Slashdot Mirror
iPhone SDK Agreement Shuts Out HyperCard Clone
Halo1 writes "Demonstrating it's not just about Flash, Apple has officially rejected for the first time another alternative iPhone development environment following its controversial iPhone SDK Agreement changes. Even though RunRev proposed to retool its HyperCard-style development environment to directly expose all of the iPhone OS's APIs, Steve Jobs still rejected its proposal. The strength of RunRev's business case, with a large-scale iPad deployment project in education hinging on the availability of its tool, does not bode well for projects that have less commercial clout. Salient point: at last February's shareholders' meeting, Jobs went on the record saying that something like HyperCard on the iPad would be great, 'but someone would have to create it.'"
Just imagine the outcry if Microsoft banned all other development environments than Visual Studio and .NET from Windows. It would be hit with lawsuits and there would be tons of stories and tens of thousands of comments dissing MS on slashdot.
People also always cry about how consoles are locked down. Slashdotters cry about DRM, restrictions and not giving them control of the devices they buy.
But suddenly when it's Apple it's all ok. Why the hell?
product which pretty much everyone knew wouldn't get approved with the changes ... and now we're surprised?
This might have been news when the changes were introduced, now its just:
Duh, you knew you were treading on thin ice before you even submitted it.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
The strength of RunRev's business case, with a large-scale iPad deployment project in education hinging on the availability of its tool, does not bode well for projects that have less commercial clout.
What does an old-school rapper / producer / d.j / reverend have to do with apple development.
Oh wait. I dyslexia have. My bad.
Your incessant first post trolling in every story about Linux or Apple is extremely tiresome and I find the way your moronic threads often come to dominate the comments to be disgusting.
Find something better to do with all your fucking free time, sopssa.
Forgive my ignorance (or is it iGnorance) on the matter, I have no idea about iMacs and iPotatoes, but here is my question:
Is it even possible to have an alternative to the iTunes provider? I mean is it possible to have another site allowing iPhones and iMaxiPads users to download whatever software they want on their fabulous toys?
You can't handle the truth.
Do you actually believe that Steve Jobs personally does all rejection......really?
Jobs went on the record saying that something like HyperCard on the iPad would be great, 'but someone would have to create it'.
This being the same Steve Jobs that effectively killed the original Apple Hypercard back in 2000?
Maybe that should have read, "something like HyperCard on the iPad would be great, but we would have to create it, otherwise it clearly would not be insanely great..."
...we PC users are hearing our swan song. This "magical device" has us all wetting our nickers in panic.
"...Steve Jobs still rejected its proposal..."
I am wondering whether it was at Steve Jobs' sole discretion to reject the app. If it is indeed the case, he must be a busy man these days looking at every app because I understand the iPhone has 200,000 apps. Right?
Steve Jobs has turned into a megalomaniac who is driven completely by business.
/. community, full of geeks, don't get this. Apple has turned into everything a geek does not want.
I am not even sure if this is metamorphosis. I think this would have a lot earlier had Apple been as successful as Micrsosft turned out to be. We are just finding out what assholes the CEO and the company are now.
Even after this, I can still understand why those who want to be cool and hip go crazy for apple products. What I do not understand is the
Steve is really trying to sell himself short, here. His reality distortion field has gone to his head, and he thinks he's bulletproof. And you know what? When he was the only game in town, he was bulletproof.
But he's not the only game in town. In fact, as of 1st Q 2010, he's not even the biggest game in town! As an application developer myself, the recent shenanigans around dictating to developers like me how we can or can't do our job and/or what tools we can use make the iphone a non-starter.
Sorry, too hostile for me, too much lockin for my clients, and not enough benefit. Android it is!
Isn't it ironic that the company responsible for opening up the smartphone market is now offering the most closed platform?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Apple are already struggling, and widely criticised, for their slow and inconsistent 'approvals' process.
Imagine the explosion of apps that would happen if multiple, and easy, development paths were opened up on the iPad/Phone.
They'd drown...
I
Then perhaps the question should be phrased as:
- how would this app need to be created so as to meet the requirements of the license?
William
(who is quite fond of Runtime Revolution as it was originally called and developed a ``ProportionBar'' app in it:
Windows: http://mysite.verizon.net/william_franklin_adams/portfolio/interfaceconcepts/proportionbar.zip
Mac OS X: http://mysite.verizon.net/william_franklin_adams/portfolio/interfaceconcepts/proportionbar.app.sit )
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
You can develop however you like on OS X, which would be the analogous case to developing on Windows.
Find me a 10" MacBook on Apple's web site. The closest thing is iPad.
i like the iphone app situation and management better than android. downloading apps to my computer and backing them up for later use is better than doing it on the phone. and the stupid app restriction in android is annoying for me. If Google can fix these issues quick they have a big chance to beat the iphone. a good cross platform dev environment will make it easier to develop applications for all the different android phones out there
I just picked up a HTC Incredible and shall I say it is, incredible... the significant reasons are AT&T sucks and the iPhone is cool but it is so married to Apple's blessings. It's one thing to be cool; it's entirely another to be free to choose what you do with your tools. Apple should be careful because it's only a matter of time that something like Android will come and decimate your business model.
Yep, That Steve Jobs is a real dope..
Lockdown is gonna wipe him out...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
You have all been Jobs'd
Apple is not selling the iPad as a PC or even as a computer. It's a device. As others have pointed out, you don't see a lot of complaints about manufacturers of other devices not supporting developers. Microwaves, refrigerators and other appliances have computers in them. How about your cable box? You can hack them if you wish, but we accept the fact that if you do you violate your warranty. We accept the fact that development tools are not provided or supported by the manufacturer, because it’s a device they’ve defined and they support.
Until the iPhone, how many phone manufacturers supported the development of phone applications beyond a few chosen partners? How many carriers or manufacturers allowed you to distribute your applications using their facilities or run on their networks? Apple provided more freedom to developers on their iPhone than you could find from any other major manufacturer. Suddenly it’s your right not only to go further but to also have Apple spend its resources and risk its business and reputation supporting you? Sense of entitlement have you?
Apple isn’t stopping you from doing what you want with your iPhone or iPad, they are just refusing to help or support you.
You have more computing power in a Toyota Prius and many other cars than you do in an iPad. Why aren't slashdotters demanding free development tools, etc. for cars? If you took it upon your self to hack your car; would you expect to be covered by the manufacturer if it was then unsafe, unreliable or inoperative? I want Linux for on my Prius! Open source my BMW!
Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
Do you mean to say that Microsoft is now going to force developers to publish through its app store and nothing else?
This appears correct.
I did not know that. Citation needed please.
From this InformationWeek article: "All apps must be approved by Microsoft, and can only be distributed via the Windows Marketplace for Mobile."
"Some of our customers have suggested that we continue to develop the version of revMobile that outputs entirely native code (as detailed above). However such a solution--even though it would create perfect applications--would be in violation of Apple's agreement, which states that code must originally be developed in one of their approved languages."
That's the part I still don't understand. Even if a code generator spits out C, C++, Objective-C, or JavaScript, it still isn't allowed. I don't understand why there could be any sane technical reason why not. Sure, machine-generated code might not be optimal, but the compiler doesn't fricking care, and there's nothing saying that *human*-generated code is automatically better anyway!
Apple is not selling the iPad as a PC or even as a computer. It's a device.
I am aware of that. However, Apple does not sell a 10" MacBook, and numerous reviews and editorials appear to claim that iPad can do everything that people expect of a 10" PC.
As sad as I am that this got turned down, it's still not playing by the rules...
Everything that has gotten approved so far uses XCode as a build step. You don't necessarily have to do all your development work in XCode (i.e. Unity game engine), but the end result needs to be an XCode project. This is what really killed Flash. They didn't just add Flash as a library you could add to your iPhone app. They attempted to ship an entire self contained IDE and compiler that didn't let you combine your work at all with a native app.
Cross compile to an XCode project with things like static libraries for your runtime and everything will be fine.
gobk2sleep, oldfag
I just hope Android and Meego cut the balls out of Apple.
This company sucks and I would never buy a product from Apple
BTW did you guys check this http://www.applevsadobe.net/
Me thinks the real reason is cross platform tools decreases Apple's ability to derive revenue. If you can get Apps that run on iPhone and Android then inter-platform price competition becomes an issue. If developers are stuck developing for one platform then the number of apps Apple derives income from goes up. Developers are locked in because the cost of development for multiple platforms is high while margins are low. Apple wins because the app ecosystem is large even if the chance of success for individual developers is low. A Win no win situation for Apple vs devloper
I'll bet that HyperCard app would look cool on an Android phone if the developer decided to port it over... hint, hint.
Microsoft is a software company. Apple, both. Apple wants to keep their platform stable, Microsoft has to deal with other peoples platform and has to hope theirs is..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
C'mon, this has HISTORY behind it.
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
Now, imagine if Microsoft had such a ban for WINCE or Windows Mobile development.
It does. Please read my other comment.
Sure, machine-generated code might not be optimal, but the compiler doesn't fricking care, and there's nothing saying that *human*-generated code is automatically better anyway!
Compiler doesn't care, but the user who's screaming at their phone when it locks, crashes or catches fire certainly does.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
I can e-mail, create small documents, edit and present, but its not very good at serious original content creation.
The problem comes when the price of stepping up from an iPad to a MacBook Pro is so steep that it makes people think that "serious original content creation" is not for them. This has already happened in other markets such as video games: only established companies qualify for a console devkit.
Are they going to be kicked out too? I heard they had a meeting with Apple to clarify the position, but heard nothing since.
Which will be the inevitable result...good!
Microsoft is doing what it always does: Copying.
But in this case, the copying went the other way around. Microsoft had the XNA Creators Club ($99 per year) and Xbox Live Indie Games several months before Apple had the iPhone Developer Program ($99 per year) and App Store. This is just Microsoft extending the XNA model to phones.
And I'd like it if Apple would be at least a bit more open about any number of things (like java 6 being two years behind)... But Apple's been pretty clear about at least a few points:
1. Don't ship crap. Say what you will about the iPad/iPhone... the hardware and software is definitely not crap.
2. Write once run anywhere always has issues (abstraction layers too). I'm a long time java swing guy and >I know that java apps are not ideal for normal end users.
3. Badly performing apps create a stink that gets on everyone.
#3 is ultimately what apple wants to avoid. A bunch of apps written on some third party abstraction layers that ALL break when apple does an update (apple can't QA everything). Then people think the iPhone/Pad suck... not the hidden abstraction layer.
And like it or not they are now at least being consistent about it. No abstaction layers for anyone!
Please write open stuff. Just use closed stuff to write it.
Apple: Making perfect sense, as always.
I'll try anything once. Twice if it tastes good
I hate it when people trot out that tired convicted monopolist argument.
So if tomorrow the Supreme Court found Apple to be a monopolist with regards to smartphones (setting aside all plausibility arguments as to such, this is a hypothetical), I presume that would make you say what Apple is doing is wrong?
I somehow doubt that would be the case for most people that raise the convicted monopolist argument.
Legality is not the same as morality.
If we were all guaranteed with a crystal ball that Apple would forever remain a niche player and that the iPhone/iPad mobile ecosystem would not become the dominant paradigm of mobile computing, then I would agree with you. However, given Apple's current trajectory, this conclusion is by no means clear to me. So in the meantime, I am trying to prevent that from happening, but raising attention to the bad things that would happen if Apple's current growth continues unimpeded.
This is about rights and freedoms. Freedom of choice is meaningless if when the time comes to make a choice, there is only one thing to choose from.
What's to stop them from making an enterprise deployment? Or have the rules for that changed? Looking at Chapter 5 of the guide (http://www.apple.com/support/iphone/enterprise/), you can use the iPhone Configuration Utility to deploy a signed package, the only thing you need to do is get a signature via Apple, then send out a config that includes instructions on how to get the app.
What am I missing?
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Calling the iPhone and especially the iPad an embedded device is an arbitrary distinction.
Does anyone doubt mobile devices will continue to get more capable over time?
Unlike other devices which are called embedded devices, no matter how much more powerful a game console gets, it's unlikely to be positioned in a manner that will displace the general computing market.
In contrast, if the iPhone or iPad was as powerful as your desktop computer is now, why would it NOT replace the general computing market? Laptops have already eviscerated the market for desktop computers. The only obstacles would be user interface, and you can already hook external input and output to these things.
Just as desktops will always have some niche place in the market, I'm sure what are currently general purpose computers will always have some place in the market. However, if 95% of the market has been dominated by the iPhone 15G, that is going to be a grim digital dark age for humanity, that will make anything Microsoft did in the past look like peanuts.
whenever someone mentions something Apple doesn't do, a fanboi pipes up with "why do you want that???"
Remember we had an article about how it would revolutionize development with 50x denser code than, say, Obj C?
It didn't. It's basically Apple Script. I'd take WebKit+JS anytime over Apple Script.
Oh I know it's about the principle. But also RunRev's cry reminds me of Adobe's Flash cry, and the common thing about both of their technologies is that they suck.
Starter Edition is only for people in third world countries.
That changed between Windows Vista and Windows 7. Windows Vista had Starter Edition with a 3-app limit for developing countries and Home Basic for low-end PCs in developed countries. Windows 7, on the other hand, switches their roles: Home Basic for developing countries and Starter with the app cap disabled for low-end PCs for low-end PCs in developed countries.
Unless you're referring to the word monopoly by its legal definition, which would not be relevant to discussions of whether what Apple does ought to be considered a problem, how you define whether something is a monopoly is crucially important.
Everyone loves to trot out that Nokia owns something like 50% of the global market for smartphones. Then they gleefully point out, Apple isn't a monopoly!
However, you take the players that are bigger than Apple on the market, and you examine their products. Nokia's so-called smartphones are not used as smartphones by the vast majority of their users. What percentage of Nokia users have ever installed a program on their phone? Likewise Blackberry's so-called smartphones are used basically as email/messenger terminals. The only significant installed programs on Blackberry's are those that are pre-installed by the corporation's IT department.
The only major player besides Apple in the real general purpose mobile computing device market is Google Android. However, despite their recent uptick in sales, at the moment, if we were to look at installed base of Android and iPhone OS mobile devices, iPhone OS is in a monopoly position.
It may not be a legally cognizable category to act upon (yet), but the real market we need to be looking at is mobile general computing products. Mobile computing very likely will replace what we now call desktop computing in the future, and if current trends continue, we may find ourselves in a situation where what we can run on our computers is in the hands of a single company that has exercised power ruthlessly in the past.
Long story short, Apple is a monopoly in an emerging market that looks like it will be incredibly important in the future. When it acts like a dick with the power that it has now, I'm going to try to convince others to consider Apple's business practices as a bad thing.
Bring that out for Android and watch it flourish, big-time. Give us your poor, your rejected, your huddled developers longing to be free...
It's been known for a long time that Apple was an insular, unfriendly company to deal with if you didn't happen to drink the Kool-Aid.
It's been known for a while now that their iPhone platform is completely closed and totally dependent on authoritarian, arbitrary Apple.
What stuns me is that there are still developers lining up to sink development costs into a platform whose approval process they have ZERO control over and can be completely fucked over on the minute Apple says "NO".
Next time, pick a better, more open platform. Preferably one NOT controlled by a bunch of turtleneck-wearing asshats with a terminal superiority complex.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
fuck apple.
Let me see if I can draw out your argument to its logical conclusion. Correct me if I misstate your views, or if an additional fact I provide means you will have to add additional nuance or caveats to your original point.
Your argument:
If you sell something and advertise it not as a computer, but as a device, you have no obligation, moral or legal, to make it more open to 3rd party development.
Hypothetical:
Year is 2018. The iPhone 15G controls 95% of the consumer computing market. General purpose computers are relegated to niche status, only owned by corporations that need major processing power and enthusiasts. The iPhone has followed the example set by gaming consoles, and is completely locked down, with no security holes realistically accessible to the average consumer. Apple has continued its policies regarding controlling what software can, and cannot, run on its device. The iPhone 15G satisfies all mainstream computing requirements, but Apple denies any software it considers offensive, including software that states any political message that does not align with Apple's, or competes with Apple in any way.
Logical Conclusion:
You are totally okay with this situation, and any consumer that complains suffers from an entitlement complex, as Apple never advertised the iPhone as a general computing platform.
There's no way MS would do this so your point is irrelevant. Microsoft makes platforms, Apple makes products. Of course we'd yell and scream because we're used to having platforms from Microsoft.
The biggest products Microsoft offers are:
Apple makes hardware.
Eh, nowhere in my post do I reference individual Macbook models, or Macbooks in general. There is also no "rugged Macbook" (which I would love), etc. I guess I don't understand your argument here.
Forget everything you read in this article; Apple doesn't make a device that fits Goldilocks's needs. There's the MacBook, but that's too big, and there's the iPad, but that's too limited. Apple makes no "Baby Bear Mac" that's just right. As long as Apple continues to decline to make or license its OS for a computer in the size I want, it matters not how open Mac OS X development is.
I don't know anyone here in the US personally who gets by with their iPad/iPhone alone
That's because it has to be synced to iTunes before it will work. Once Apple drops that restriction, watch people start "get[ting] by with their iPad/iPhone alone". A lot of people in Japan, where homes are smaller due to exorbitant land values, already get buy with other models of phone alone.
This is why I wouldn't want to be a small company developing applications for the iPhone/iPod/iPad - if you don't have the clout to get preapproval, you're stuck with investing your time and money in doing the development then hoping that Apple will actually approve your application.
fencepost
just a little off
I did try to imagine this and found that there was no realistic way it would vaguely affect my life one way or another.
I'll give you a clue: Arbitrary separation of devices into those for creating and those for consuming, enforced by cryptography, is likely to ensure that only those creating on behalf of businesses and universities can afford to create. Tough droppings for hobbyists.
You say you don't care about Apple's draconian actions in your original post.
You then respond to me and imply that you would care if they had an illegal monopoly.
So would it be accurate to characterize your belief as you only care about things, and think they're bad, if they're illegal? For example, if it were legal to have a monopoly, you would not care if a company had a monopoly and exercised it in an anti-competitive fashion?
Personally, I find things good or bad, generally irrespective of what the law says about them, and in turn believe good governance is trying to align the laws with the populace's beliefs on what is good and bad.
In this case, I see actions by Apple, that are plainly anti-competitive, and add nothing to society, and add nothing to anyone except themselves. It may be legal (I am taking no position on that), but despite that, I still believe that Apple's actions are bad, and should be discouraged.
The best way to keep Apple from having a monopoly is not "to not buy an iPhone". It is to not buy an iPhone, to raise attention to Apple, to call them out on their bad behavior, and to not give bad guys a free pass simply because they are complying with the letter of the law.
Just imagine the outcry if Microsoft banned all other development environments than Visual Studio and .NET from Windows. It would be hit with lawsuits and there would be tons of stories and tens of thousands of comments dissing MS on slashdot.
Can you think of any differences between even Apple's current and strong position in the mobile market and Microsoft's position, particularly in the past?
But suddenly when it's Apple it's all ok. Why the hell?
Wow. It must be hard for you to be the lone voice that's willing to speak up on Slashdot and say that there's something wrong with this. You must feel alone. So very, very alone. If only there were any indication that there were anyone else in the world who felt even remotely the same way as you do. If only there were even one other Linux fan that would be willing to add their voice to yours on this site, maybe it would alleviate the frustration you obviously feel. But it's too bad that Slashdot is totally and completely overrun with Apple users who never utter a word of criticism against the company. Maybe you should find some other forum where you can associate with likeminded people!
Tweet, tweet.
The PC is going to become a niche product. It's only a question of when and not if.
We've already seen this once when desktops were turned into a niche product by laptops. Laptops already have "good enough" power for anything any mainstream user needs.
When a mobile phone has the same power as your current general purpose computer, what do you think the sales of general purpose computers is going to look like?
Bearing in mind that cutting edge mobile phones can already be hooked up to external keyboards and monitors.
The average person, even the above-average intelligent person such as those you find on this fine website, drastically undervalues hazy and amorphous future benefits such as freedom.
We have a Constitution, because if given half a chance, at every opportunity, ordinary men, and the greedy leaders who prod them on, would sell freedom up a creek for a little temporary gain.
If the average man would sell his freedom of speech away for pennies, what do you think he would sell something even more vague and speculative for, such as the freedom of others to innovate and create new products that may interest him?
The fact is, freedom does not make a very good bullet point on marketing materials, and arguing that it is not important because the OpenMoko failed is ridiculous.
The only reason we have any freedom at all is because freedom is something that can be idealistically assigned an out-sized value, such that some people do all the caring for the rest of mankind.
Are you seriously arguing that Apple copied Microsoft's XNA model for the iPhone? Do you seriously believe that the XNA model in any way, shape, or form, influenced Apple's design decisions on the iPhone?
I know this is Slashdot, and everyone loves to try and shift all negative blame onto Microsoft, but this is even moderated informative?
Apologies for the double post, somehow must have clicked anonymous the first time I posted this.
Let me see if I can draw out your argument to its logical conclusion. Correct me if I misstate your views, or if an additional fact I provide means you will have to add additional nuance or caveats to your original point.
Your argument:
If you sell something and advertise it not as a computer, but as a device, you have no obligation, moral or legal, to make it more open to 3rd party development.
Hypothetical:
Year is 2018. The iPhone 15G controls 95% of the consumer computing market. General purpose computers are relegated to niche status, only owned by corporations that need major processing power and enthusiasts. The iPhone has followed the example set by gaming consoles, and is completely locked down, with no security holes realistically accessible to the average consumer. Apple has continued its policies regarding controlling what software can, and cannot, run on its device. The iPhone 15G satisfies all mainstream computing requirements, but Apple denies any software it considers offensive, including software that states any political message that does not align with Apple's, or competes with Apple in any way.
Logical Conclusion:
You are totally okay with this situation, and any consumer that complains suffers from an entitlement complex, as Apple never advertised the iPhone as a general computing platform.
I am sick and tired of apple being a total fucking Nazi about their development ! Fuck windows was bad, but not like this! This is perverted! They are totally monopolisic with this bullshit approval process. No one can write anything or create their own app store? What a bunch of utter fuckers waiting to be sued and broken into parts. Frankly they need to be taught a lesson. Read about the 1984 Ma Bell breakup. Or Microsoft anti-trust. This shit needs to get ON!
PS:
I post this from a Mac so apple fan boys chill out.
Just check out http://tilestack.com/
It's a backwards compatible HyperCard clone using just standard browser features (no flash or other plugins). Works fine on most mobile devices too, including iPhones and iPads.
Because something like HyperCard on the iPad would be great, but not "insanely great."
I use logical arguments to point out logical flaws in abigor's arguments.
Abigor makes ad hominem attacks, and arguments that do not logically follow. Moderated insightful.
Anonymous moderator attack me with a non-meta-moderatable "underrated" when I make a response using a logically valid "Reductio ad absurdum".
How about responding to my points instead of unfairly moderating?
Right. Because code generators normally cause the target device to catch fire. Ban the code generators! Quick!
From the article:
needed color after somebody showed him an Atari ST with a Mac EPROM adaptor showing the Apple desktop in living color on a computer his company had nothing to do with.
Tech Public Policy stuff
is getting to the point where it's going to cost the Apple Corp. stockholders money if it's allowed to continue. mean, blowing off an app that's likely to sell a few tens of thousands of iPads to the educational market? Well, I'm sure that the developer will have no trouble finding a tablet computer running Win7 or Linux that the app can be ported to.
Jobs reallly should spend several hours watching this video looped which illustrates an entirely different attitude towards developers... and even for a Linux user, it's kind of a sad day when it's obvious that Apple needs to catch a clue FROM MICROSOFT.
Tech Public Policy stuff
If someone creates hypercard for android, or a filemaker pro replacement, then i'll keep my stupid $300 g1 for another year. i can't believe manufacturers have talked us into paying 300 fucking dollars for a goddamned phone. or $500-$700 if you like.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
Fuck Steve Jobs and the Rotten Apple that he rode in on.
Steve we love you but sometimes it seems like your head is up your butt. Turning down Flash and all sorts of things of the sort will do nothing but hurt apple and disappoint it's close followers
Good. Now if only all Android users who're bashing Apple here would actually buy that app when it's out for Android, to show developers that, yes, there is a lucrative market outside of Apple's walled garden.
(Consider it a pledge to do so on my behalf, since I certainly fit into that category.)
That's only because of the limited and artificial way in which 'monopoly' is defined'.
If apple computers were "PC-compatible" and could run all PC programs just as well as any Win7 box, then I'd say they can be judged in the same class. But that's not the case.
Apple's != PC's. Therefore, they should be judged as being in a separate container.
There are few or NO competitors to Apple in the OS-"x" (x={6,7,8...}) space.
There are no competitors to Apple in the "iphone-compatible" space. There are no other phones by other manufacturers, that can run iphone programs. When there ARE, then we would have 'competition'. But Apple is a monopoly in this space. As well as in the OS-x space.
Fragmentation is an issue, but that's no more a problem, when you get right down to it, than that faced by PC developers every day
PC developers face no fragmentation at all, because all modern PC's have a very hefty base of abilities - resolution and CPU power - that you can rely on. Only if you are doing something at the edge of CPU or graphics abilities do you even have to think about a variety of possible PC platforms.
One something the size of a mobile device, extra pixels matter a great deal as does PPI as does CPU as does memory as does network. All are constrained, and even common things you might want to do can easily run afoul of any of those parameters being too tight for what your app is trying to do.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I've asked that they port Xcode (with hooks to compile on your own servers or a cloud server) to iPad and allow free developing for your own use, educational use, and opensource/free apps. I think that'd be a good compromise because it provides some filter to keep idiots from accidentally hurting themselves and giving Apple support headaches. Pay $10 for this app and compile the code yourself and you can run whatever but you can't distribute it in the App Store. Anything you compile yourself would of course be unsupported. If they really want the iPad to reach it's potential it has to be usable for producing and not just consuming. Porting iWork indicates they do realize this. Supporting coding directly on the platform is just a small but important step further. The $100/yr developer fee should only be for distributing your app for profit. Of course it should be easy to upgrade to full-developer status if you see your app moving well.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Yeah and when I was a kid I remember people laughing that people would own their own computer in their home. Obviously computers are room sized devices that only businesses need. Of course the PC isn't going to die but if you haven't noticed everyone and their dog owns one or more mobile devices and the Network is everywhere. It's only a matter of time before the mobile device and the networks are powerful enough to make cloud computing the new king. Only a few geeks would rather be planted in front of a screen looking at a clunky outdated interface that does a billion things than out doing whatever they do with a nice mobile device that can do whatever they need with a simple interface. Eventually even your PC will be just another component of the cloud as applications all integrate the Network for storage and extra processing power. There is to much benefit to being able to access your data from any device that can connect to the network and being able to have smaller, more efficient systems that can get extra processing power on demand from more efficient cloud servers. There will be bumps, like privacy concerns, but the change is happening and will continue to become the dominate model.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Jobs is a moronic hypocrite, so you should really expect stuff like this from him. He'll change his mind when it suits him, and complete ignore any of his previous statements.
For example theres a video of him on youtube basically saying it's ok to steal other peoples ideas. Yet Apple has lawsuits with 2 of its biggest competition in progress, because they think they stole Apple's ideas.
Apple fanboys never seem to notice this... it's really rather worrying.
Look, I don't like the way Steve Jobs is systematically trying to destroy the personal computer model we've had until now and replace it with a load of pretty locked down shit either.
But just remember this - he's going to die pretty soon and it's going to be really painful. So yeah, he'll try and remove personal freedoms, and then die screaming - it's the perfect outcome if you think about it. Maybe he's set it up as a lesson to his worshippers. Or maybe he really is just a cunt.
Then someone else will take over Apple and try to go down the same path, but the magic will be gone, and all this shit falls apart. Boohoo, so sad.
> Actually, Microsoft is banning all other environments other than .Net from WinMo 7. That was the reason cited for FireFox not to create a port for it.
If we don't complain about this, it's because we honestly don't know. As a long-time Slashdotter, I'm more than happy to bash Microsoft for doing stupid crap.
This stuff simply hasn't affected me yet, which is probably why not many people are up in arms about it.
So Apple sees this Hyper-Card clone that already has a good sized institutional market lined up and decides not to approve it. Rather than hyperventilate about DRM and lockin, why not just go with the simpler explanation of greed.
It would be so simple for Apple to come out with their own Hyper Card for the iWhatever; they've got the background and the copyrights. With an already existing market this would be a easy win; I'll bet that there's Apple developers at work on this right now.
It's not all about control, guys - it's about money. If you follow the money you won't have to pull out that old "reality distortion field" handwave to explain what's going on.
PC developers face no fragmentation at all, because all modern PC's have a very hefty base of abilities - resolution and CPU power - that you can rely on.
A PC monitor can be anywhere from 1024x600 to 2560x1440 pixels. I have already seen several programs for both Windows and Linux that require at least 1024x768 and get cut off when I try to run them on a 10" laptop. One of these is Inkscape.
Only if you are doing something at the edge of CPU or graphics abilities do you even have to think about a variety of possible PC platforms.
Then any PC game newer than about 2001 must be "at the edge", because the Intel GMA 950 in a lot of existing 10" PCs lacks hardware vertex processing, just like a Voodoo3.
you can have an apple employee activate your iphone/ipad before you leave the store.
Does this work at all iPad dealers or just in major cities that have an Apple flagship store?
There are no competitors to Apple in the "iphone-compatible" space. There are no other phones by other manufacturers, that can run iphone programs. When there ARE, then we would have 'competition'. But Apple is a monopoly in this space. As well as in the OS-x space.
Your lack of understanding of monopolies is quite tragic. There are many, many other phones that can run applications that are outside of Apple's control so they do not have a monopoly.
Your view is like saying that Ford has a monopoly in the Modeo market. Sure, they do technically as no other manufacturer sells a Mondeo, but other manufacturers sell cars with almost the same specs and if I don't like some servicing restriction on the Mondeo, I can just go and buy a Mazda 6 or a Volvo.
You do realise you can pick up the Visual Studio Express editions for free, right?
Those are huge downloads, much bigger than one gets through sudo apt-get install build-essential. Can one order VC++ Express and the Windows SDK on disc, or does one have to live where cable or DSL is affordable?
Since those are computers these days ($130 shipped gets you Android on 600 MHz ARM with WVGA!)
Is that new or otherwise with manufacturer's warranty? If so, link please. I have money burning a hole in my pocket, but not $300 for an Archos 5.
Program on anything you want...copy the files over to your MAc and compile them.
But how can I test a Mac program while I'm on the bus with my netbook? Or am I supposed to develop only the program's platform-agnostic back-end while away from home and then come home to a Mac in order to develop the front-end?
I think we are going to see a lot of Mac developers go to Android. That's the proper free market response to the double restrictions of a monopolistic sales venue + draconian control of development environments.
As mobile platforms replace PCs in the next ten years, it will be great disadvantage to have a single complicated API or a single IDE to access a platform. Perhaps Apple could create an IDE like Eclipse with third party plug-in support. We could build visual development tools and Hypercard development functionality through the plugin interface. It is in Apple's best interest to offer something. It is also inevitable to support all Java APIs and a JVM. It is THE business infrastructure builder. As a Java developer writing my own app, I don't want to learn Obj-C. I don't have the time to learn a new language and API, I have a wife to spend time with and kids to conceive. Of all things, Steve Jobs understands families.
The tragedy is your tiny view of monopolies being only what you are told they are.
You cannot run applications on a 'Mondeo'. There is no marketplace of 3rd party apps that run only on 'Mondeo's. Your analogy is 'tragically' flawed.
But you have an entire market place of applications that only run on 1) iphones, and 2) OS-x based computers.
No one else is allowed to provide a "plug-compatible" platform that will run those applications. There is no competition. If you want a device that will run all of the apps in those specific spaces, you must by from Apple.
That's what I mean by no competition. Apple has a created a unique niche for which they are the only allowed supplier. That is why they are a monopolist. They wouldn't be one if they didn't sue every "compatible" maker off the market.
While we're sitting here re-hashing every old argument known to slashdot about DRM/apple/etc - something more important is happening and I think you're missing it.
What apple is really doing here become much more apparent. First it was shutting out flash, now hypercard-clone. You'll notice also that this year's Apple design awards are ONLY open to iPhone/iPad apps - desktop apps need not apply. Wha? What's this all about?
Well, here's my take. Apple's new growth and new revenue streams are no longer coming from their PC sales. While they've done well, the desktop market has sat in single-digit market penetration for years now. But phones and iTunes are where record and somewhat unbelievable growth are happening. Apple's not stupid - they see this trend. The trend is that if they can control the means of application and media distribution on their platforms, they're sitting on their new gold mine. Every person that makes and app or wishes to distribute media on their platform gives them a tiny cut. If you're looking forward and seeing that mobile computing and smart phones are your future growth areas - the last thing you want to do is loose control of the revenue stream. And while there is not bad money to be made on making the OS and the hardware, there is FAR MORE money to be made on the on-going money of media, apps and services associated with those devices.
That's why Apple isn't going to let another platform other than their iTunes store be able to install apps or distribute music on their devices - EVER. Having a viable Flash on the device means you could write whatever app you want for the device and not have to use Apple's distribution model (iTunes) or restrictions. If you allowed a hypercard or other app distribution model - you'd be allowing people to get around you again. This is why their end-user agreement got SO draconian about not allowing any other means of distributing apps on their devices or even using their API's in ways they don't like.
Despite what Jobs says about flash or other apps being good/bad for the platform, their marketing plan is becoming much more clear - and the reason has little to do with technical reasons. He is a genius - he's seeing where his money comes from and changing to match the times. It's masterful - but it's about controlling their new revenue stream - the one that the future of their company is betting on.
(ps: It'd sure be nice if slashdot stop being so myopically black/white with very tired old arguments about DRM/Open-source/Microsoft/Apple. The world is moving on - and while these points are still somewhat valid - they're not always what's going on anymore. It blinds you to seeing the new trends that are going on - and we're certainly in a very exciting inflection point of a LOT of new technologies. I find myself stopping and really re-thinking the computer insdustry that I got into in the 90's and finding it turning a big new corner and the decisions that this NEW generation of technology creaters are coming up are very intriguing.)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Reverse engineered implementations have been sued out of business.
It is impractical, given the non-published interface to clean-room implement it and even under the DMCA, breaking of a 'shrouded' interface is allowed to provide interoperability. But apple sues, with their legal might, anyone who tries. Thus they continue to monopolize the market.
You can have your definitions, I can have mine. Eventually if apple continues their practices and especially if they continue to increase their success, they will become "legally entangled", as they are going against the public good.
The App Store has FMTouch (a third-party FileMaker client), Bent (FM lite), HanDBase (the classic palmtop database), and some others. Not sure if any of those meet your needs.
Name one clean room reverse engineered implementation that has been killed. When you're done failing to do that, explain the continued existence of GNUStep.
Under the DMCA, only breaking of encryption is outlawed, not reverse engineering specifically. Furthermore, the DMCA only applies inside the boundaries of the USA. Finally, the DMCA explicitly protects the right to reverse engineer for the purposes of interoperability.
As for having your own definitions, you can win any argument when you redefine the terms to mean just what you want them to. The rest of us use commonly agreed language as a framework for communication. When you're ready to use the same framework as the rest of us, come talk.
The tragedy is your tiny view of monopolies being only what you are told they are.
No, I view monopolies as what they are considered and agreed to be under law. This is useful because that way, when the grown-ups are talking, we all get to talk about the same thing.
No one else is allowed to provide a "plug-compatible" platform that will run those applications. There is no competition. If you want a device that will run all of the apps in those specific spaces, you must by from Apple.
And if you want to fit a Ford ECU, you need to own a Ford. You can't fit them to a Toyota. There's NO monopoly in either example.
We can sit and redefine terms to our heart's content, but that doesn't move this forward. I can redefine "small minded dickhead" to be a picture of you, but that wouldn't necessarily make this the commonly agreed upon use for this term. In the same way, your use of the word monopoly is misinformed and more importantly, wrong.
GNUStep comes close to being the equivalent to Cocoa as far as objective-C frameworks go. And it hasn't been sued out of existence. Funny that...
...Safari? Seriously, just make whatever HyperCard app you want out of javascript/xhtml and don't lock it down to one proprietary app on one model of phone...
No, I view monopolies as what they are considered and agreed to be under law. This is useful because that way, when the grown-ups are talking, we all get to talk about the same thing.
And laws are subject to change. Consumer advocates agree with, in theory, the idea
of expanding the legal definition of the word. That you go on to claim anyone moving to change the definition is not grownup...well, that's just childish.
Like I said, you can keep your definition, I'll keep mine. We'll see if your apple manages to steer clear of regulation.
RunRev CEO:
> It makes perfect sense to have a high quality, rapid application
> development system available for the iPhone and iPad.
We already have that with Xcode. It's the same rapid application development system that a physicist used in 1990 to create the World Wide Web. A non-programmer was able to create the fucking Web with these tools. You don't have to program in it if you don't want to, but at minimum you have to Paste in your C code and compile a native app. Only native apps can be sold as native apps. It's pretty straightforward.
If Xcode is really too hard for you, then prototype your app in RevMobile (or Flash) and hire a developer to program your app in C. Then your app won't abuse the hardware of every iPhone you run on, you won't be ripping off users who have paid for your app expecting it to be native, and you will sell more copies and pay for the C developer.
This is the same thing that happens in Web development. A designer makes a fucking Photoshop mock-up and instead of just converting that to a huge PNG and plopping it in the page, we give the mock-up to an engineer who creates a real Web app.
On iPhone OS, we prioritize the end user over the developer. The developer has to work a little harder to make things much better for the end user. Yes, you have to make C to get paid.
If you don't like all that, you have 2 great options:
* run in iPhone's open API, HTML5
* run on another manufacturer's native platform
If you want to play baseball, show up at the diamond with your baseball glove and play baseball. Everybody is welcome. But don't show up at the baseball diamond in football gear and expect to play football.
if you're interested in building apps on ubuntu, you can specify that you want the developer's stuff during the install.
I didn't see this checkbox advertised when I installed Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic) on any of my PCs. Is it a new feature in 10.04 (Lucid)?
For those of us who found a (absolutely incredibly wonderful) HyperCard replacement in RunRev, and with RunRev meeting all the requirements from Apple, it seems like a slap in the face. Also, it seems that unless this is turned around, Apple is effectively turning its back on its large base of supporters: many amongst us continue to use Apple - AND RunRev – because of what they each offer ie, ease of use, beautiful aesthetics, simplicity of design, ...with steps to increasingly enter ever more complex paths into computing.
It's not just a 'product' that Apple is rejecting here, but basically something akin to what has made Apple so attractive for so long.
Like I said, you can keep your definition, I'll keep mine. We'll see if your apple manages to steer clear of regulation.
Uh, it's not _my_ apple - I have no interest in them at all. I just can't stand idiots who don't know what a monopoly is and why the laws are different for them.
I am a casual Revolution developer. Think about that for a moment. I have no time to learn to develop in Apple's xCode. I have no time to learn Java, ObjectiveC or C++. I especially have absolutely NO time to become proficient at it! But I CAN and DO develop in Revolution, and am quite good at it. I have written an alpha stage help desk/inventory system that imports/merges with a Spiceworks database to get all the scanned devices on the network. I just about have the import/merge feature finished at which point I can get to work on searching for, editing and saving the data in forms I very easily created in the Revolution development environment. And I did it in my spare time. I would not have gotten past creating the first field in xCode.
Imagine what dedicated determined developers could do with a Revolution SDK for the iPhone/iPad?? Imagine developing working apps in a fraction of the time it takes now, and what you end up with is EXACTLY the app you would have produced if you had developed it in xCode? That is what RunRev offered to Apple and Steve Jobs: An environment that would PRODUCE C++ code, then compile it like a normal dev environment would, and produce a fully native app. And he said no?? Why??? Because he is not interested. That's it.
Well it's his right I suppose. It is Apple's store and product after all. But look, none of this is about anyone's rights. Rights have nothing to do with it. It's about selling as many of your product to as many people as you possibly can. What I question about Steve's decision is his motivation. What I think is that he is very offended about the recent threats of anti-trust lawsuits, and all the flack he has received about flash on the Apple devices. Now Runrev comes knocking on his door and offers a very reasonable dev environment that fulfills all of his stated requirements, but it all stinks of the whole mess he has been having to deal with for months, so he basically says to RunRev, "Go away, I don't want to talk to you." I think he's having a hissy fit. That's all.
On the Palm, you moved your fingernail to the text region and did swipe-X, swipe-C, or swipe-V (the equivalent of CTRL-X, -C and -V on a Mac or PC keyboard).
On iPhone OS you have pinch and stretch, and you expect //something// to happen when you press-and-hold, but you're not always sure what. There's no standard gesture or symbol for "Help", or "extended functions", or "Options". Hell, there's not even a gesture for "Home", the only way to exit an app is by pressing the single clicky button (the "Arrgh!" button) ... if that button fails, you're screwed. So after missing buttons off the Newton entirely becauase they represent a mechanical failure point, they do this?
Oh yes, and becuase you only have one button, and because you can't reassign it to be anything else (becuase there's no alternative way to go back to the home screen), you can't click a "hotbutton" to go straight to your mail or addressbook or some other favourite app. Apple say you only need one button -- two or more buttons would be confusing. So when they implement multitasking, to get to the additional features, you have to //multiclick// the single button ... sigh.
Maybe we should just all learn Morse code?
Eric Baird
Oh, some of the software included with the iPhone is most definitely crap. A "notes" editor that doesn't support bold or italics or bullets of headings, can't sync its pages as text files, and can only transfer its text files to a Windows PC if that PC has MS OneNote installed? A contacts manager that puts all its contacts onto a single scrolling list, and doesn't let the user create categories without an external computer? A picture app that doesn't let you delete photos? A "desktop" on a variable-orientation device that (until v4.0) only worked in portrait mode? An analogue clock app whose non-resizable dial display is a massive 13 millimetres high?
The user-interface //looks// pretty and has those gorgeous animated bounces and accelerations when you scroll, but underneath the gloss, some of this is unfinished, beta-quality software. The user interface is inconsistent. There's no proper file-synchronisation API. How long did it take them to implement cut/paste? The web browser and mapping software's nice, and there are some great third-party apps, but some of the onboard stuff written by //Apple// is embarrassing. And seriously, Apple couldn't write and bundle a basic ToDo list manager for their pocketable 'puter? They gave these to all their employees for feedback and testing, and nobody suggested that an onboard ToDo List manager might be useful? I think that just about every NON-smart mobile I've owned has had one of those onboard, but if you blow five hundred quid on an iPhone ... sorry, no list manager. And if you download a third-party list-manager app, you can't sync it over the sync cable to your mac/PC, because the sync portal doesn't understand any of the relevant file formats.
The OS3.x iPhone's onboard software is pretty but stupid. Its saving grace is that you can use other companies' software on it, to get around the limitations that Apple have either deliberately engineered in, or haven't been able to engineer out.
Some aspects of the hardware are pretty nice. But you've got no card storage, insufficient buttons (on the iPT), and the aerial sensitivity on my iPT is the worst of any wifi device I've used. Everything else in my place seems to pick up about fifteen local networks, my iPT sees about three.
It is, however, very shiny.
Eric Baird
Apple's reply was apparently, no, the new terms and conditions require that the app is //originally written// with their tools.
See, insisting that people use their tools isn't just about the code that the tools generate ... it's also about the user-agreement that the authors have to comply with as a condition of using those tools. If Apple's user-agreement says that you aren't allowed to use their tools to generate apps for other competing platforms, then it means that authors aren't allowed to take apps that they've written for the iPhone OS and convert them to other devices. If the original source code is written on non-Apple tools and exported to the Apple tools, then that means that there's a version of the app source code out there somewhere that precedes the "Appleised" version, isn't governed by the Apple tools user agreement, and can be ported to other platforms.
By making it compulsory for companies to //originate// their code for the iPhone on Apple tools, Apple effectively get the ability to ban those companies from producing non-iPhone versions. If a company says that they authored their apps with the Apple tools, then they aren't allowed to port, if they say that they CAN port because they have an earlier parent copy to port from, then Apple can automatically ban the app from their store for being "externally" authored. If they say that they used the Apple tools, but they're gong to port anyway because it's their code not Apple's and to hell with the small print, then Apple can use the company's violation of its "tools" agreement as reason to shut down that company's merchant account with the app store. Remember, Apple can change the terms and conditions of the app store at any time.
This isn't about quality control, it's about enforcing exclusivity. Apple know that developers are being advised to hedge their bets and start supporting other platforms like Android, because Apple aren't to be trusted as a market-owner. They also know that as soon as the customer-base thinks that you can buy exactly the same "iPhone apps" for any other mobile platform, they'll tend to buy the machine with the best spec/cost ratio, which often won't be an iPhone.
So what they're doing is giving developers an ultimatum: keep your apps 100% exclusive to the iPhone, or face being banned from the Apple store and being unable to sell your iPhone apps to iPhone customers through normal channels.
Eric Baird
I was referring to the situation described in this article: "There are millions of Japanese consumers whose only home computing device is an iMode phone, providing them with text messaging, Web pages, and various social and commercial services." It doesn't matter whether it's an i-mode phone, an iPhone, an iPad, an iBall, or whatever else. There are plenty of people who have realized that as long as you can activate and update a phone in the shop, and you don't plan to create, you don't need a PC. The problem will come if the pricing structure for a "real PC" changes such that "you don't plan to create" becomes "you can't afford to create".
Arbitrary separation of devices into those for creating and those for consuming, enforced by cryptography, is likely to ensure that only those creating on behalf of businesses and universities can afford to create.
Experience many paranoid delusions?
It's not paranoia if you can show that they really are after you. In video games, the separation of devices for creating and for consuming occurred in the 1980s with the rise of dedicated game consoles. It became arbitrary and cryptographic in 1985 with the introduction of the CIC lockout chip in the Nintendo Entertainment System as a response to the Atari 2600 shovelware that allegedly caused the 1983 video game recession. Only established businesses, not hobbyists or microISVs, can develop or publish games for Sony or Nintendo consoles.