Apple iPhone and related items (cont.)

[magneze]

It's a stupid restriction, you can write shit code in Objective C in the same way you can write it in any language. Restricting development like this is short-sighted and fast tracks the iPhone to a Mac-like niche market. Apple have made the mobile market all about the apps - Android already makes it loads easier to develop apps, now Apple makes it even harder to develop on their own platform? I can imagine the scenes in Apple tbh - loads of devs going "wtf, this is stupid", with execs going "yeah, this will show Adobe et al". Guess who really knows what they're talking about though.

 

[Structaural]

If we’re going to ban inefficient code that’s the product of a poor cross-platform porting framework and results in a goddamn awful app, Apple could have the decency to ban their own Windows port of iTunes.

from the comments on this article

 

[sunnysidedown]

It's a stupid restriction, you can write shit code in Objective C in the same way you can write it in any language. Restricting development like this is short-sighted and fast tracks the iPhone to a Mac-like niche market. Apple have made the mobile market all about the apps - Android already makes it loads easier to develop apps, now Apple makes it even harder to develop on their own platform? I can imagine the scenes in Apple tbh - loads of devs going "wtf, this is stupid", with execs going "yeah, this will show Adobe et al". Guess who really knows what they're talking about though.

but shit code in Obj C will still be nativelly compiled (with all those benefits) and future proof. if you're meaning that the app may look like a piece of shit then fair enough

If OS 4.0 results in cleaning up all the shovelware currently stacked up in the app store, and moves all the potential Flash wrappers/converters to other platforms, I think that will be a good thing. There is a lot of faux emotion doing the rounds at the moment and if the result is certain devs moving away from the iPhone then fair enough - it's about quality not quantity, and if that means missing out on some potentially great apps then thats a risk that has to be taken.

But it's early days still.

 

[grit]

but shit code in Obj C will still be nativelly compiled (with all those benefits) and future proof. if you're meaning that the app may look like a piece of shit then fair enough

If OS 4.0 results in cleaning up all the shovelware currently stacked up in the app store, and moves all the potential Flash wrappers/converters to other platforms, I think that will be a good thing. There is a lot of faux emotion doing the rounds at the moment and if the result is certain devs moving away from the iPhone then fair enough - it's about quality not quantity, and if that means missing out on some potentially great apps then thats a risk that has to be taken.

But it's early days still.

This is all about raising the barriers of entry to produce applications for the iPhone OS. Whats the count on the app store 150,000? something like that.

They need a way to filter out some of the less professional developers and hopefully improve the quality of the applications.

 

[Sunray]

It's a stupid restriction, you can write shit code in Objective C in the same way you can write it in any language. Restricting development like this is short-sighted and fast tracks the iPhone to a Mac-like niche market. Apple have made the mobile market all about the apps - Android already makes it loads easier to develop apps, now Apple makes it even harder to develop on their own platform? I can imagine the scenes in Apple tbh - loads of devs going "wtf, this is stupid", with execs going "yeah, this will show Adobe et al". Guess who really knows what they're talking about though.

Yeah but its way easier to developer for the iPhone because there is just the one screen size and cpu and input technology.

Android has busted this out to multi-platform hell, with every combination possible plus add on skins that do stuff like the droid and the sense UI from Motorola and HTC.

 

[magneze]

but shit code in Obj C will still be nativelly compiled (with all those benefits) and future proof. if you're meaning that the app may look like a piece of shit then fair enough

If OS 4.0 results in cleaning up all the shovelware currently stacked up in the app store, and moves all the potential Flash wrappers/converters to other platforms, I think that will be a good thing. There is a lot of faux emotion doing the rounds at the moment and if the result is certain devs moving away from the iPhone then fair enough - it's about quality not quantity, and if that means missing out on some potentially great apps then thats a risk that has to be taken.

But it's early days still.

That's my point though, it's not going to do anything about quality.

 

[magneze]

Yeah but its way easier to developer for the iPhone because there is just the one screen size and cpu and input technology.

Android has busted this out to multi-platform hell, with every combination possible plus add on skins that do stuff like the droid and the sense UI from Motorola and HTC.

Just developing for a single platform is pretty limiting though, unless you're sure it's going to become the dominant platform. The restrictions about using non-Apple hardware to develop the app on had already turned me off looking at it as a dev platform. This new restriction only reinforces that decision for me. I can see it being quietly reversed tbh.

 

[grit]

Just developing for a single platform is pretty limiting though, unless you're sure it's going to become the dominant platform. The restrictions about using non-Apple hardware to develop the app on had already turned me off looking at it as a dev platform. This new restriction only reinforces that decision for me. I can see it being quietly reversed tbh.

Yeah, but if your target market is consumers you have to support it. Fragmentation is the cost of doing business.

 

[magneze]

Yeah, but if your target market is consumers you have to support it. Fragmentation is the cost of doing business.

I don't think you have to. If it had >50% market share then you might be able to make that argument, but it's 25% and dropping.

 

[editor]

the main thing here is user experience, apple knows that if all apps are compiled to their spec then they are not going to get any potential issues arising from wrapped applications after a software update (for instance), and yes it's about restricting to a degree, which is not necessarilly a bad thing in my book.

Funny thing is, I don't see people suffering so terribly on platforms that aren't so ridiculously closed as Apple's.

If OS 4.0 results in cleaning up all the shovelware currently stacked up in the app store,...

How's it going to do that then? Apple seems very keen to trumpet the amount of apps available at every opportunity, even if a substantial amount of them are of very dubious merit.

 

[elbows]

This is all about raising the barriers of entry to produce applications for the iPhone OS. Whats the count on the app store 150,000? something like that.

They need a way to filter out some of the less professional developers and hopefully improve the quality of the applications.

I dont think thats the primary aim. More likely they want lots of software exclusives for the iphone and dont want it to be too easy for developers to port their apps to other platforms. Even that isnt the only factor, Ive droned on about all the other reasons Apple dont like flash etc several times before.

 

[elbows]

But having said that they did do some other stuff recently to weed out a range of apps that were very basic and knocked together via 3rd party 'app template' type systems.

 

[Sunray]

I don't see what there is to complain about? The iPhone does x things and Apple have y restrictions.

If you don't like x and y there is plenty of other phones out there that are supposedly as good or better. Work with them and make those platforms more attractive than the iPhone.

The iPhone still wins for me because Apple are putting a lot of effort into developing the platform.

 

[grit]

I don't think you have to. If it had >50% market share then you might be able to make that argument, but it's 25% and dropping.

Its not just raw numbers, iPhone owners are the demograph that have proven themselves to make purchases. The average iPhone owner is interested in and willing to pay for applications.

 

[OneStrike]

Just to add a little sub topic, never get your iphone wet, even in rain, it broke mine and liquid damage voids your warranty grrrr.

 

[sunnysidedown]

Funny thing is, I don't see people suffering so terribly on platforms that aren't so ridiculously closed as Apple's.

I don't think anyone is really suffering anywhere so whats the problem? people have a choice between platforms and what works best for them.

If you're referring to Adobe to Adobe suffering and it's Flash users who want to wrap up there stuff for the iPhone then it isn't going to happen, it's not as if Flash has been available on the iPhone anyway - all it means is that one export option from one particular Adobe application will not work on one particular mobile platform - a platform which makes up for what? 28% of the market (forgive me if i'm off the mark here).

Obviously there will be those caught in the cross-fire, but they too have a choice, and we still need to see how this pans out - also this new clause is a more defined rewording of a previous clause, and as elbows (i think) has mentioned, Apple have already been pulling wrapped apps from the store.

Apple seems very keen to trumpet the amount of apps available at every opportunity, even if a substantial amount of them are of very dubious merit.

For the time being yes, of course they want to show the App store as being a success and let everyone know how many applications there are... but long term it's not about the numbers, they've reached saturation point already and this is a move to start rectifying the situation.

 

[sunnysidedown]

I don't see what there is to complain about? The iPhone does x things and Apple have y restrictions.

If you don't like x and y there is plenty of other phones out there that are supposedly as good or better. Work with them and make those platforms more attractive than the iPhone.

The iPhone still wins for me because Apple are putting a lot of effort into developing the platform.

exactly.

the internet is awash with people pissing in their knickers over this - even Arstechnica have joined in on the hysteria.

 

[elbows]

There are obviously some things worth complaining about. Not everyone shares those complaints, fine. That doesnt mean those that do have concerns or complaints can be brushed off as irrelevant. There are legitimate reasons for concern, especially from some developers. I wouldnt go as far as to call it hysteria but yes it does get a lot of attention, with both the good and bad of apple and the iphone getting more attention than is really needed in recent years. But it is a high profile device, with games being played by a variety of corporations and the stakes are high.

 

[sunnysidedown]

There are obviously some things worth complaining about. Not everyone shares those complaints, fine. That doesnt mean those that do have concerns or complaints can be brushed off as irrelevant.

I'm not saying it's irrelevant for devs (i'm not concerned for Adobe and it's wrappers), I'm interested in how this pans out for the devs themselves, but there will be choices to make ahead, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

This is not exactly a new modus operandi for Apple, they have been like this since the 80's - if you don't like their methods, go someplace else. (that's not aimed at you btw)

There are legitimate reasons for concern, especially from some developers.

Apple is not going to allow code that has not been compiled to their spec on their OS on their device, how you get to that point is the issue, and we have yet to see what effects this will have (besides the obvious).
If Apple's intention is to get dedicated iPhone devs producing applications to their spec on their platform, I think that would be of great benefit to the end user.

An example - there has always been a huge amount of more software available on the Windows platform than on the Mac, this has not stopped dedicated Mac software developers creating some wonderful applications that I could not honestly live without and which are not available on any other platform. On windows you may find over a dozen apps tailored to one specific task, on the mac 3 or 4, this to me is a good thing, I know that I can spend a week or so testing a couple of these to find the one that best suits me, instead of trying to test over half a dozen of them. Obviously this will not suit everyone, that does not surprise me, what does surprise me is the huge outcry going on in comment sections all over the net.* (and the annoying thing here is that the majority of negative posts are just the usual shit slinging anti-Apple crap that gets brought up all the time, instead of informative and constructive criticism by actual devs, who are the only people this will effect).

* actually that does not surprise me anymore these days...

 

[editor]

Interesting discussion from devs - and some responses fromJ obs - here: http://www.taoeffect.com/blog/2010/04/steve-jobs-response-on-section-3-3-1/

The Mac has only been helped by the fact that Firefox, Ableton Live, and hundreds of other high-quality applications can run on it thanks to the fact that developers have a choice as to what tools they can use on it.

Crappy developers will make crappy apps regardless of how many layers there are, and it doesn’t make sense to limit source-to-source conversion tools like Unity3D and others. They’re all building apps through the iPhone developer tools in the end so the situation isn’t even comparable to the Mac where applications can completely avoid using Apple’s frameworks by replacing them with others.

In my opinion, 3.3.1 only serves to make the platform less attractive to legitimate developers, giving them reason to write their software for competing platforms instead.

 

[sunnysidedown]

Interesting discussion from devs - and some responses fromJ obs - here: http://www.taoeffect.com/blog/2010/04/steve-jobs-response-on-section-3-3-1/

he misses the point when talking about Mac software development, we are discussing the mobile platform here & it's OS, it is a completely different beast to the desktop platform and it's OS.

 

[sunnysidedown]

I think the Jobs comment about Grubers post being insightful is interesting.

here's a bit of that post:

I don’t think Apple even dreams of a Windows-like share of the mobile market. Microsoft’s mantra was (and remains) “Windows everywhere”. Apple doesn’t want everywhere, they just want everywhere good. The idea though, is to establish the Cocoa Touch APIs and the App Store as a de facto standard for mobile apps — huge share of both developers and users.

So what Apple does not want is for some other company to establish a de facto standard software platform on top of Cocoa Touch. Not Adobe’s Flash. Not .NET (through MonoTouch). If that were to happen, there’s no lock-in advantage. If, say, a mobile Flash software platform — which encompassed multiple lower-level platforms, running on iPhone, Android, Windows Phone 7, and BlackBerry — were established, that app market would not give people a reason to prefer the iPhone.

And, obviously, such a meta-platform would be out of Apple’s control. Consider a world where some other company’s cross-platform toolkit proved wildly popular. Then Apple releases major new features to iPhone OS, and that other company’s toolkit is slow to adopt them. At that point, it’s the other company that controls when third-party apps can make use of these features.

So from Apple’s perspective, changing the iPhone Developer Program License Agreement to prohibit the use of things like Flash CS5 and MonoTouch to create iPhone apps makes complete sense. I’m not saying you have to like this. I’m not arguing that it’s anything other than ruthless competitiveness. I’m not arguing (up to this point) that it benefits anyone other than Apple itself. I’m just arguing that it makes sense from Apple’s perspective — and it was Apple’s decision to make.

rest here

 

[sunnysidedown]

good article here on the Apple v Adobe Flash Myths.

 

[paolo]

It amuses me to note that, in all of this, the urban forums are pleasantly free of irritating 'enhanced' content. Users aren't free to post videos, avatars, sigs and all that other dross that drags down (for me) other forum sites.

And I doubt a "post conversion tool" (that would - say - copy ones posts from another forum) would get much truck here either.

Editor's unwavering views on how a forum should be done is a huge asset. But perhaps he should also see a little of Jobs in himself. He'll hate that observation, but I mean it as compliment, not a point-score.

 

[magneze]

he misses the point when talking about Mac software development, we are discussing the mobile platform here & it's OS, it is a completely different beast to the desktop platform and it's OS.

How is it different? I really don't think it is. It's less mature that's all.

 

[elbows]

good article here on the Apple v Adobe Flash Myths.

That article is a tad over the top in several places but it does have some points. The one I most agree with is that there has been no really good mobile version of flash, this is changing but its well overdue and thats nobodies fault but Adobe. OK its also because mobile hardware didnt have enough grunt till recent years but Adobe still failed to position itself to be able to take advantage of new developements in hardware quickly enough.

There have been many occasions in the last 10 years when I've toying with going with flash, but either the tools or the results put me off before I got through the 30 day trial. The rendering quality from flash always annoyed me, along with sluggishness in certain areas that left me underwhelmed. That hasnt stopped lots of people from doing good things with flash, but there has long been an opportunity to usurp flash by doing things better.

Its not like Apple are Adobes only cause of concern either. While Google may be supporting flash in all sorts of ways, they have also been doing things that may kill flash by offering better alternatives. The Quake 2 demo that uses WebGL & an assortment of HTML5 features is a good example. And years before any of these things, AJAX was offering a more dynamic web without the downsides of flash, stuff that devs could have done using flash for years but didnt because either the development experience/cost or end-user experience was not good enough. I see Apples stance as accelerating a trend that was already happening - it inconveniences some users along the way but it probably gets web developers & users to a better place more quickly than would otherwise have happened.

 

[sunnysidedown]

I see Apples stance as accelerating a trend that was already happening - it inconveniences some users along the way but it probably gets web developers & users to a better place more quickly than would otherwise have happened.

someone buy this man a drink

 

[editor]

Editor's unwavering views on how a forum should be done is a huge asset. But perhaps he should also see a little of Jobs in himself. He'll hate that observation, but I mean it as compliment, not a point-score.

I'll take it as intended, but it's hardly a valid comparison: users are often asked what features they want and their response guides what features the site gets. Changes and possible new features are then discussed by the mods and any technical considerations weighed up - and I certainly don't always get my way either! And the biggest difference is of course, that no one has to pay to access the forums.

FYI, the only reason we haven't got embedded YouTube videos on some forums is because it's not technically possible to selectively implement that feature at the moment.

Elsewhere, the inevitable anti-Apple pro-Adobe Facebook group has been spawned:

The recent war between Adobe and Apple reached a breaking point on April 8, 2010, when Steve Jobs not only recommitted to never allowing Flash to run on the iPhone or iPad, but even banning Adobe's new Flash-to-iPhone C compiler which was to go on sale Saturday, April 10.

There is no longer any debate as to who the "bad guy" is in this story -- Apple has proven themselves to be anti-competition, anti-developer, and anti-consumer.

I stand with Adobe.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=info&ref=search&gid=113492765344092

 

[editor]

I see Apples stance as accelerating a trend that was already happening - it inconveniences some users along the way but it probably gets web developers & users to a better place more quickly than would otherwise have happened.

Except Android is growing far faster than Apple without the need for such hands-on restrictions.

 

[sunnysidedown]

How is it different? I really don't think it is. It's less mature that's all.

to see it as less mature I think is getting off the track a bit, it's not about becoming OS X, it's about becoming something even better.