or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by mjtomlin

That project was to allow the execution of native binary code within the browser. That's not at all what I was talking about. I'm talking about using the Swift language as a scripting language as an alternative to JavaScript. It would seem that this is the direction Apple may want to go taking into account their desire to match iCloud apps with native apps.
This isn't directly going to benefit Apple users at all, this is mostly about allowing other developers to become familiar with the language outside of Apple's platforms. Personally, I believe this announcement is Apple's first step in getting Swift onto the web as an alternative to JavaScript. Next year we'll see SwiftCore made available as part of Webkit.
So? Try viewing all of this from a user point of view. Would you rather have the option of being able to view all your data in a centralized location or jump from one app to another? If you do a little reading - which based off all your posts here, you are incapable of - you'd know that HealthKit is merely a centralized location for health related apps to store, retrieve and share information. The data stored here is encrypted by the user and all access to the data must be...
Gee, you're a bright one. Of course what Apple wants to do is make money... that's the point of running a business, isn't it? You really think people are buying iPhones just to use Apple Pay, HealthKit, and HomeKit? No they aren't. It's a side benefit of entering the Apple ecosystem. I have iOS 8 and have yet to use any of those. They are features for those that want to make use of them just as iCloud and iTunes Radio are. As I stated, you're completely wrong in assuming...
Nice. But the fact remains, that HealthKit, just as Apple Pay, HomeKit, etc., are user centric services and features that Apple does not directly gain from. Yes, they indirectly benefit from 3rd party support of their platform, but ultimately, it's the users that have the most to gain or lose from a company supporting a centralized feature.
This has nothing to do with Apple... HealthKit is a convenience feature for users, including FitBit users. Whether a company decides to make use of the feature doesn't affect Apple in the slightest. It's those users that will lose the ability to have all their data where they want it.
Ugh to be able to tell Siri to turn of my coffee maker from work, would be a godsend! I don't know how many times I've forgotten if I turned the damned thing off or not.
The problem with Apple moving home grown applications to other platforms is that they eat their own dog food, so to speak. Meaning they use a lot of built-in APIs and services provided by OS X. All of that has to be moved over as well and makes for a not so good experience. iTunes isn't just an application, it's a media platform, but I think Apple can do a better job by building a version that uses native technologies in Windows rather than trying to bring their own over....
If Apple can provide a valuable service for their customers and extend that service to an even greater audience with little to no overhead, then why not? Those customers pay for Apple products and that subsidizes most of Apple's services. There's no reason they can't take an online service designed as a convenience to their customers and allow access by "outsiders". They did this with iWork and it is ad-free. They'll do the same with Maps. ​Apple could already make a crap...
iCloud's "Find My iPhone" feature already uses Apple Maps, albeit in a limited fashion; no search, points of interest, 3D Flyover, etc. It works in Internet Explorer, Chrome and Safari on Windows and OS X (and Linux).   Obviously Apple would probably like to bring the full experience to the web in a dedicated stand-alone site, and I've always thought they would as part of iCloud's services. I also think iMessage and Spotlight will eventually make its way to iCloud as well.
New Posts  All Forums: