81–90 of 93 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be more like taking out flowers in an attempt to free your garden of weeds. :)
Actually, rather more like saying "We won't accept another shipment of flowers mixed up with weeds until we sort the weeds from the flowers we already have."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I've heard lots of people toe the Apple company line on simplifying before. But I thought we were talking about whether or not there is smartphone competition. If you want to believe there is nothing that can truly compete with the iPhone because of its magical UI or lack of features or whatever I can't prevent that. Yes, it's true, the iPhone is the only iPhone in existence. But in that sense nothing can compete…
"If you get specific enough, everything is in a category of its own without any competition." Of course. The problem the parent is describing is that the smartphone market, the person on the street with an iPhone, who doesn't have a clue what "objective see" is, has his/her own specific criteria for buying a phone, and so far they seem to line up with Apple's criteria pretty well. Android can compete on features, pri…
http://industry.bnet.com/technology/10005344/android-unit-sa...
+1 for openness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's fascinating. This is the way I look at them, as being on the side of people who agree with Apple on this one. #1: Don't agree. Apple has 180,000 apps in their App store, maybe a good time to remove incentives for a new influx of non-programmer-written apps straight from Flash? Oh, they're getting rid of other stuff that also encourages people to use other tools than their own? I think they can live with that. #2…
What you've said there is that you are not rational with respect to your position re Apple. You explicitly say that people should work with Apple platform from a "sense of duty", that people should be "faithful". This seems to me to make you unqualified to counter rational arguments.
And I'm saying that Apple has a point in supporting the faithful, as in the people who are convinced this platform is the one they want to work with, because that group of programmers will probably stick around even when some new other thing comes around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, rather more like saying "We won't accept another shipment of flowers mixed up with weeds until we sort the weeds from the flowers we already have."
That's not what they said. They said we are not taking flowers/weeds combinations that arrive on purple trucks. But if you want to dump a whole mess of stuff in a red truck, that is fine with us.
The problem is Apple has no real competition. They can do almost anything they want without fear of retribution because your average consumer has no idea what any of this means. That's bad news for all us pissed off developers since Apple's new platform will continue to be extremely popular in which case devs are forced to develop for it. Google seems to be inching towards being a real threat but they also seem extre…
> ...devs are forced to develop for it. No, you're not. This is what I don't understand from all of the developer "outcry" over this: you're not forced to develop for this platform. If you don't trust it anymore, then stop developing for it. There were ways to make money as a developer before the iPhone came along. There are still plenty of ways to make money as a developer that don't involve dealing with the iPad or…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's fascinating. This is the way I look at them, as being on the side of people who agree with Apple on this one. #1: Don't agree. Apple has 180,000 apps in their App store, maybe a good time to remove incentives for a new influx of non-programmer-written apps straight from Flash? Oh, they're getting rid of other stuff that also encourages people to use other tools than their own? I think they can live with that. #2…
I don't have time to respond to each point, but I will say that it's well thought out. I don't agree with many points, but you've clearly thought about it. =) "They're putting up rules, if you follow them you should be fine." The big issue is that they are changing rules. They are. There isn't anything you can say that changes this. So even if you did follow the rules, you are still stuck with an unsure situation.
However, when introducing the iPhone SDK, they clearly said (about XCode) "This is where you'll be developing all your apps." I'm saying you could consider this a change in legal language to more clearly adhere to the spirit of the premises of that SDK.
The fact that people have been able to use products in a grey area to sidestep this, doesn't mean that the rules have been changed, just that they haven't been enforced before. Apple never said: You can develop in any IDE you want for the iPhone, and then changed their mind again. None of these tools that are affected have been approved as developer tools by Apple before, and people using them know or should have known that.
What has happened is that Apple is starting to clearly stress that Xcode is the only approved developer tool. The major change is that unapproved tools now clearly are marked as unapproved, which in itself isn't a change from before. They've always been unapproved.
Now, as far as enforcement, that might be just the same as before, since we haven't seen any rejections based on the new policy. Most people, including me, seems to be guessing on that this will mean some kind of enforcement as well, but we're just going to have to see what's going on there. Either way, if you've been using Apple approved development tools before this change, nothing has changed, and therefore there is nothing more to worry about after than before this change in stance.
It seems to me that part of number 3 (about private APIs) is bogus -- it's pretty easy to compare an executable against private API addresses to make sure it isn't linked to any of them. They likely have a tool and it likely results in an instant fail and I doubt there are any approved apps that use private APIs.
Nice work DHH!