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

401–410 of 495 posts

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

#401

Post by juasko »

moron4hire wrote: post #309
tzs wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.…

"The games at this time were all pretty good. A consumer could go out, buy a game based just on the information printed on the box, and go home and be pretty sure they'd have a good experience." Rose tinted glasses. They still managed to release buggy, downright broken software. It wasn't about quality, it was about control.

You don't achive quality without control

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

#403

Post by gaius »

jlees wrote: post #325
thought_alarm wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

"It would seem Apple knows exactly what developers want." Aye, money outweighs freedom even today.

Money is freedom.

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

#404

Post by stcredzero »

nailer wrote: post #370
bad_user wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Red Hat, Canonical, and Google are just some of the companies that have found valid business models around "free software". That's a fallacy. The majority of open-source sponsors are selling closed systems or services to sponsor their "free software" involvement. Google doesn't have a business model around "free software". Neither does IBM or Sun. I'm also not Mozilla and my apps would probably never get in front o…

> > Red Hat, Canonical, and Google are just some of the companies that have found valid business models around "free software". > That's a fallacy. > The majority of open-source sponsors are selling closed systems or services to sponsor their "free software" involvement. Red Hat, Canonical and a large chunk of IBM GS wouldn't be able to sell those services with proprietary products - the OSS licensing of various Linu…

I agree with you re: Google. They're not a service business and could have written their own OS or used a proprietary one and not affect revenue.

Not sure what licensing fees would have done to their overhead costs in the early days.

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

#405

Post by bettynormal »

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…

MonoTouch isn't really a cross platform toolkit. It is not providing a replacement API for Apple's APIs just allowing them to be called from C# and allowing you to use extra code you have in C# that Apple by definition doesn't have.

the Modern C# language provides many advantages over the Objective C used on the iPhone which does even have garbage collection.

If they intend to succeed in the Enterprise they should of encouraged MonoTouch not squashed it.

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

#406

Post by stcredzero »

philjackson wrote: post #364
blub wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is human nature, it's not related to source openness. Open source would just allow you to start over after you have been treated badly if you have the needed development skills (hello Mr. Drepper). It's also worth noting that the users aren't getting screwed at all by Apple, only the developers and only a small fraction of them.

I don't get it. You don't have to "start over" you continue from where you left off. Only some members of the community need development skills. Secondly, users are harmed by these actions as there will be fewer developers making apps for them, plus, Apple are potentially stifling innovation.

It's on purpose. Apple willfully sacrifices innovation for control and UX. Users accept it for UX.

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

#407

Post by juasko »

colinwiseman wrote: post #383
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…

I can understand Apple wanting to lock down their property to make sure what comes on it is quality and secure. Look at MS, anyone can develop almost anything on it, and what we have is a massive bug and virus trap. BUT... Microsoft was given into trouble by the competition commission over the tight reign it had on Windows. Now what are we saying, Apple should be allowed to get away with near enough the same things M…

well i cannot agree with you on the apple/mircosoft issue. Microsoft has an near monopoly or defacto monopoly if we call it that.

What MS decides on does effect the whole market. What Apple decides affect the Apple users only. But me as an Apple user Is affected of all dumb anti standard decisions MS have done. My web experience is crippled and I have to deal with name extensions and even more so now in OSX 10.6.

Under MacOS9 i only had to know if a file was going to be used on a windows machine and then add the proper extension in the name. But it's uggly and wrong.

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

#408

Post by bettynormal »

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…

20 years ago I used to rave about how Objective C was 10 years ahead of anything else out there. Unfortunately it's now 10 years behind C#....

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

#409

Post by juasko »

bliss wrote: post #212
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…

This is seriously putting me off. I was not thinking of a third party approach, but it limits me when I want to use my OWN scripting language when developing apps. Does this stretch to build scripts??

There was a sentece from Apple, Apple aproved tools could be used. Don't excpect Flas to be one of them and I totally hate Flash.

When they produce less buggy Flas that doesn't have memoryleaks enough to kill a new computer with 4GB ram Core2Duo only running outlook and Google maps in IE7. Then maybe I'm also intressted to run Flash in my phone. ATM flash is blocked in my Nokia.

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

#410

Post by sunilshah_99 »

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…

Apple is really trying hard to enclose and seal a closed garden environment, that much more lucrative for them. HOWEVER, 98% of video seen is currently viewed via flash. If Adobe have a cross compiler that works and apps can be translated WELL onto the apple platform, why should apple care? if they dont work, the user will decide!! Is this Microsoft all over again? And is it non-competitive? A legal suit looms over apple's head. One I suspect they will lose.
Post reply on HN