As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Apple To Developers: Fuck You

1141517192029

Posts

  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    And in any case, they can just refuse to license your game for any reason, or no reason at all, and you have no recourse other than to resubmit.

    Their house, their rules.

    the problem is, if they end up in EVERY house, then there are larger rules

    imagine the massive lawsuits if putting a program on windows was the same as putting one on the iphone?

    Evander on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Jokerman wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Wazza wrote: »
    I own both a PC and a Mac. I find the Mac's user interface far more intuitive, smooth, and pleasant.

    I never understood what Apple users meant by this until I actually owned a Mac though.

    Is that something you would only pick up if you own one or use one for extended periods of time? I was raised with macs (albeit 15 years ago) and have used them every now and then since, and I find that I have a much easier time navigating and manipulating Windows-based OS's.

    I've found Macs to be the least intuitive OS to use on a basic level.

    Also, 1-button mouse. Where's my scroll wheel assholes!

    But shryke, it just works!

    Again:

    They make mice that have more than two buttons or react in such a way, the OS supports things like scroll wheels and multiple buttons on mice and support non-Apple mice if their non-One Button mice are not satisfactory.

    EDIT: and this post is coming from a life-long PC user whose only experiences with Macs have been for classes, fiddling with a friend's Mac and MacBook and in-store demo units

    Apparently you've got to pay extra for them or something?

    Cause the Macs I've dealt with and the models I've seen in store have been the "classic" one-button affair.

    Like using a computer with a sharpened piece of flint.
    macs now come with a mouse than has a multitouch interface on the top that can recognise gestures, has two clickable button zones, and can scroll simply by brushing your finger across the top.

    With a simple free 3rd party software download, you can turn it into a 20-someodd button mouse (1 finger click, 2 finger click, 3 finger click, two finger down swipe, three finger up swipe etc etc.)

    Apple hasn't made a truly one button mouse for like 5 years. And the mouse they made 5 years ago introduced hardware 360" scrolling via a scrollball in place of a wheel, which is something I miss whenever I don't have access to (read: every PC mouse).

    Your info is out of date there, bud.

    I know this is an old post, but this is such bullshit that I had to bring it up. I've been trying to work with macs all semester, and I have yet to make the mouse do the correct click more than 50% of the time.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    To me, this is equivalent to censorship.
    Sometimes I wish the corporations would hurry up and impose global fascism so that insufferable moaning neckbeards could finally get a taste of actual honest-to-god oppression

    Azio on
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    To me, this is equivalent to censorship.
    Sometimes I wish the corporations would hurry up and impose global fascism so that insufferable moaning neckbeards could finally get a taste of actual honest-to-god oppression
    That's nice, you silly goose, but instead of throwing out offhand insults, how about you read my entire post so you can see the parallel.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238
    Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
    Playing: Persona 5 Royal (PS4), Animal Crossing (SW), FF7remake (PS4)
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I'm really not seeing the harm in the existence of "tons" of shitty development guidelines. If they suck, don't develop for them.

    Azio on
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2010
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    how is a complete monopoly on development tools for a platform not a monopoly?

    Because they also developed the platform?


    Nintendo does the same thing. This is a silly question.

    No, they don't. Please show me where they tell their developers what tools they are allowed to use to develop games?

    In the licensing agreement? You can only use approved middleware and toolchains on the Wii. And you can't use any open source code at all, which disqualifies a bunch of middleware.

    Well, then Nintendo's in the wrong as well. And you'd think they would know better.

    Microsoft and Sony doesn't allow unapproved stuff either.

    Heck, Sony doesn't let you take their toolset out of the building.

    And the reason Nintendo bans open-source is because a) the GPL is incompatible with their business, and b) they already had to recall a game that didn't properly follow the rules for it's open source license. It's the same reason Harmonix bans covers from Rock Band Network - it's easier and cheaper to just 86 it up front instead of being in a legal quagmire later.

    If you don't like it, make your own device, and let everyone use any toolchain and middleware they want.

    FyreWulff on
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    I'm really not seeing the harm in the existence of "tons" of shitty development guidelines. If they suck, don't develop for them.

    Obviously this isn't censorship. I just don't believe it is good practice to quality assure on the development side. I believe people should be free to develop whatever garbage they want and in whatever way, or with whatever tools they want. Consumers/the market can then reject crappy products on the basis that they are crappy. Restricting development is not a good thing. I understand the desire for quality assurance, but I don't agree with this method of trying to attain it.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238
    Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
    Playing: Persona 5 Royal (PS4), Animal Crossing (SW), FF7remake (PS4)
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    And in any case, they can just refuse to license your game for any reason, or no reason at all, and you have no recourse other than to resubmit.

    Their house, their rules.

    the problem is, if they end up in EVERY house, then there are larger rules

    imagine the massive lawsuits if putting a program on windows was the same as putting one on the iphone?
    Windows is in every house because Microsoft used shady business practices to ensure that all computers from all manufacturers would ship with Windows and only Windows pre-installed. That is why they were sued for anti-trust. If Windows had become the dominant, ubiquitous, inescapable platform that it was in 1998 because everyone specifically, willingly bought Windows because they had a choice in the matter then Microsoft would have probably been able to impose whatever guidelines, and ship however many programs with it, as they cared to.

    iPhone OS is on every iPhone because Apple exclusively designed, manufactured and sold the iPhone. The fact that everyone went out and bought an iPhone doesn't exactly make it a matter of public interest that iPhone development guidelines be fair to other platforms.

    Azio on
  • NatheoNatheo Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    besides, the availability of cheap multiplatform middleware would result in a deluge of terrible apps on all platforms

    There currently is a deluge of terrible apps on all platforms. The good stuff floats to the top.

    Natheo on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    how is a complete monopoly on development tools for a platform not a monopoly?

    Because they also developed the platform?


    Nintendo does the same thing. This is a silly question.

    No, they don't. Please show me where they tell their developers what tools they are allowed to use to develop games?

    In the licensing agreement? You can only use approved middleware and toolchains on the Wii. And you can't use any open source code at all, which disqualifies a bunch of middleware.

    Well, then Nintendo's in the wrong as well. And you'd think they would know better.

    That... that's the point of consoles.

    Quid on
  • NatheoNatheo Registered User
    edited April 2010
    I still think the only way this comparison is valid is if it were a game console, or if apple only imposed the restriction for game development.

    Natheo on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited April 2010
    And to bring it back around, you can use any code you damn well please on your own console. The restrictions only come into effect once you want to actually release licensed software on the thing.

    FyreWulff on
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    And in any case, they can just refuse to license your game for any reason, or no reason at all, and you have no recourse other than to resubmit.

    Their house, their rules.

    the problem is, if they end up in EVERY house, then there are larger rules

    imagine the massive lawsuits if putting a program on windows was the same as putting one on the iphone?
    Windows is in every house because Microsoft used shady business practices to ensure that all computers from all manufacturers would ship with Windows and only Windows pre-installed. That is why they were sued for anti-trust. If Windows had become the dominant, ubiquitous, inescapable platform that it was in 1998 because everyone specifically, willingly bought Windows because they had a choice in the matter then Microsoft would have probably been able to impose whatever guidelines, and ship however many programs with it, as they cared to.

    iPhone OS is on every iPhone because Apple exclusively designed, manufactured and sold the iPhone. The fact that everyone went out and bought an iPhone doesn't exactly make it a matter of public interest that iPhone development guidelines be fair to other platforms.

    You are COMPLETELY missing the point. Reread what I wrote.

    Evander on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I'm afraid you're going to have to hold my hand here. If Microsoft suddenly locked up Windows and made it impossible to independently publish software for it without getting licensed by them, and then refused to license any software not written in C# and compiled in Visual Studio, then it wouldn't be Windows anymore, would it?

    Azio on
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    I'm afraid you're going to have to hold my hand here. If Microsoft suddenly locked up Windows and made it impossible to independently publish software for it without getting licensed by them, and then refused to license any software not written in C# and compiled in Visual Studio, then it wouldn't be Windows anymore, would it?

    Don't be a developer, be a consumer.

    It's really not very difficult.

    Evander on
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Microsoft got in trouble in Europe for bundling their own browser, because of the scale at which Windows dominates the market. That was just for bundling one piece of software, imagine if they handled windows programs the way that Apple handles iPhone IS programs. The iPhone is growing in popularity. It isn't like Windows level penetration, but the larger issue, in my mind, is that the rest of the market tries to copy Apple. We've already had the announcement that WP7 apps will be handled similarly through central marketplace ONLY.

    It is one thing when we are talking about video games, but when we talk about our gee dee cellphones, that is an integral part of people's lives.

    Evander on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I'm afraid you're going to have to hold my hand here. If Microsoft suddenly locked up Windows and made it impossible to independently publish software for it without getting licensed by them, and then refused to license any software not written in C# and compiled in Visual Studio, then it wouldn't be Windows anymore, would it?

    Don't be a developer, be a consumer.

    It's really not very difficult.
    As a consumer I am mighty pleased with my (jailbroken) iphone. It's a great piece of hardware with a lot of really neat apps. If there is some earth-shaking killer app on android that would substantially improve the iphone if only it could be easily ported over, I am not aware of it.

    Whatever apple is doing clearly works. More, please.

    Azio on
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Also that comparison doesn't quite seem apt. Microsoft didn't build those computers.

    Quid on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    To me, this is equivalent to censorship.
    Sometimes I wish the corporations would hurry up and impose global fascism so that insufferable moaning neckbeards could finally get a taste of actual honest-to-god oppression

    This is just me speaking here--but this sounds like the sort of argument you'd get from, well, an insufferable moaning neckbeard. Especially the second and third words, not so much the first one, perhaps.

    I'm not going to flat out say that you're one, because I can't confirm that and that's the sort of accusation you'd normally associate with a longer pattern of behavior, but it really, really captures the tone. I just wanted to point out the sort of irony (?) of that. My idea of an insufferable, moaning neckbeard might be way, way out there though, since I'm really not that deeply familiar with the technology myself.

    Synthesis on
    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • nescientistnescientist Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Azio wrote: »
    Evander wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I'm afraid you're going to have to hold my hand here. If Microsoft suddenly locked up Windows and made it impossible to independently publish software for it without getting licensed by them, and then refused to license any software not written in C# and compiled in Visual Studio, then it wouldn't be Windows anymore, would it?

    Don't be a developer, be a consumer.

    It's really not very difficult.
    As a consumer I am mighty pleased with my (jailbroken) iphone. It's a great piece of hardware with a lot of really neat apps. If there is some earth-shaking killer app on android that would substantially improve the iphone if only it could be easily ported over, I am not aware of it.

    Whatever apple is doing clearly works. More, please.

    [scanners guy headsplosion.gif]

    So... you're defending Apple's restrictive app store policy on the strength of your positive experience with a jailbroken iPhone? You do realize that your phone will run any binary you damned well please, and that no decision by Apple mentioned in this thread (unless someone was talking about the remote-bricking of some jailbroken iPhones at AT&T's behest, which I suppose you still have to watch out for) will have any effect on your phone?

    I guess I should have abandoned all hope of a sane discussion as soon as this devolved into a religious war about whether Apple's products are worth their prices instead of sticking to the subject of programming languages permitted for app store submissions.

    nescientist on
    Carl Sagan wrote:
    The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars.
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    This is just me speaking here--but this sounds like the sort of argument you'd get from, well, an insufferable moaning neckbeard. Especially the second and third words, not so much the first one, perhaps.
    I don't have a neckbeard, but I can be insufferable
    So... you're defending Apple's restrictive app store policy on the strength of your positive experience with a jailbroken iPhone?
    Well. I haven't actually used any jailbreak apps. I just broke it because I could. And to try apps that don't have demo versions.

    I'm not defending this. I'm saying this is what the iPhone has always been about: total control, by apple, of a proprietary, "revolutionary," and commercially successful handheld computing platform. I'm not surprised by it at all. A lot of people are outraged and they are comparing it to censorship, laughably, and to Windows antitrust, which was about control of all computers everywhere. I don't agree with that comparison. I'm also trying to be constructive (rare for me) by giving my thoughts as an inexperienced developer about what this means for smartphone devs.

    Azio on
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    if, say, apple sued this guy, or scared him off with legal threats, then I might be convinced to get mad about it.

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yO2KQHkt4A

    Azio on
  • GlalGlal Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    I've never understood mouse gestures. To me they basically seem like an opportunity for my normal mouse inputs to, under specific circumstances, do something I did not intend.
    I find them useful in browsers. For example, in Opera holding the right mouse button, dragging down, then releasing will open a new tab. If you start the gesture over a link it'll open said link in the tab. A gesture to the left will go back, a gesture to the right will go forward and a capital L (down, right) will close the tab.
    It's quite handy if you don't want to deal with keyboard shortcuts or drop-down menus. It also allows you to keep the mouse inside the window most of the time, rather than having to dart up to the menu bar.

    It depends on your browser habits, really. If your other hand is on the keyboard most of the time then they're rather pointless. Myself, I usually keep my left hand resting on the side or supporting my chin while controlling the browser with just my mouse, so being able to do basic operations like back or close without having to move into the upper left corner of the screen is just plain handy.

    Glal on
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    Scalfin wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Jokerman wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Wazza wrote: »
    I own both a PC and a Mac. I find the Mac's user interface far more intuitive, smooth, and pleasant.

    I never understood what Apple users meant by this until I actually owned a Mac though.

    Is that something you would only pick up if you own one or use one for extended periods of time? I was raised with macs (albeit 15 years ago) and have used them every now and then since, and I find that I have a much easier time navigating and manipulating Windows-based OS's.

    I've found Macs to be the least intuitive OS to use on a basic level.

    Also, 1-button mouse. Where's my scroll wheel assholes!

    But shryke, it just works!

    Again:

    They make mice that have more than two buttons or react in such a way, the OS supports things like scroll wheels and multiple buttons on mice and support non-Apple mice if their non-One Button mice are not satisfactory.

    EDIT: and this post is coming from a life-long PC user whose only experiences with Macs have been for classes, fiddling with a friend's Mac and MacBook and in-store demo units

    Apparently you've got to pay extra for them or something?

    Cause the Macs I've dealt with and the models I've seen in store have been the "classic" one-button affair.

    Like using a computer with a sharpened piece of flint.
    macs now come with a mouse than has a multitouch interface on the top that can recognise gestures, has two clickable button zones, and can scroll simply by brushing your finger across the top.

    With a simple free 3rd party software download, you can turn it into a 20-someodd button mouse (1 finger click, 2 finger click, 3 finger click, two finger down swipe, three finger up swipe etc etc.)

    Apple hasn't made a truly one button mouse for like 5 years. And the mouse they made 5 years ago introduced hardware 360" scrolling via a scrollball in place of a wheel, which is something I miss whenever I don't have access to (read: every PC mouse).

    Your info is out of date there, bud.

    I know this is an old post, but this is such bullshit that I had to bring it up. I've been trying to work with macs all semester, and I have yet to make the mouse do the correct click more than 50% of the time.

    Then either the mouse is configured wrong (always a possibility in a public lab), is broken (same as before), or you haven't picked up on how to use the apple mice, which is (admittedly) different.

    To right click, the only finger that can be touching the top surface is the one doing the right clicking. Because its a touch surface, it reads your left finger resting while your right finger clicks as a two-finger click, which is a left click by default.

    I'll be honest; it does take some getting used to, and they are horrible mice for gaming. But that's what the USB ports are for :P... and I happen to think the magic mouse is an excellent device for work and design.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Evander wrote: »
    Microsoft got in trouble in Europe for bundling their own browser, because of the scale at which Windows dominates the market. That was just for bundling one piece of software, imagine if they handled windows programs the way that Apple handles iPhone IS programs. The iPhone is growing in popularity. It isn't like Windows level penetration, but the larger issue, in my mind, is that the rest of the market tries to copy Apple. We've already had the announcement that WP7 apps will be handled similarly through central marketplace ONLY.

    It is one thing when we are talking about video games, but when we talk about our gee dee cellphones, that is an integral part of people's lives.

    Having an "open" development environment isn't a benevolent moral stance; it's a business decision. Microsoft became the dominant player in personal computers by abandoning second- or third-party quality control and focusing centrally on keeping their OS cheap and their office suite ubiquitous. As a result, you could get a microsoft OS on a cheap computer and had available millions of applications, many of them unworkable or dogs or virus-ridden, but also good ones in there. Your experience with Microsoft's PCs will vary greatly depending on your personal set-up and savvy.

    Apple's strategy has generally been to maintain some degree of control over the entire computing experience. It's been true of their PCs as well as their forays int oconsumer electronics. This has, on balance, brobably not been a fantastic business decision in terms of market share, but they have been able to maintain a reputation for delivering a consistent, elegant user eperience, which some people prefer to the frustrations of Windows or the wild west of Linux.

    In terms of the phone market, Android is offering roughly the equivalent to old-school microsoft to compete with Apple's traditional philosophy as implemented on the iPhone. Anyone can put an app out there and it's not really Google's responsibility. WinMobile seems, at the moment, dead. However, Microsoft has seemed to take some QC lessons from Apple recently and tends to maintain much tighter control than they used to (see: Xbox, Zune) - mostly because I suspect the company is smarting over the awful reputation that windows has acquired. PalmOS is another option for a relatively open development environment with low QC and a whole lot of apps that barely work.

    Anyways, the market is well-served. You have a lot of choices about what kind of configuration you want on your smart-phone. You don't really sound like an Apple consumer in the first place, Evander. I could understand your fear if Apple were the only option for cell phones, but they are not!

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Lanz wrote: »

    I know they have produced AIR for Android but if Adobe are not working hell for leather to target LLVM to produce native Android apps then they are fools.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Lanz wrote: »

    And what about things like PhoneGap which are reported to still be supported?

    PhoneGap (as far as I can tell) is a toolset for writing HTML/Javascript applications. HTML/Javascript is an allowed development language as ordained by Apple. It's why Unity 3D will still get a pass as the Unity 3D toolset spits out a complete XCode project - which is, obviously, allowed.

    Anything that is producing native code without going through a c/Obj-C/C++ stage first is fucked. Up the arse, with a barbed wire pole.

    If Adobe really wanted to they could get their LLVM architecture to spit out a Obj-C or C intermediate version of the flash app but that would almost certainly reveal too much about the inner workings of the flash player for them to be happy with.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Apple will run into problems if they don't keep a close eye on what kind of common libraries and tools that iPhone developers are building in order to make their stuff work. Keeping a fairly closed development environment can work okay as long as you stay active and agile.

    The thing is that no one likes working in Flash. It's a nightmare to work in, it's closed, it's buggy, it's a memory hog, etc. Flash is basically the worst, both for the developer and the consumer. But people use it because it's "cross-platform" sort-of, and this cuts down on development costs.

    It's not like getting rid of flash support will stop cross-platform development. It just either requires that applications be written in OS-specific code (best scenario) that shares common resources (the way that console development is done), or else code be written in some meta-language that will "compile" into OS-appropriate intermediate languages (not ideal, but still maybe better than Flash).

    Basically, the only losers in this are Adobe and developers who went all-in for Flash.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Apple will run into problems if they don't keep a close eye on what kind of common libraries and tools that iPhone developers are building in order to make their stuff work. Keeping a fairly closed development environment can work okay as long as you stay active and agile.

    The thing is that no one likes working in Flash. It's a nightmare to work in, it's closed, it's buggy, it's a memory hog, etc. Flash is basically the worst, both for the developer and the consumer. But people use it because it's "cross-platform" sort-of, and this cuts down on development costs.

    It's not like getting rid of flash support will stop cross-platform development. It just either requires that applications be written in OS-specific code (best scenario) that shares common resources (the way that console development is done), or else code be written in some meta-language that will "compile" into OS-appropriate intermediate languages (not ideal, but still maybe better than Flash).

    Basically, the only losers in this are Adobe and developers who went all-in for Flash.

    And anyone else who wrote a native iPhone generating middleware layer. The .Net iPhone development environment for example has just been killed stone dead by this move.

    And you're confusing Flash with the Flash Player. The Flash Player is buggy but the native apps that were produced with the Abode cross compiler were only as buggy as the code used to create them.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    edited April 2010
    And anyone else who wrote a native iPhone generating middleware layer. The .Net iPhone development environment for example has just been killed stone dead by this move.

    http://monotouch.net/

    Funny; they seem to have a 4.0 version of monotouch already available, and are pretty sure that since xcode is part and parcel with the development process that apple will be okay with it.

    syndalis on
    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • PerpetualPerpetual Registered User
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Apple will run into problems if they don't keep a close eye on what kind of common libraries and tools that iPhone developers are building in order to make their stuff work. Keeping a fairly closed development environment can work okay as long as you stay active and agile.

    The thing is that no one likes working in Flash. It's a nightmare to work in, it's closed, it's buggy, it's a memory hog, etc. Flash is basically the worst, both for the developer and the consumer. But people use it because it's "cross-platform" sort-of, and this cuts down on development costs.

    It's not like getting rid of flash support will stop cross-platform development. It just either requires that applications be written in OS-specific code (best scenario) that shares common resources (the way that console development is done), or else code be written in some meta-language that will "compile" into OS-appropriate intermediate languages (not ideal, but still maybe better than Flash).

    Basically, the only losers in this are Adobe and developers who went all-in for Flash.

    And anyone else who wrote a native iPhone generating middleware layer. The .Net iPhone development environment for example has just been killed stone dead by this move.

    And you're confusing Flash with the Flash Player. The Flash Player is buggy but the native apps that were produced with the Abode cross compiler were only as buggy as the code used to create them.

    Oh noes, people will no longer have the ability to pay 400 to 1000 dollars for a MonoTouch license.

    The horror!

    Perpetual on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    In terms of the phone market, Android is offering roughly the equivalent to old-school microsoft to compete with Apple's traditional philosophy as implemented on the iPhone. Anyone can put an app out there and it's not really Google's responsibility. WinMobile seems, at the moment, dead. However, Microsoft has seemed to take some QC lessons from Apple recently and tends to maintain much tighter control than they used to (see: Xbox, Zune) - mostly because I suspect the company is smarting over the awful reputation that windows has acquired. PalmOS is another option for a relatively open development environment with low QC and a whole lot of apps that barely work.

    Not to pick at details, but from everything I've seen seems to suggest that, at least in the case of the Xbox 360 and XBL, both of those borrow far more from Microsoft's earlier experience with the Xbox in 2001 and the early Xbox Live setup that followed it that Apple's OS at the time.

    I say this primarily because you can, very easily, trace each step into the current product it is from that origin point.

    If we want to go back even further, I'd look more at earlier video game consoles (Sega's rules on the Dreamcast), and Sony, than Apple.

    The Zune is a different story. As for Xbox, I really don't think you could accurately say they were taking "lessons" from Apple, a though Apple was the only people with some sense of quality control back then (especially given how their quality control was back in 2001 versus what it is now). This is just my take on it, however.

    Synthesis on
    Orca wrote: »
    Synthesis wrote:
    Isn't "Your sarcasm makes me wet," the highest compliment an Abh can pay a human?

    Only if said Abh is a member of the nobility.
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Apple will run into problems if they don't keep a close eye on what kind of common libraries and tools that iPhone developers are building in order to make their stuff work. Keeping a fairly closed development environment can work okay as long as you stay active and agile.

    The thing is that no one likes working in Flash. It's a nightmare to work in, it's closed, it's buggy, it's a memory hog, etc. Flash is basically the worst, both for the developer and the consumer. But people use it because it's "cross-platform" sort-of, and this cuts down on development costs.

    It's not like getting rid of flash support will stop cross-platform development. It just either requires that applications be written in OS-specific code (best scenario) that shares common resources (the way that console development is done), or else code be written in some meta-language that will "compile" into OS-appropriate intermediate languages (not ideal, but still maybe better than Flash).

    Basically, the only losers in this are Adobe and developers who went all-in for Flash.

    And anyone else who wrote a native iPhone generating middleware layer. The .Net iPhone development environment for example has just been killed stone dead by this move.

    And you're confusing Flash with the Flash Player. The Flash Player is buggy but the native apps that were produced with the Abode cross compiler were only as buggy as the code used to create them.

    There are a pretty significant number of complaints at how terrible the Flash cross-compiler works for the Mac. My understanding is that a large part of this restriction of flash on the iPad apparently has to do with Adobe intransigence at refusing to optimize their cross-compiler and player for Apple's platforms. Apple is pretty obsessed with "user experience" (e.g., limiting multitasking) and couldn't guarantee smooth running on their mobile platforms with a chokey cross-platform flash dev environment.

    I agree that it's a bit of a gambit that Apple is running, and it definitely evokes their missteps in the early 90s. That said, the dynamics of the 2010 mobile market are different than the dynamics of the 1990 PC market, and their strategy might be well-suited here. The trade-off for the consumer is going to be ease of use and reliability vs. flexibility, since it doesn't really look like anyone in the smartphone market is seriously looking to compete significantly on price. On the developer side, it's just a question of whether they're willing to spring for another dev or two in order to cross-develop their products, and if not, whether they prefer to develop for the iPhone/ iPad or Android.

    My personal experience with Palm Pre apps left me desperately wishing that Palm adopted Apple's locked-down QC. Their third-party stuff is fuckin awful.

    All this said, I'll probably buy one of those 4G android phones when they come out this summer. I can't use AT&T in Boston because it doesn't work, so I'm stuck with Sprint. I guess I'll get to see first-hand at how magical Flash is on a mobile platform!

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    syndalis wrote: »
    And anyone else who wrote a native iPhone generating middleware layer. The .Net iPhone development environment for example has just been killed stone dead by this move.

    http://monotouch.net/

    Funny; they seem to have a 4.0 version of monotouch already available, and are pretty sure that since xcode is part and parcel with the development process that apple will be okay with it.

    That'll teach me for picking a random middleware layer and just assuming it wouldn't produce an intermediate XCode project.

    The point still stands though that more than just Adobe has been affected by this decision.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    In terms of the phone market, Android is offering roughly the equivalent to old-school microsoft to compete with Apple's traditional philosophy as implemented on the iPhone. Anyone can put an app out there and it's not really Google's responsibility. WinMobile seems, at the moment, dead. However, Microsoft has seemed to take some QC lessons from Apple recently and tends to maintain much tighter control than they used to (see: Xbox, Zune) - mostly because I suspect the company is smarting over the awful reputation that windows has acquired. PalmOS is another option for a relatively open development environment with low QC and a whole lot of apps that barely work.

    Not to pick at details, but from everything I've seen seems to suggest that, at least in the case of the Xbox 360 and XBL, both of those borrow far more from Microsoft's earlier experience with the Xbox in 2001 and the early Xbox Live setup that followed it that Apple's OS at the time.

    I say this primarily because you can, very easily, trace each step into the current product it is from that origin point.

    If we want to go back even further, I'd look more at earlier video game consoles (Sega's rules on the Dreamcast), and Sony, than Apple.

    The Zune is a different story. As for Xbox, I really don't think you could accurately say they were taking "lessons" from Apple, a though Apple was the only people with some sense of quality control back then (especially given how their quality control was back in 2001 versus what it is now). This is just my take on it, however.

    I guess I didn't mean to imply that MS was directly aping Apple - just that when MS actually owns the complete product experience, they become a whole lot more interested in making sure that third-party development is controlled, tested platform-optimized, and quality-assured in the same way that Apple does with its products.

    When MS was just in the business of making an OS for cheap PCs, they didn't see third-party QA as their problem, and this indifference has kind of molded the expectation of developers, who seem to regard "open" systems as some sort of panacea in spite of the broad failure of linux as a consumer platform.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Linux's failure as a consumer platform has far more to do with the fact that it's free.

    When a project is dependant on voluntarily donated time, to a large extent, people are going to work on that which interests them and no-one's really going to be able to make drastic decisions to provide a uniform UI.

    People work on what interests them, usually as a part of comp sci thesis's which tend to focus on interesting algorithm problems and not user experience.

    On a corporate level, there's still practically no profit in trying to standardize the way applications run in the Linux desktop environment.

    electricitylikesme on
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Linux's failure as a consumer platform has far more to do with the fact that it's free.

    When a project is dependant on voluntarily donated time, to a large extent, people are going to work on that which interests them and no-one's really going to be able to make drastic decisions to provide a uniform UI.

    People work on what interests them, usually as a part of comp sci thesis's which tend to focus on interesting algorithm problems and not user experience.

    On a corporate level, there's still practically no profit in trying to standardize the way applications run in the Linux desktop environment.

    Yeah I guess in fairness the failure of linux has a lot of mothers, but significantly among these is a complete lack of central QA or control. Nothing just works in Linux, and traditionally, nothing really just worked in Windows either.

    I guess what i am saying is that the expectation that the application developer should be able to do what they want with no interference from the device/ OS manufacturer strikes me as unrealistic and silly.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I guess what i am saying is that the expectation that the application developer should be able to do what they want with no interference from the device/ OS manufacturer strikes me as unrealistic and silly.

    But the restriction of 'original language' is about as arbitrary as demanding that all iPhone development be done at mahogany desks whilst wearing tweed jackets. Technically the language of 3.3.1 still fucks over middleware that spits out an Obj-C/C/C++ XCode project because the program was not 'originally written in' one of those 3 languages.

    This was a move to spear Adobe by Apple which has also caught a lot of smaller fish, and Apple - in it's arbitrary an illogical way, is now going to pick and choose as to who's allowed to continue and who's fucked.

    Alistair Hutton on
    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I guess what i am saying is that the expectation that the application developer should be able to do what they want with no interference from the device/ OS manufacturer strikes me as unrealistic and silly.

    But the restriction of 'original language' is about as arbitrary as demanding that all iPhone development be done at mahogany desks whilst wearing tweed jackets. Technically the language of 3.3.1 still fucks over middleware that spits out an Obj-C/C/C++ XCode project because the program was not 'originally written in' one of those 3 languages.

    This was a move to spear Adobe by Apple which has also caught a lot of smaller fish, and Apple - in it's arbitrary an illogical way, is now going to pick and choose as to who's allowed to continue and who's fucked.

    I mean the intention was to kick Adobe off of the iPhone platform, partly because Apple wasn't happy with easy, non-optimized multi-platform development, partly because Flash is terrible - especially on mobile platforms, and partly i guess because there is supposedly some animus between Adobe and Apple (which doesn't really explain Apple's broad endorsement of Adobe's application suite and PDF format?)

    I basically don't think it's a terrible decision is what I am saying. Flash is terrible and Apple wanted to migrate away from Flash-as-standard. And it's not even entirely about the apps - flash-based webpages are often shitty resource hogs and especially flash-based ads are fucking infuriating - no one wants to burn their phone battery on some animated scroll-over.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Protein ShakesProtein Shakes __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I guess what i am saying is that the expectation that the application developer should be able to do what they want with no interference from the device/ OS manufacturer strikes me as unrealistic and silly.

    But the restriction of 'original language' is about as arbitrary as demanding that all iPhone development be done at mahogany desks whilst wearing tweed jackets.

    Like it has been stated over and over, their house, their rules.

    If Apple demanded that all iPhone development be done at mahogany desks whilst wearing tweed jackets, guess what: developers would have to obey it the moment they clicked "I Agree" in the terms of service. There isn't anything immoral about this. The only thing you'd be able to argue would be that it's silly, which you'd be right about.

    Protein Shakes on
    Modern Man wrote: »
    Well, if my mom met the following criteria... I'd be in favor if waterboarding her.
Sign In or Register to comment.