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

New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 495 posts

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#171

Post by ghshephard »

tzs wrote: post #137
mortenjorck wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the cross-platform experience is subpar, Apple should just let these apps fail in the market.

"If the cross-platform experience is subpar, Apple should just let these apps fail in the market" Perhaps, like Nintendo, they learned the lessons from the collapse of the home video game market in 1983. When Nintendo was contemplating developing the NES, they took a deep look at what had caused the collapse. What they concluded was that the main cause of death was the market being flooded with too many crappy games.…

Poor comparison. All you need to be an authorized Apple Developer is $99. They aren't really trying to lock down the developer market, only the developer-compiler market.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#172

Post by api »

axod wrote: post #56
icey wrote: post #8

I don't really have a politically correct way to say this: What a horseshit maneuver by Apple.

Just make a webapp :/ all the freedom you need.

Yup, freedom to have: no access to hardware, no ability to do anything computationally intensive, no filesystem access, no storage, no disconnected access, ...

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#173

Post by MutantSushi »

raganwald wrote: post #46

Getting 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…

Sure, 'multiplatform compiling/targeting' is one thing. But banning non-approved languages is silly. Even apple is funding projects like RubyCocoa and bringing Python compatability to the Cocoa API. If somebody wants to write an app using CocoaTouch but finds Ruby, Python, Lua, or Mono to be a better fit for the project or their own capabilities than Obj-C, why stop them from doing so? If the apps still have to interface with Cocoa somehow, how are such app's any more/less native than one written in Obj-C? Such a policy does nothing to stop somebody from writing a cross-platform targetting framework that uses Obj-C. The language is not the real issue.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#174

Post by wvenable »

ghshephard wrote: post #165
raganwald wrote: post #46

Getting 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…

Adobe's response, from a game-theoretic perspective, is to adhere to 3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented…

Yes, but then the app still wouldn't be "originally written" in Objective-C.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#175

Post by city41 »

api wrote: post #162
city41 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had to guess, the iPhone and iPod Touch are seen as more successful endeavors to Apple than the Mac has been of late. So I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's iPhone policies start leaking their way onto the Mac too.

That's what I'm worried about. The instant that happens, I'm gone.

I think I'm already gone :( I am now seriously considering mowing down my iMac and MacBook and putting Linux on them. (Not that this makes a lick of difference, but it will make me feel better)

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#176

Post by jackowayed »

tedunangst wrote: post #122
minalecs wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lets see theres training, and consulting, theres offer the free version, and charge for a more robust paid version, theres pay for customization and don't forget ads. There are many ways to have a business model around "free software". Red Hat, Canonical, and Google are just some of the companies that have found valid business models around "free software".

Does Canonical make a profit? A business model that loses money isn't really all that valid. And the software that makes Google their money is proprietary, unless you can show me the link to the AdWords server source.

Phusion (makers of Ruby Enterprise Edition and Phusion Passenger) definitely make a profit.

I think they basically just do it through consulting + a little support and training. (See http://phusion.nl/services). But since they wrote Passenger and REE, I'm sure they can command a very high rate.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#177

Post by ewjordan »

city41 wrote: post #108
Zak wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boycotting the Mac platform (which is pretty much free of any such absurdity) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's where Apple is doing things right . You should of course, shun iPhone OS devices if you feel this way. The system76 laptops are probably generic machines from Clevo, Sager or some such with a custom badge. Alienware used to do the same thing.

If I had to guess, the iPhone and iPod Touch are seen as more successful endeavors to Apple than the Mac has been of late. So I wouldn't be surprised if Apple's iPhone policies start leaking their way onto the Mac too.

If you believe Trefis, the iPhone makes up a little over 50% of AAPL's value as compared to ~20% from the Mac line, so anyone that thinks of it as more successful is right: http://www.trefis.com/company?hm=AAPL.trefis&hk=34d9a244...

I really hope that this ridiculousness doesn't start to bleed through - the MacBook Pro is pretty much the only laptop I've ever considered usable for development, and I don't know what I'd do if I had to abandon it...

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#178

Post by wvenable »

hristov wrote: post #123
AndrewO wrote: post #88

While Adobe is going to bear the brunt of this, this looks like a calculated move against Android as well. By precluding things like PhoneGap (if it turns out that it's "an intermediary translation or compatibility layer"), they're forcing developers that can only afford to write an application once to choose one platform. Right now, iPhone is the easy choice for a lot of developers, just based on market. The end res…

Yeah, but if someone writes a compiler that compiles apps natively written for the iphone into android apps, Google will allow that and Apple can do nothing to stop it. So in a way this will mostly hurt Apple.

But Apple will still be the first-class platform and Android will be the second-class citizen in that scenario.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#179

Post by kalid »

dugmartin wrote: post #51

Wow. Just wow. I was planning on building an app in Titanium. I guess I'll wait and see how this shakes out first. btw, at the time of writing this comment Titanium's developer center is hosed. Maybe it became self aware at the same time and commited suicide. http://developer.appcelerator.com/

Agreed -- I had just found Titanium and was gearing up to make app ports using it. Now I'm nervous whether they will be allowed.

Re: New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others

#180

Post by api »

city41 wrote: post #161
api wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hardest thing to me about ditching Mac would be that Apple is the only company capable of doing a user interface. ALL other user interfaces by ALL other vendors suck. For some reason, no human beings on the entire planet other than those that work at One Infinite Loop in Cupertino are capable of doing a UI.

Although historically I have always agreed with you, I dare say Microsoft is starting to figure it out. Slowly but surely. Win7 is almost a pleasant experience.

Windows 7 is usable for two reasons:

1) They removed much of the "originality" that they did from Vista.

2) They copied more stuff from Apple, and a little bit from the Linux ecosystem.

Oh... and what's their fetish with that sickening shade of teal/blue? Yuck! It looks like smurf vomit.

Post reply on HN