141–150 of 152 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I know i will get downmodded for saying this I hate when people say this. It's like saying "my point is valid, but people on HN are too stupid to get it".
Or you could look at it as someone saying that they know saying something will cost them karma, but they feel it's important enough to say anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, you're getting downvoted because your comment doesn't actually add anything to the discussion. Snarky replies aren't (generally) considered valuable here.
Well then, rephrasing the first comment for those who didn't get it, I see no reason to think developers are being forced one way or the other. As a developer, you choose the platform you intend to use to deliver your application. Nobody is being forced anything. There is a huge potential market outside the App Store. If you bet the company on Apple's good mood, it's only your fault they pull your app, change the rul…
Development for a mobile device is different. If you were developing a Windows application, you'd be expected to own a Windows system. If you're developing a MacOS X application, you'd be expected to own a system that runs MacOS X.
But what about an iPhone application? By the above logic, you should only be expected to own an iPhone. Now, this analogy breaks down a bit, because I wouldn't expect anyone to actually develop a serious piece of software directly on an iPhone (at least not without an external monitor, mouse, and keyboard). So you need another platform to do your development on. Apple is requiring you to buy a Mac. Clearly they have development tools that work on Windows, otherwise Win Safari wouldn't be possible. A port of the iPhone SDK to Windows (or Linux, or whatever) is certainly not out of the question... it's just a matter of throwing resources and time at it. Now, again, I can certainly believe that Apple would think that restricting iPhone development to Macs is in their best interest, but it's ludicrous to suggest that this decision is also in their developers' best interests. I think that's what a lot of people are pissed off about.
Go to another mobile platform? Sure, you can do that, but then you're restricting your market. Yes, there are quite a few other lucrative mobile platforms (several of which have greater market share than the iPhone), but, as a developer, you end up with the unfortunate choice of having to either not develop for the iPhone, or buy an expensive piece of hardware that you only use for iPhone development. And by "expensive" I don't just mean the price tag. I also mean costs in training (even if it's self-training), maintenance (in 5 years your speedy Mac won't be so speedy anymore), and upgrades (IIRC you already can't install the latest version of Xcode on anything older than Snow Leopard; I imagine this trend will continue).
I know people like you seem to think that it's an easy binary decision: 1) don't buy a Mac and don't develop for the iPhone, or 2) buy a Mac and develop for the iPhone, but there's a lot that goes into that decision, including a judgment of whether or not developing an app that you may not be "allowed" to distribute is worthwhile.
It's not so cut and dried.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now let me put aside my role as an official representative of Adobe for a moment . . .
"Disclaimer -- This is my personal blog. The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. "
Possible business opportunity: Objective-C to Java/Android cross-compiler?
There's a few things you can do in Obj-C that would be pretty hard to do in Java, but... It's not the language, it's the framework. UIKit and friends really are very good; they're the secret sauce of the iPhone OS and I'm not sure Android has anything comparable.
The trouble is that we will never hear their discontent because Apple employees are forbidden from blogging, posting to social networks, or other things that we at companies with an open culture take for granted. ... Comments are closed. A little hypocritical don't you think?
Publishing on teh intarwebs is cheap and easy. If some potential commenters want their own soapbox, they can easily get one. I honestly don't understand why it's become "required" that readers of any site should be able to comment on what's written on that site. Let the content stand for itself. If you have an opposing viewpoint, use your own channel to promote that viewpoint; don't leech off of someone else's.
Any real developer would not in good conscience be able to support this. I hate such broad-sweeping statements. What is clear is that Apple most definitely would [abuse their loyal users and make them pawns for the sake of trying to hurt another company]. Apple has always been about the experience of using their products, and I think a lot of what they're doing with their mobile devices still stems from that focus. M…
> I also find this highly patronizing.
Patronizing? Sure... Incorrect? Probably not.
sheesh... while one half of Adobe's brain (the flash-obsessed Macromedia one) is still screaming and flinging mud, the other half already used some of the perfectly Apple-endorsed C/C++ code they've got lying around and build a useful iPad App: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adobe-ideas-1-0-for-ipad/id36... - It's not like they're all about Flash; although it's obviously this guy's job to make it look like it - hence…
Funny, I was thinking the same thing. All the huffing and puffing about openness when they list C/C++ among the ordained languages. Have that many people completely divested themselves of the most cross-platform compatible languages there is? I realize they're ugly step sisters, but if you structure the projects right it's not like it's impossible.
"Go screw yourself Apple." How professional.
Personally I'd prefer something profanity-laced that I can relate to (as long as it actually presents reasoned arguments!), over some artificial, self-censored PR-speak.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well then, rephrasing the first comment for those who didn't get it, I see no reason to think developers are being forced one way or the other. As a developer, you choose the platform you intend to use to deliver your application. Nobody is being forced anything. There is a huge potential market outside the App Store. If you bet the company on Apple's good mood, it's only your fault they pull your app, change the rul…
I don't disagree with any of your points in a fundamental sense: sure, Apple is well within their rights to set the policies they have set, and I understand that Apple believes that all this gives them a distinct market advantage (I won't try to pass judgment on whether or not that's correct; I don't think anyone here knows for a fact whether they'd be better off another way). Development for a mobile device is diffe…
As with any business decision, you have to weight as many factors as possible. Unless you have some marketing muscle for promoting your app, chances are it will drown in an ocean of similar applications. Worse: in an ocean of applications with similar names and descriptions.
Going the Apple way has never been an easy thing. At least in the pre Xcode days, Macs had a wider choice (like two vendors?) of development tools. I never liked MPW and preferred the Metrowerks tools. On the Mac, you program to a small slice of the pie, but a less crowded one. The iPhone is different - it represents a huge slice of the "people willing to pay for mobile apps" pie, but the slice is very, very crowded.