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

Wozniak calls for open Apple

itnews.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 151 posts

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#141

Post by slowpoke »

freehunter wrote: post #138
slowpoke wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me this is a joke. I have to pay to load applications I wrote myself on my own device ? This is even more ridiculous than just locking down the platform. This is a slap in the face. Good thing WP7 is failing to reach the mass market so far. I seriously hope it stays that way.

You're paying for an affordable, restricted developer account. This is better than iOS. Don't feign outrage or spew hyperbole just because it's not 100% of what you demand. You can't defend your argument that a $10 dev account is somehow worse than a $99 dev account.

My point is that this is ridiculous in the first place. There is no reason to disallow people from running their own code on their own devices.

It's even worse like this. What they are doing is essentially making an undesirable situtation, then capitializing on that by offering you a slightly less shitty solution (which is still far from reasonable):

"Hey, you could buy a $100/y dev account, but we're so incredibly generous that we'll allow you to run a few programs at a premium of $10!"

They are charging for something that should be one of the most essential freedoms of a computing device. This is insane, no matter how you try to sugar-coat and excuse it.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#142

Post by ricardobeat »

rogerbinns wrote: post #137
ricardobeat wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a "iOS Provisioning Portal" and the "Development Provisioning Assistant", a 4-step wizard that guides you through creating the necessary profiles, but they are behind a login. There's a few SSs over at PhoneGap docs: http://www.adobe.com/fr/devnet/dreamweaver/articles/phonegap...

I cannot find any way of doing this other than handing over $99 to Apple. See for example this page https://developer.apple.com/programs/start/ios/ The provisioning portal is supposedly at http://developer.apple.com/ios/manage/overview/index.action but it won't let you in until you hand over money for annual membership.

That's correct.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#143

Post by freehunter »

slowpoke wrote: post #141
freehunter wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're paying for an affordable, restricted developer account. This is better than iOS. Don't feign outrage or spew hyperbole just because it's not 100% of what you demand. You can't defend your argument that a $10 dev account is somehow worse than a $99 dev account.

My point is that this is ridiculous in the first place. There is no reason to disallow people from running their own code on their own devices. It's even worse like this. What they are doing is essentially making an undesirable situtation, then capitializing on that by offering you a slightly less shitty solution (which is still far from reasonable): "Hey, you could buy a $100/y dev account, but we're so incredibly g…

The basic argument is, it's a cell phone. It's an embedded device. It's not a computer (as proved by the "post-PC-world" phrase). A traditional cell phone could run apps (Tetris, Snake, etc). A game console is built to run "apps" (video games). Yet no one is loudly complaining that they cannot run their own software there for free. A smartphone is more closely related to a game console than a traditional personal computer.

Will we reach the point where smartphone (or smartphone like devices in the future) are considered computers and we can use them freely? I hope so. It might happen. It might not. What we can count on is there will always be the choice on the market for those who require that choice. Not everyone does. I have a Windows Phone. I've never been bothered by not being able to install my own software. I also have an HP Touchpad with Android and WebOS, the two freest OSes on the market right now. Never sideloaded. I don't need to.

My point? Your outrage is misplaced, for several reasons listed above. People often talk about consumer choice, but the rubber meets the road when consumers willingly make an informed decision (in my case) that the crowd doesn't understand. I bought a Palm Pre not because of the freedom, but because of the UX. I bought a Windows Phone for the same reason. Sometimes a smartphone is just a smartphone. You might not understand my choice, but I do and that's what counts in the end.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#144

Post by Tloewald »

JackC wrote: post #48
Tloewald wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh. This meme. 1) plenty of non apple browsers in app store, try searching. No HTML rendering engines because that's a security issue. 1a) Microsoft did a heck of a lot more than bundle IE. They made it impossible to remove or avoid or even hide. (you can hide Safari on the tenth home screen in iOS -- IE was locked onto your desktop). They also did similar things to screw around with Java, QuickTime. Borland, Parad…

No HTML rendering engines because that's a security issue. It's not a security issue; there are plenty of apps that download and render content, just not HTML content. You're not allowed to publish browsers on iOS because it's a business model issue. Browsers download and run code. Apple likes being the only one who can decide what code runs on an iPhone, so Safari is the only rendering engine. Apple simply has some…

Downloading data and rendering a ui around it is very different from providing a general purpose HTML renderer. One is going to make you vulnerable to attacks on a single custom protocol, the other to any security issue in the rendering engine for all users of that browser. It may well be that Apple derives both business and security benefits from sticking to one HTML rendering engine, but it's simply untrue to argue there is no security benefit.

As for the iPhone being crippled — it's the only significant computer platform with no malware in the wild. And it's not for lack of interest - jail broken iPhones are not free of malware. It's a tradeoff that some customers choose to make. It's also a trade off apple thought made sense for a device we carry around, communicate with, which can track our movements, and so on.

Personally, I think the security model apple is pursuing on Mac OS X is better than that for iOS (an opt in walled garden which is what I think you want). Maybe they'll converge. But I don't think there's any evidence (so far) of insidious intent behind Apple's moves. They're figuring this stuff out as they go along, and they're being careful. One thing is pretty certain -- they can't put the genie back in the bottle, so as they ease up on security and other restrictios they need to figure out what works and what doesn't.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#145

Post by Tloewald »

slowpoke wrote: post #134
Tloewald wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative at the time was to buy an mp3 player with no way for normal people to load or buy music. It's precisely because of the lack of hoop jumping that iPod took off. Don't confuse the customer experience with the developer experience. Apple has always considered ease of use for end users a top priority and ease of use for programmers to be a distant nth.

No matter how much you might try to excuse it, there is no greater user friendliness than a device simply identifying as data storage to the OS. It's ridiculous to have to use a separate program when you could just use your file manager.

That's a consequence of cutting deals with the music industry. Apple had to block users using their iPods as devices for copying music around to enable the iTunes store to work. There are all kinds of trade off in iTunes design, but in the end it's the only significant end to end solution out there, even after all this time. (Kindle Fire is close.)

Oh and anything that involves the file system is not friendly for a surprisingly huge number of users.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#146

Post by Tloewald »

StuffMaster wrote: post #56
Tloewald wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative at the time was to buy an mp3 player with no way for normal people to load or buy music. It's precisely because of the lack of hoop jumping that iPod took off. Don't confuse the customer experience with the developer experience. Apple has always considered ease of use for end users a top priority and ease of use for programmers to be a distant nth.

Whoah there, iTunes is not ease of use. I had an MP3 player before the iPod was ever relased and it was most definitely easier to load music onto.

Back in the day you install iTunes, stick a cd in your computer, iTunes recognizes the cd, rips it, names the tracks, loads it onto your iPod.

This is back when you had to figure out which Mp3 encoder you wanted to use.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#147

Post by slowpoke »

freehunter wrote: post #143
slowpoke wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that this is ridiculous in the first place. There is no reason to disallow people from running their own code on their own devices. It's even worse like this. What they are doing is essentially making an undesirable situtation, then capitializing on that by offering you a slightly less shitty solution (which is still far from reasonable): "Hey, you could buy a $100/y dev account, but we're so incredibly g…

The basic argument is, it's a cell phone. It's an embedded device. It's not a computer (as proved by the "post-PC-world" phrase). A traditional cell phone could run apps (Tetris, Snake, etc). A game console is built to run "apps" (video games). Yet no one is loudly complaining that they cannot run their own software there for free. A smartphone is more closely related to a game console than a traditional personal com…

Neither of your point disproves the fact that it's ridiculous. It's not about whether you want to run your own applications or not, it's about having that choice whenever you want to. On every computing device. This is - or should be - a fundamental Freedom, one which you should not be able to sign away, not even by an "informed choice".

Citing examples like feature phones and gaming consoles isn't helpful, either. Just because nobody complained in the past doesn't make it okay. Also, as the quite active homebrew scene around most consoles proves, there is value in being able to run your own stuff on gaming consoles. You might remember the deep shit that Sony got themselves into when they decided to turn off OtherOS on the PS3 for no reason whatsoever.

Anyways, I think consoles - while owning quite a few myself - are a thing of the past. They're eventually going to die. The coming next generation might be the last we see.

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#148

Post by slowpoke »

Tloewald wrote: post #145
slowpoke wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how much you might try to excuse it, there is no greater user friendliness than a device simply identifying as data storage to the OS. It's ridiculous to have to use a separate program when you could just use your file manager.

That's a consequence of cutting deals with the music industry. Apple had to block users using their iPods as devices for copying music around to enable the iTunes store to work. There are all kinds of trade off in iTunes design, but in the end it's the only significant end to end solution out there, even after all this time. (Kindle Fire is close.) Oh and anything that involves the file system is not friendly for a s…

>Oh and anything that involves the file system is not friendly for a surprisingly huge number of users.

"User friendliness" in this case also includes developers, who could easily write a program that interacts with the device. For example, any media player could be used to synchronize music (if it supports that feature).

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#149

Post by WickyNilliams »

dave1010uk wrote: post #87
rogerbinns wrote: post #21

Here is a nice comparison. Buy a mobile device and try to use the standard developer tools to put Hello World on it. Android: Download Eclipse (Windows, Linux or Mac) and the Android SDK (Windows, Linux or Mac) - no accounts or registration needed for either of these. In your phone menus enable development and connect via USB. In Eclipse make your hello world project, and hit Run or Debug. Enjoy. Apple: You must buy…

Maemo (as used on the Nokia N900) : On the device, tap the menu button, then tap "Xterm" Type in 'nano helloworld.py' Enter the text 'print "Hello, World!"' Ctrl-x, ctrl-s to save the file Enter 'python helloworld.py' and press enter Of course, as Maemo is based on Debian, you can easily install Ruby, PHP or even a C compiler.

Android:

    Download AIDE from play market
    Enable apps from untrusted sources
    Start coding
    Run your app!
AIDE really is a fantastic achievement, i had a play about with it when my laptop died a few weeks back and i was itching for some coding! It's a fully-fledged development environment with code completion, refactoring and many other cool features. Something surreal about writing android apps on an android device!

Re: Wozniak calls for open Apple

#150

Post by peterkelly »

lolcraft wrote: post #132
peterkelly wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason a mac is required for development is that iOS and OS X are essentially the same operating system - they just have different user interfaces. When you run your app under the iOS "simulator", it is actually running as a native OS X app, linked against a version the iOS user interface libraries that have been compiled for OS X. For Apple to support development on other platforms, as far as I can see the only…

For the sound of it, the job would be compiling a cross-target version of GCC/LLVM and putting QEMU, an iOS ISO and some libs in a TGZ. Could hardly be called a major feat of engineering.

Yep, but qemu is very slow - it's why the Android emulator is basically unusable.
Post reply on HN