or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by diddy

Indeed - we can (and have) criticized Apples (and other companies) decisions. Heck, it's encouraged around here. Nobody wants this to be an area where we just cheer Apple on or just disparage the competition and nothing else. Nobody would tolerate it and this would be a barren wasteland. However we like to encourage valid and constructive criticism else it becomes meaningless. Just throwing the word censorship is pointless since it does two things: It sounds...
The iBookstore is a means for Apple to sell whatever books Apple wishes to sell - that's why they have guidelines just like every retailer does. It is not some institute owned by the public. I don't care who this guy is, nobody has a right to have their content sold everywhere. That right is an expression of freedom too. Nobody can force me to sell anything that I do not want to by arguing censorship. That's abusing the term to an extreme. Just because Apple or I says...
Yes they can and they should. Appe isn't saying to their customer "you cannot view this text and the links". They are saying, "we will not sell this". That is a huge difference. If I open a book store, I can choose what I want to sell and how I want to sell it. If there are competitive choices I can do that. I can open up a bookstore and say " I want to carry these types of books, I can refuse to sell a book that falls outside of my desires. I am not censoring...
Not true - Apple is not preventing it's iBooks software from registering a generic epub or PDF version of the book on the iBooks software. He is being denied a listing in the store which Apple (along with any other vendor) is allowed to do. Nobody is being deprived from this book even if they rely entirely on iBooks for their reading. No vendor is under any legal or moral obligation to sell another vendors products unless there is an issue of monopoly or Anti-trust...
Hopefully Apple has a way of doing that or Adobe can work around it somehow. There has to be a way - but I don't know what that would be. I'm not a paid developer and I don't have access to the documentation. My free account doesn't get me anywhere.We can only hope, but I am not holding my breath.ETA:Thanks, my google fu was failing me...
What? I was never suggesting that Adobe would ever want to use the MAS. None of my questions even applied to the store. I was always talking about third party development outside of the store. I was merely pondering on how programs that were not developed in Xcode and made by companies like adobe (working from the assumption that might be flawed that they don't use Xcode) would get the third party certificate if it required development with Xcode. Adobe is not going...
I wasn't talking about MAS since - I think they will have to get signed. Good to know though.I was thinking about a big company like Adobe - however I admitted that I don't know how they develop their apps so it might be moot.
There are other development tools beyond Xcode that I have heard about - the name escapes me. Again, I am not a developer, but I can't imagine their not being other tools out there.
My question in this would be if the certificate can only be used in Xcode products how would that affect major software developers who do not use Xcode for their projects.... I don't speak from authority but I doubt that they develop in X-code for programs. If that is indeed the case, how are they going to apply such a certificate even if they wanted to but cannot use X-Code?
ItÂ’s called nipping the problem in the budMost serious developers pay for the support. There is still a free membership and Xcode is still freeThis is not a mandatory system. Nobody is locking down the OS - you can still install whatever you want and that is not going to change. Apple has said as much.
New Posts  All Forums: