Perhaps they go and start their own shop? It's something I see in the Mac business. Lots of people leaving larger (thinks Apple) or even semi-large (think Omni Group) companies to start their own software companies. It's easy for us developers to do so, since one developer can produce a full, finished, sellable product within a reasonable timespan (like half a year) with minimal outside help (some graphics design, some translation, probably some money and law stuff).
As a developer, if you can put away enough money to survive half a year, you can start your own company with minimum risk.
No, it's entirely pedantic because nothing created with the SDK can be installed without a signature/approval from Apple.
That is besides the point (as Apple most likely won't go through your code before publishing your app, enforcing all the rules) and, furthermore, false. When you get approved by Apple, you can sign your own code and install your apps on up to five iPhones. Additionally, with some work, it's possible to install code written with the official SDK on jailbroken phones.
Look, it doesn't matter. I wasn't trying to insult anyone. You're obviously not a very technical person, and nobody expects you to know all the details. Your honor isn't stained if you make a mistake.
Somebody wrote something which was obviously, technically and verifiably false, and I pointed it out. I'm not trying to start a family feud.
Dramatically distinguishing between the two is pointless,
Dramatically? Dude. Somebody made a mistake. I pointed it out. I didn't expect anyone to actually be insulted by that. It wasn't a big deal, and it wasn't personal, really.
Seriously, what is your problem?
and just makes you an asstalker.
...
Dude. Your statement is obviously and technically false. Yet you continue to defend it. And then you call me an asstalker. And tell me that using the word "sucks" [1] is 1) homophobic and b) equal to racial insults. Really.
I think everyone reading this discussion has been able to make up his own mind. Have a nice day.
[1]: For the record, it is my opinion that preventing background applications sucks because it essentially forced me to stop two iPhone projects I was working on. Instead of writing interesting social networking stuff, I am now writing an iPhone game. I think you'll see a lot of those, as I imagine many iPhone devs are in a similar position as I am.
I wasn't trying to contradict what you wrote. Not every comment has to be a disagreement, you know.
Actually, your first sentence implies that you're trying to contradict what I said.
Me: "There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this."
You: "If there was ever a country that was extremely vulnerable to influence from other countries, it's Switzerland".
So I'm saying that other countries can't influence Switzerland. You then say that Switzerland is extremely vulnerable to outside influence. Seems like an attempt at contradicting my point. But maybe that's just me. Doesn't really matter, anyway.
There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this You're right about others changing what the Swiss do, but what if the countries claiming damage due to loss of tax revenue simply make it illegal for their citizens to deposit money in Swiss accounts?
Given how much of the world's economy relies on swiss banks, this is impossible. There are, of course, things countries like Germany could do to put pressure on Switzerland. However, in the grand scheme of things, banks aren't that important. There was a huge body of contracts created between Switzerland the EU some years ago; lots of stuff covered like importing and exporting goods, travelling between countries, working and studying in foreign countries. Banking was part of this, but the EU backed down and let Switzerland keep its laws. It just doesn't seem that important to them. Not to mention that there are other European countries with similar banking laws.
Also, as an aside, there's a special contract between Switzerland and the USA which essentially destroys these laws for US citicens.
That would seem to leave the Swiss to do banking as they see fit and place the onus of change on the parties claiming to be injured. Goes beyond "jack shit", too.
Would go beyond "jack shit", but won't happen, and if it did happen, wouldn't change the laws, but would make the swiss people even more likely to keep the laws.
There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this;
If there was ever a country that was extremely vulnerable to influence from other countries, it's Switzerland, which owes its very existence to their willingness to service the world's liquid (and often crooked) capital.
I don't see how that contradicts what I wrote.
The minute some little island somewhere makes laws more favorable to your average arms dealer, third world dictator or Haliburton executive, Switzerland will be praying that wristwatches become cooler than iPods.
Actually, dictators don't typically have their money in swiss bank accounts anymore. Secrecy in Switzerland isn't what it was a decade ago. They already have them in bank accounts on little islands. It's mostly music and sports stars who have their residences in switzerland; Michael Schumacher, Tina Turner and the like.
Also, banks aren't that important to Switzerland's economy anymore. There's also tourism, pharmacy, technology and lots more. Switzerland has some of Europe's best Universities.
Perhaps you are watching too many Hollywood flicks.
What a nice way to support your country's economy: laundering money for the scum of the earth. And by "scum" I refer to those wealthy folks who believe their wealth somehow transcends the benefits and tender mercies that their home country has given them, which allowed them to get rich in the first place. Globalists, in other words. You know, people who think the Free Market is God's way of telling them that they're superior to the rest of us.
Not sure what triggered that response. I'm not defending Swiss laws, merely pointing out that international pressure is absolutely meaningless in a direct democracy.
Distinguishing between the SDK and the signing/approval process is pedantic.
Uh... No? You're not a programmer, are you. One of them allows Apple to easily make exceptions ("Oh, you want your Skype app to run in the background? I'm sure we can come to an agreement"), and may allow "bad" applications to slip through. The other doesn't, because it enforces the restrictions in code. One is a sandbox, the other isn't. There are so many differences between the two that calling distinguishing between the SDK and signing "pedantic" is... I'm not sure, insane perhaps?
And who can argue against such a sophisticated argument based entirely on a homophobic pejorative?
I do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about.
This is a very subjective thing to measure. For one person, "customer friendly" might mean "makes a product that the customer thinks makes him cool" and for another it might mean "helps the customer adapt a product to his own purposes, rather than expect the customer to adapt to the purposes of the manufacturer".
I live in a country where the iPhone isn't sold, yet I know about two dozen people who own one, and see a few on the street each week. The only eee I've ever seen was yesterday, in a computer shop's show room (it was pink).
It should be remember that Switzerland is a direct democracy. If the swiss government were to change the laws, it is very likely that the SVP, a swiss right-wing party, would force a public vote on the issue. Personally, I think there's a good chance that the swiss people would vote against their own government and keep the law as-is, international treaties be damned. There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this; in fact, pressure from governments like the US government would have the opposite effect and help keep the current law.
After double-clicking such a file, Mac OS X will tell you that you're about to launch an application for the first time. It will also tell you where exactly you got it from.
Except that pretty much all AV software sucks and is more trouble than any virus you could possibly get. I'd rather suffer through having to restore a backup because I got a virus than through decades of bloaty crapware which won't help me in the end, anyway, because the virus definition update came too late.
And I've yet to see a nice ClamAV frontend for the Mac.
There's also no reason to actually use anti-virus software on Macs. That doesn't mean you should feel secure. It just means you should behave like a moderately reasonable person. I've actually written about this in my blog. In my opinion, you should prevent catching a virus by behaving correctly, and you should plan for infection by having a backup. What you should not do is install crap that will make your computer unusable and still won't actually protect you.
Do you really think there's even a single person in the whole world who has nothing to hide? How about your medical history, would you be okay with everyone knowing that? Do you not care if everyone know who you've slept with (or, as the case may be, have not slept with but pretended to have slept with)? How about that one time you've shat your pants for some ridiculous reason when you were 8 years old? You don't care if everyone knows this? How about letting the police know how fast you drive? You don't care about that? Surely you've never broken the speed limit? Or maybe crossed the road when the signal was still red? No jaywalking? Never littered? Never thrown a cup of coffee at your boyfriend in the heat of an argument? Never stole your neighbour's newspaper out of his box because you saw an interesting article? Never found a wallet without any identification and just kept the money? Never insulted your friend when he wasn't present? Want your new employer to know you've stolen a sandwich out of the fridge at your previous place of work? Or that you had an affair with your old boss's secretary? Or that you like to wear women's underwear? That you downrob gigs of movies and music off the Interwebs? Or that you jerk off to violent hot gritz fat chicks midget porn all evening? Or that you tend to post pages and pages of dumb crap on Slashdot instead of working (which, by the way, is obviously the only one of these points which applies to me, for the record:-)?
Nobody has nothing to hide, and our society only works because we're allowed to keep secrets. If every bad deed were punished, everyone would constantly be punished. Privacy is an important right; without it and without the ability to do "small" bad things, our society would not work.
I don't know. I guess that depends on what Apple's lawyers deem a major change. Anything to do with hardware, I would guess, is a no. Apple did charge for the updated driver to the wifi capabilities. I guess IP over FW would not be free, either.
1) the base phone is a barely 3G, non-multi-tasking, bling-bling phone, at least for now
What? The iPhone runs OS X. It has preemptive multitasking, memory protection and all that other stuff modern operating systems have.
2) other organizations (open moku will be cited along with others) have failed to get developer energy
And you think that applies to Apple, too? You'll be surprised. There's a reason Apple's dev servers went down yesterday.
3) the iPhone's business model is being constantly corrupted (look at SIM unlock #s to understand 'renegade thinking')
Apple said they were not married to any individual business model. Not to mention that they make money whether you use your phone with AT&T or some other carrier.
4) unless you find your own business model, or market through Apple, you won't get much but love with your code
Everyone will use Apple's service.
5) your code will need lots of adaptation to be used on other phone substrates
If your app is good enough, you'll sell enough copies on the iPhone that you won't have to adapt for other mobile systems. And if you don't make enough money, port the app to the Mac. Porting from OS X to Mac OS X and vice-versa should be easy, they share a ton of APIs.
6) Apple will likely digest the best and discard the rest-- have we not learned anything?
Well, for starters, I'm not whining (or whinge-ing) - I support products that either a) do what I want them to do or b) allow me to change them into what I want. As for Apple, they're certainly isn't hurting for cash - yes, they spend money on development, but I'd say the markup on their computers ALONE guarantees their bottom line, not to mention the markup on their ipods!
I find it hilarious that a person with "Sony Fanboy" in his name makes these points about Apple. Hopefully you don't own a Sony PSP, or a Sony notebook, or a Sony MP3 player, or, actually, pretty much anything from Sony.
But the original complaint doesn't seem to be that Apple's service isn't worth 100 bucks. The original complaint was either that he could not afford 100 bucks, or that OSS would not work if somebody had to pay 100 bucks to get the app on the store.
I think you're missing the point. Sayin that "current product X will lose because potential future product Y will be much better" practically always assumes that current product X will not improve until future product Y appears. There are no Android phones available. Mobile 7 is not available. The iPhone is. When the other two are here, the iPhone will be in a different place, too, and if it turns out that absolutely open development is better (so far, this does not seem to be the case for mobile devices), Apple will be able to adapt.
Do you honestly think that, once a developer gets a cert, Apple would actually stop him from signing anything he damn well pleases with it, no matter how crappy? If so, you're painfully naive.
Uhm. They've already outlined a number of things that they will not allow, even if you have a cert. They even said they would enforce the HIG. Apple absolutely will not publish crappy applications.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps they go and start their own shop? It's something I see in the Mac business. Lots of people leaving larger (thinks Apple) or even semi-large (think Omni Group) companies to start their own software companies. It's easy for us developers to do so, since one developer can produce a full, finished, sellable product within a reasonable timespan (like half a year) with minimal outside help (some graphics design, some translation, probably some money and law stuff).
As a developer, if you can put away enough money to survive half a year, you can start your own company with minimum risk.
obviously.
That is besides the point (as Apple most likely won't go through your code before publishing your app, enforcing all the rules) and, furthermore, false. When you get approved by Apple, you can sign your own code and install your apps on up to five iPhones. Additionally, with some work, it's possible to install code written with the official SDK on jailbroken phones.
Look, it doesn't matter. I wasn't trying to insult anyone. You're obviously not a very technical person, and nobody expects you to know all the details. Your honor isn't stained if you make a mistake.
Somebody wrote something which was obviously, technically and verifiably false, and I pointed it out. I'm not trying to start a family feud.
Dramatically distinguishing between the two is pointless,Dramatically? Dude. Somebody made a mistake. I pointed it out. I didn't expect anyone to actually be insulted by that. It wasn't a big deal, and it wasn't personal, really.
Seriously, what is your problem?
and just makes you an asstalker....
Dude. Your statement is obviously and technically false. Yet you continue to defend it. And then you call me an asstalker. And tell me that using the word "sucks" [1] is 1) homophobic and b) equal to racial insults. Really.
I think everyone reading this discussion has been able to make up his own mind. Have a nice day.
[1]: For the record, it is my opinion that preventing background applications sucks because it essentially forced me to stop two iPhone projects I was working on. Instead of writing interesting social networking stuff, I am now writing an iPhone game. I think you'll see a lot of those, as I imagine many iPhone devs are in a similar position as I am.
Actually, your first sentence implies that you're trying to contradict what I said.
Me: "There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this."
You: "If there was ever a country that was extremely vulnerable to influence from other countries, it's Switzerland".
So I'm saying that other countries can't influence Switzerland. You then say that Switzerland is extremely vulnerable to outside influence. Seems like an attempt at contradicting my point. But maybe that's just me. Doesn't really matter, anyway.
Given how much of the world's economy relies on swiss banks, this is impossible. There are, of course, things countries like Germany could do to put pressure on Switzerland. However, in the grand scheme of things, banks aren't that important. There was a huge body of contracts created between Switzerland the EU some years ago; lots of stuff covered like importing and exporting goods, travelling between countries, working and studying in foreign countries. Banking was part of this, but the EU backed down and let Switzerland keep its laws. It just doesn't seem that important to them. Not to mention that there are other European countries with similar banking laws.
Also, as an aside, there's a special contract between Switzerland and the USA which essentially destroys these laws for US citicens.
That would seem to leave the Swiss to do banking as they see fit and place the onus of change on the parties claiming to be injured. Goes beyond "jack shit", too.Would go beyond "jack shit", but won't happen, and if it did happen, wouldn't change the laws, but would make the swiss people even more likely to keep the laws.
I don't see how that contradicts what I wrote.
The minute some little island somewhere makes laws more favorable to your average arms dealer, third world dictator or Haliburton executive, Switzerland will be praying that wristwatches become cooler than iPods.Actually, dictators don't typically have their money in swiss bank accounts anymore. Secrecy in Switzerland isn't what it was a decade ago. They already have them in bank accounts on little islands. It's mostly music and sports stars who have their residences in switzerland; Michael Schumacher, Tina Turner and the like.
Also, banks aren't that important to Switzerland's economy anymore. There's also tourism, pharmacy, technology and lots more. Switzerland has some of Europe's best Universities.
Perhaps you are watching too many Hollywood flicks.
What a nice way to support your country's economy: laundering money for the scum of the earth. And by "scum" I refer to those wealthy folks who believe their wealth somehow transcends the benefits and tender mercies that their home country has given them, which allowed them to get rich in the first place. Globalists, in other words. You know, people who think the Free Market is God's way of telling them that they're superior to the rest of us.Not sure what triggered that response. I'm not defending Swiss laws, merely pointing out that international pressure is absolutely meaningless in a direct democracy.
Uh... No? You're not a programmer, are you. One of them allows Apple to easily make exceptions ("Oh, you want your Skype app to run in the background? I'm sure we can come to an agreement"), and may allow "bad" applications to slip through. The other doesn't, because it enforces the restrictions in code. One is a sandbox, the other isn't. There are so many differences between the two that calling distinguishing between the SDK and signing "pedantic" is... I'm not sure, insane perhaps?
And who can argue against such a sophisticated argument based entirely on a homophobic pejorative?I do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about.
Ah. Just this once, then.
THere are no safeguards in the SDK. It's all enforced by Apple's approving process. Also, no background apps sucks, plain and simple.
Dude.
Flamebait much?
I live in a country where the iPhone isn't sold, yet I know about two dozen people who own one, and see a few on the street each week. The only eee I've ever seen was yesterday, in a computer shop's show room (it was pink).
It should be remember that Switzerland is a direct democracy. If the swiss government were to change the laws, it is very likely that the SVP, a swiss right-wing party, would force a public vote on the issue. Personally, I think there's a good chance that the swiss people would vote against their own government and keep the law as-is, international treaties be damned. There is jack shit any other country can do to influence the outcome of this; in fact, pressure from governments like the US government would have the opposite effect and help keep the current law.
Friends don't let friends buy RAM from Apple. That is all. Replacing RAM or a HD in a Mac is generally really easy (Mac mini excluded).
If that truly is your bet, then I would bet against you. Name the value. What he actually most likely did was download a ClamAV frontend for OS X.
After double-clicking such a file, Mac OS X will tell you that you're about to launch an application for the first time. It will also tell you where exactly you got it from.
Except that pretty much all AV software sucks and is more trouble than any virus you could possibly get. I'd rather suffer through having to restore a backup because I got a virus than through decades of bloaty crapware which won't help me in the end, anyway, because the virus definition update came too late.
And I've yet to see a nice ClamAV frontend for the Mac.
There's also no reason to actually use anti-virus software on Macs. That doesn't mean you should feel secure. It just means you should behave like a moderately reasonable person. I've actually written about this in my blog. In my opinion, you should prevent catching a virus by behaving correctly, and you should plan for infection by having a backup. What you should not do is install crap that will make your computer unusable and still won't actually protect you.
Probably, but some commenters seemed to take the OP's comment seriously.
Do you really think there's even a single person in the whole world who has nothing to hide? How about your medical history, would you be okay with everyone knowing that? Do you not care if everyone know who you've slept with (or, as the case may be, have not slept with but pretended to have slept with)? How about that one time you've shat your pants for some ridiculous reason when you were 8 years old? You don't care if everyone knows this? How about letting the police know how fast you drive? You don't care about that? Surely you've never broken the speed limit? Or maybe crossed the road when the signal was still red? No jaywalking? Never littered? Never thrown a cup of coffee at your boyfriend in the heat of an argument? Never stole your neighbour's newspaper out of his box because you saw an interesting article? Never found a wallet without any identification and just kept the money? Never insulted your friend when he wasn't present? Want your new employer to know you've stolen a sandwich out of the fridge at your previous place of work? Or that you had an affair with your old boss's secretary? Or that you like to wear women's underwear? That you downrob gigs of movies and music off the Interwebs? Or that you jerk off to violent hot gritz fat chicks midget porn all evening? Or that you tend to post pages and pages of dumb crap on Slashdot instead of working (which, by the way, is obviously the only one of these points which applies to me, for the record :-)?
Nobody has nothing to hide, and our society only works because we're allowed to keep secrets. If every bad deed were punished, everyone would constantly be punished. Privacy is an important right; without it and without the ability to do "small" bad things, our society would not work.
I don't know. I guess that depends on what Apple's lawyers deem a major change. Anything to do with hardware, I would guess, is a no. Apple did charge for the updated driver to the wifi capabilities. I guess IP over FW would not be free, either.
What? The iPhone runs OS X. It has preemptive multitasking, memory protection and all that other stuff modern operating systems have.
2) other organizations (open moku will be cited along with others) have failed to get developer energyAnd you think that applies to Apple, too? You'll be surprised. There's a reason Apple's dev servers went down yesterday.
3) the iPhone's business model is being constantly corrupted (look at SIM unlock #s to understand 'renegade thinking')Apple said they were not married to any individual business model. Not to mention that they make money whether you use your phone with AT&T or some other carrier.
4) unless you find your own business model, or market through Apple, you won't get much but love with your codeEveryone will use Apple's service.
5) your code will need lots of adaptation to be used on other phone substratesIf your app is good enough, you'll sell enough copies on the iPhone that you won't have to adapt for other mobile systems. And if you don't make enough money, port the app to the Mac. Porting from OS X to Mac OS X and vice-versa should be easy, they share a ton of APIs.
6) Apple will likely digest the best and discard the rest-- have we not learned anything?What does that even mean?
I find it hilarious that a person with "Sony Fanboy" in his name makes these points about Apple. Hopefully you don't own a Sony PSP, or a Sony notebook, or a Sony MP3 player, or, actually, pretty much anything from Sony.
Boss wants to use his iPhone. IT department makes it so. This is probably a reasonably common scenario; much more so than Boss wanting to have a Mac.
But the original complaint doesn't seem to be that Apple's service isn't worth 100 bucks. The original complaint was either that he could not afford 100 bucks, or that OSS would not work if somebody had to pay 100 bucks to get the app on the store.
I think you're missing the point. Sayin that "current product X will lose because potential future product Y will be much better" practically always assumes that current product X will not improve until future product Y appears. There are no Android phones available. Mobile 7 is not available. The iPhone is. When the other two are here, the iPhone will be in a different place, too, and if it turns out that absolutely open development is better (so far, this does not seem to be the case for mobile devices), Apple will be able to adapt.
Uhm. They've already outlined a number of things that they will not allow, even if you have a cert. They even said they would enforce the HIG. Apple absolutely will not publish crappy applications.