Earlier quoted context omitted.
GHC has a C backend. Just claim that you wrote that code yourself. Problem solved.
It's being phased out in the next version.
In favor of an LLVM backend; LLVM, in turn, has a C backend :P
New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
291–300 of 495 posts
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#292Getting away from the frenzied rhetoric, my opinion is that what Apple really wants to prevent is people releasing multi-platform compilers. So taking Flash as just one example, if I can build one app and the compiler can make me an iPhone executable, an Android executable, and so forth, Apple don't want that. In my experience so far with such "cross platform compatibility layers," they always produce results that wa…
What you're saying makes sense, but at the end of the day - it doesn't matter what Apple wants to do, what matters is what they have actually done.
If they wanted to eliminate cross-platform apps, they could have just as easily put something which specifically mentions that in their terms of service. It wouldn't be any more ridiculous than the conditions they have put in place right now.
These new terms of service effectively bar tools like Monotouch - a development environment that exclusively targets the iPhone OS.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is incorrect. Apple's C is C99; they have also introduced a new optional syntax for blocks that they have submitted for standardization.
Right, and $foo is just C but with $bar.
To be fair, all widely-used C compilers I am aware of have extensions to the C90 and C99 standards, which they accept as conformant code by default.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#294This doesn't sound practical for Apple to enforce - they could cherry pick a few big targets perhaps (Adobe....).
It could also simply be a change just so they can see what the response from the development community is - and may change rather soon.
I just can't fathom this particular rule lasting very long... it's not just lock-in, or a little bit evil, it's patently insane.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Nope. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the phone market" It's a common misconception that you have to have a monopoly to run afoul of antitrust law. You don't. It also goes the other way--having a monopoly is not necessarily a violation of antitrust. For instance, mergers have been shot down on antitrust grounds even when the merged companies would have had under 50% of the market. Antitrust is more about the effect…
Thank you, good sir, for posting this reasoned, thoughtful, and accurate post.
People disagree?
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#296Getting away from the frenzied rhetoric, my opinion is that what Apple really wants to prevent is people releasing multi-platform compilers. So taking Flash as just one example, if I can build one app and the compiler can make me an iPhone executable, an Android executable, and so forth, Apple don't want that. In my experience so far with such "cross platform compatibility layers," they always produce results that wa…
This is seriously putting me off. I was not thinking of a third party approach, but it limits me when I want to use my OWN scripting language when developing apps. Does this stretch to build scripts??
Technically yes, but it's not like they would ever know.
It's pretty obviously an out clause so they can kick Adobe in the pants, and possibly prevent app-mills from popping up all over, completely saturating their approval process for the app store. I doubt they'll go after an individual developer who isn't obviously using some mass-market code generator to pump out apps.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it's the content creators that are developing the apps and making the iPad/iPhone a more valuable platform. Boycotting Apple's content creation tools and consequently not developing for the iPad/iPhone is one way to send a message.
I've been wondering about this a bit lately. I've so far chosen not to support the iPhone OS for the reason you mention, instead favoring Android. However, I'm ultimately interested in serving my application to the largest number of people, and it seems clear to me that the App Store is the best way to achieve that today. So, do you cave in and develop an iPhone version? Or, do you stand by your morals, and, in turn,…
If you're already developing for Android, stick with what you're doing and you'll soon be serving your app to a much larger market. Android growth is pretty strong: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-20001788-265.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/193653/google_android_hits_ma...
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#298Apple is shifting the burden here from users to developers. It's easier for a developer to simply puke out a lowest common denominator app but it's not so good for the user who is buying the iPhone because of the cool UI/interaction/integration good native apps provide. It's easier for a developer to simply have their unmodified app run in the background but it's not so good for the user who is losing cycles/battery because of it. I don't want to justify it because obviously there's some valid downsides especially for developers to this approach. My only point would be that's Apple's secret sauce. It's gotta work right, it's gotta look right, everything has to work right together. Apple is going to do whatever it takes to make this happen because they feel like that's their core advantage over their competitors. They're probably right. If you disagree there's Android, BlackBerry, Palm, Nokia, etc. It's not like Apple has a gun to our head. As individuals we have free will.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Mobile" is what will become obsolete. These new devices are handheld computers pretending to be phones. Someday they will embrace this reality, and inherit all of the progress that's already played out on PCs/laptops - browsers, flash, etc.
Handheld computers (with and without a phone) have been around forever. Apple has changed the game from that open reality to this and have been quite successful with it. You have it backwards.
Hand held computers capable of rendering standard web pages have not been around for very long, unless I'm overlooking something.
Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others
#300Getting away from the frenzied rhetoric, my opinion is that what Apple really wants to prevent is people releasing multi-platform compilers. So taking Flash as just one example, if I can build one app and the compiler can make me an iPhone executable, an Android executable, and so forth, Apple don't want that. In my experience so far with such "cross platform compatibility layers," they always produce results that wa…
I'm sorry but that is a terrible excuse for what they've done. As a flash developer hit hard by the recession, having another (strong) string in my bow was essential for survival. Like others in my industry, I don't have time to completely re-train every time a new product comes onto the market. Being able to produce for a different device using my current skills is a blessing. Apple should be thoroughly ashamed with…
I sympathize with your economic plight. But the fact that you're having a hard time making a living using Flash doesn't give Apple the obligation to provide you with a development platform.
Since the iPhone has less than 20 percent of the smartphone market, it seems unlikely that the Monopolies Commission will be interested.