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

261–270 of 495 posts

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

#261

Post by cakesy »

alex_c wrote: post #113

Welcoming explanations for how this is a good thing for Apple's end users.

The first Apps produced by the beta version of CS5 were horrible, bloated, kept everything in one class, slow.

Of course, if Adobe managed to improve this process, which they surely would have, then that argument goes.

I guess if these libraries contained a bug, then several apps would all have this bug, and Apple would get blamed, rather than the app writers. A bit of a stretch.

It is probably just wiggle room for Apple, so they can reject apps if they want to. Maybe.

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

#262

Post by tumult »

joubert wrote: post #234
rayval wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tumult's point is not about writing a single script-based solution but rather about developing an enabling technology for a whole raft of solutions. A platform-on-platform.

Like what? You can't use Objective-C to do something like that?

I could do it with assembly. But it would be stupid, and wasteful. Objective-C is not the tool for every job. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_tarpit

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

#263

Post by exit »

riso wrote: post #246

I am not trying to defend Apple, but is it possible that the approval process was being slowed done by having to ensure that all the other intermediary translators were not using private APIs?

no, it isn't any harder to determine whether binaries produced by intermediaries access private apis.

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

#264

Post by tumult »

zefhous wrote: post #229
tumult wrote: post #54

This is unsavory in the extreme. I had been writing an iPhone app in Haskell, and now I have to can it? What the fuck? Fuck you, Apple! Blowhards. Hope you guys enjoy the mass exodus of decent developers from your dumbass platform with kiddie languages.

"your dumbass platform with kiddie languages." That's ironic. Objective-C, C, and C++ are kiddie languages? I seriously doubt that there will be any sort of exodus away from iPhone development because of this. Apple provides some awesome development tools, and they want developers to use them because they improve the quality of the applications that people write.

Have you ever written software? You'd be surprised what isn't written in C or C++. I bet this clause disqualifies the majority of serious applications in the app store. Anything with a generated parser, for example, can now be rejected. Objective-C is definitely a kiddie language, it's highly dynamic and mostly suitable for creating a OO interface to lower-level code written in C, which is how almost all of OS X and Apple software works. I personally believe C is not suitable for writing large GUI applications in, and many people would agree. C++ is unwieldy and more difficult to map onto UIKit without it just ending up looking like C again.

Apple is telling people, "write software like this, because we say so."

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

#265

Post by joubert »

Totally rational if: - it doesn't undermine the market for Apple hardware - it sets back competitors

The requirement to use Apple development tools, automatically means you must use Apple hardware to develop on. Ka-ching!

So, as an Apple shareholder, I'm happy about it.

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

#266

Post by strags »

thought_alarm wrote: post #254
Zak wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has consistently demonstrated that they don't care about what developers want. They seem to believe, and have so far been shown to be correct that if they can get the consumers, developers will follow. The only way I can see this changing is if a killer app that consumers want becomes available on another platform and not iPhone OS due to Apple's restrictions.

> Apple has consistently demonstrated that they don't care about what developers want. The facts disagree. The App Store model is unusual and it is not perfect. Few developers have any experience with Cocoa or Objective-C. Developers must use a Mac. iPhone software only runs on the iPhone and is not easily ported to other platforms. Despite all of that, Apple has attracted developers to the App Store and the iPhone i…

No. Apple knows exactly how much developers will put up with.

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

#267

Post by phifty »

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…

They dont want anyone peeing in their pool. They purge the pornspam apps, they purge the rss-reader apps. I personally think this is a good thing, because developing a native iPhone app in C/C++/Objective-C means you will more likely have a vested interest in the iPhone/Mac platform other than to make a quick buck with a flatuence app. At the very least, you're a more dedicated developer.

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

#268

Post by leandroferreira »

thought_alarm wrote: post #254
Zak wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has consistently demonstrated that they don't care about what developers want. They seem to believe, and have so far been shown to be correct that if they can get the consumers, developers will follow. The only way I can see this changing is if a killer app that consumers want becomes available on another platform and not iPhone OS due to Apple's restrictions.

> Apple has consistently demonstrated that they don't care about what developers want. The facts disagree. The App Store model is unusual and it is not perfect. Few developers have any experience with Cocoa or Objective-C. Developers must use a Mac. iPhone software only runs on the iPhone and is not easily ported to other platforms. Despite all of that, Apple has attracted developers to the App Store and the iPhone i…

Apple only cares about their image. They make that "glow" effect on produvt to attract costumers, and developers go wwhere the people are.

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

#269

Post by Keyframe »

rimantas wrote: post #84

Adobe will not be happy about this, which makes me think: given how events unfolded recently in Adobe-Apple relationship and given that Photoshop is getting crappier and crappier in its OS X incarnation—has Apple some Photoshop/CS analog in the works?

I wouldn't be surprised if there were "unexpected" difficulties or delays of CS5 for OSX. Same stuff happened when Apple pulled a Final Cut on Adobe and Adobe pulled Premiere off of Mac back then - all accompanied with lots of sparks. I guess things never settled between those two companies ever since.

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

#270

Post by rortian »

barrkel wrote: post #97

Can someone put up a link to the full text of license?

I hope you understand there is a reason that this can't be done: Developers cannot disclose the license. The first time I and many others saw one of them was when EFF FOMAd one from NASA.
Post reply on HN