS "endorsing" Mono as if that means someth…

Don't forget Cappuccino!

http://cappuccino.org/

Re: IPad thoughts from Ben Fry (creator of Processing)

#60

Post by sjs »

grinich wrote: post #59
sjs wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course Mono for Apple would be an abomination that had to be destroyed (considering how they sued Psystar and even Wired on publishing an article about hackitoshes) Cocoa is a direct descendent of NEXTStep which is an open spec. Hence the NS prefix on class names. Here's "Mono for Apple": http://www.cocotron.org/ http://etoileos.com/ http://www.gnustep.org/ You mention MS "endorsing" Mono as if that means someth…

Don't forget Cappuccino! http://cappuccino.org/

Yes, and this recent thread[1] on the Cappuccino mailing list has links to several other Objective-X languages.

[1] http://groups.google.com/group/objectivej/browse_thread/thre...

But the first ones I linked are all Objective-C. Well, Étoilé has implemented a smalltalk-esque syntax now.

Post reply on HN