or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft details how to port programs from Apple's App Store
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft details how to port programs from Apple's App Store - Page 2

post #41 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by richyfp View Post

Windows Mobile, C#, and especially the .NET framework are all known for being slow.

WinMo.. yes.

.NET framework.. that's dependent upon what you're using it for, what it's running on, etc.

C#.. absolutely NOT! At my previous job we upgraded a ton of code to C# and on average it ran 10 times faster. You can hate M$ all you want, but C# is a very nice and efficient language that is not hard to pick up if you're familiar with Java or other common languages.
post #42 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

WinMo.. yes.

.NET framework.. that's dependent upon what you're using it for, what it's running on, etc.

C#.. absolutely NOT! At my previous job we upgraded a ton of code to C# and on average it ran 10 times faster. You can hate M$ all you want, but C# is a very nice and efficient language that is not hard to pick up if you're familiar with Java or other common languages.

As I said, that's an actual quote from the MSDN article. No M$ hating here...
post #43 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post


As far as supporting "all the versions" of WM: It's not as hard as you think. Some of the new stuff with 6.5 might not easily be backward compatible with 6.1 or 6.0, but what I've found is if it works on 6.1, it tends to work all the way back to 5.0. I've never had an issue running something designed for 5.0 on 6.1.


I can tell you this is not the case on the Motorola Q, I know for a fact that MS has various version of their releases to support variations in hardware manufactures depending on the mobile processor they are using and the graphic and screen drives on the phone. Also, depending on the firmware level of the hardware newer versions of MS Mobile do not work.

This is the nightmare any developer will be faced on supporting apps for MS mobile. I can tell you one app I ran into this with, Trapster, they make it for all platforms, iphone, Android, Java and MS Mobile. Their support for iphone is great and the other platform is not so great and they make had two version for the MS mobile one worked, kinda of the new one does not and they can not figure it out since they do not have Moto Q with my specific firmware and MS software release.
post #44 of 128
What's cracks me up, is that Microsoft don't even use C# to build their own OS. They promotion Visual Studio and .NET but don't fully embrace .NET.

Don't get me wrong .NET and managed code is very handy and powerful to work with. On the other hand Apple have being using Objective C for well over 10+ years. Also Apple gives you the IDE XCode for free on the OSX disc, while Microsoft's IDE isn't free or cheap.

Microsoft forever playing catch up or just simply late to the party as always. Only recently they start promoting the Model / View / Controller method used by Objective C, Ruby, etc...

They are simply too proud to admit that someone else might be doing something better than themselves.
post #45 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by i386 View Post

Apple have being using Objective C for well over 10+ years.

Actually, Apple, nee NeXT, have been using Objective-C for 20+ years.
post #46 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by i386 View Post

Also Apple gives you the IDE XCode for free on the OSX disc, while Microsoft's IDE isn't free or cheap.

Look at it all in perspective though. The IDE XCode isn't even close to free when you consider the extra couple $1000 you paid for the Apple hardware. On the surface it seems like a good deal, but break it down and I can buy a PC, Windows and Visual Studio for far less than a Mac with "free" XCode. I'm not arguing which one is better, etc.. just saying the price argument is flawed.
post #47 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by cozagada View Post

If you write in C#, the hardware should be abstracted, as in .NET, so the same code can run on different hardware.

640x480 - when apps don't run in a scaleable window you need to know the screen res for starters. So unless all Win mobile devices have the same aspect ratio it is probably going to squish the interface - very ugly indeed. And that is just the obvious flaw in your generalization.

Addressing the hardware differences is always going to be a major issue when porting code to a new device. The Win mobile environment is very fragmented where iPhone is quite consistent across the various models.

Trying make it sound simple to port apps is just a smoke screen. The whole memory management, file system, security, and OS integration is going to make the process very tedious indeed.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #48 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

Look at it all in perspective though. The IDE XCode isn't even close to free when you consider the extra couple $1000 you paid for the Apple hardware. On the surface it seems like a good deal, but break it down and I can buy a PC, Windows and Visual Studio for far less than a Mac with "free" XCode. I'm not arguing which one is better, etc.. just saying the price argument is flawed.

Extra couple thousand? Dunno where you shop, but the last time I compared a Mac Pro to an equivalent PC, the price difference was a couple hundred dollars tops:

Dell Precision T7500
Mac Pro

Looks like the same price to me. And you still have to buy Visual Studio for the PC.

Even if you build a DIY PC, if you build it to those exact specs, you're only going to save about $750 (and have no tech support). Go ahead, price out the components on TigerDirect and see. Make sure to include the price of the software.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #49 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio View Post

Extra couple thousand? Dunno where you shop, but the last time I compared a Mac Pro to an equivalent PC, the price difference was a couple hundred dollars tops:

Dell Precision T7500
Mac Pro

Looks like the same price to me. And you still have to buy Visual Studio for the PC.

Even if you build a DIY PC, if you build it to those exact specs, you're only going to save about $750 (and have no tech support). Go ahead, price out the components on TigerDirect and see. Make sure to include the price of the software.

I can develop just fine on my $499 Dell Latitude that came with Vista. Add VS to that and you're way under the price of the cheapest Macbook. Just because there are PC's that are more expensive doesn't mean that's required to develop in VS. For Apple though it is required because they don't offer any affordable models.
post #50 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"So, in 6.5, let's just pick an example, you'll see our browsing experience get dramatically better," Bach said. "So, you will have a very rich browsing experience on 6.5 devices that will give you access to more Web sites than you will be able to get to on an iPhone, that will work actively and work well. It really is a much better experience. We will have to continue to enhance that because the browser world is advancing very quickly. But, that's an experience people expect to work and that's just one example of many experiences that we're building to expand in that area, so choice in selection, great end-to-end experiences."

You think the PR guy/gal sent him out with the advice: "Hey, Robbie, make sure to talk about the Windows experience."
post #51 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

they don't offer any affordable models.

Affordable for whom?
post #52 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

I can develop just fine on my $499 Dell Latitude that came with Vista. Add VS to that and you're way under the price of the cheapest Macbook. Just because there are PC's that are more expensive doesn't mean that's required to develop in VS. For Apple though it is required because they don't offer any affordable models.

I can develop just fine on my $599 Mac Mini using a monitor left over from defenestration. Just because there are MacBooks that are more expensive doesn't mean that's required to develop in Xcode.
post #53 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Affordable for whom?

People who realize it makes no sense to pay 2x more for a macbook when they could get a PC that does everything they need.
post #54 of 128
Its sad when microsoft has to rely on the apple library of applications when obviously they can't write their own. They're a software company, one of the largest I might add, and yet they are relying on the catalog of a smaller competitor to bolster their own.

I find this to be quite ironic, its like their admitting they do not have a compelling product and pretty much have to outsource from apple directly. Microsoft is quite sad indeed.
post #55 of 128
This guy Bach is the worst salesman on earth. All this rambling about web browser experience is so incoherent. Actually he has nothing to say except "web browser experience". That's very encouraging. How about the EXPERIENCE of their SDK? How many hundreds of phones will this porting be for.
Microsoft will continue to lose market share until smartphone market is totally out of their hand. They have nothing to offer today as competition, and will not have anything different to offer tomorrow.

There is no web browser on any smartphone platform better than iPhone! Microsoft should have a developer conference for their smartphone, not incoherent talk at financial analyst conference. This guys are so disorganized. Who are they kidding?
post #56 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by i386 View Post

What's cracks me up, is that Microsoft don't even use C# to build their own OS. They promotion Visual Studio and .NET but don't fully embrace .NET.

As a developer I can say that most of what an OS needs to in no way falls in the "managed code" category. Plus, the overhead of handling managed code (garbage collection etc.) doesn't really make it the best choice for an OS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by i386 View Post

Microsoft forever playing catch up or just simply late to the party as always. Only recently they start promoting the Model / View / Controller method used by Objective C, Ruby, etc...

Yes, I found it amusing that Microsoft picked up MVC almost 20 years after NeXT started using it in the late 1980's.
post #57 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmas View Post

The only thing that Apple could do is allow third parties to sell outside of the 'app store', so that anything they don't want to be seen accepting can still be installed.

there is a valid reason for the restriction on a technical front. this is why those non app store apps are warranty voids. because any issue could be part of how the item was installed. at least if you are using their installer they can isolate the problem better.

yes it sucks when apps are approved and removed, not approved etc. particularly when the developers want to try the case in the media and make Apple look bad and we see that on the surface things don't make sense. but there are a myriad of factors and players we don't have the details on. we don't know what the contract with ATT says and now it might disallow certain apps, we don't know how the whole conflict of interest issue might have been a factor with Google, we don't know what kind of outcries took place when blatant porno apps were broached as possible, or when naughty uses for allegedly innocent apps were discovered. we only know what the media reports and it is always one sided and rarely in favor of the big bad corporation
post #58 of 128
One thing Microsoft forgot to mention was that you're going to have a heck of a time trying to port the look and feel of your iPhone app over to WinMo.

Sure the underlying functionality might be fairly straightforward to port, but you're probably going to have to redesign the entire work flow of the app to match whatever user interface elements are available on WinMo. That's no small task.

The porting example I see on their website is for an application which has a completely custom interface (no standard iPhone UI elements like tables or navbars). That's certainly not the norm for most of the iPhone apps I use.

I guess this press release will be enough to convince non-technical folks. However, once they see the effort (cost) involved in one or two app ports (or how horrible the ports are if done on a shoestring budget without any input from people with technical knowledge), they'll quickly come to see this for what it is: a marketing ploy.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #59 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by cozagada View Post

If you write in C#, the hardware should be abstracted, as in .NET, so the same code can run on different hardware.

If you are writing software that doesn't care about size or resolution of the screen, presence or absence of a keyboard, accelerometer or any other hardware feature, than what you say may be true. Of course that guarantees the shitiest imaginable software, which is precisely why people have migrated in droves from WinMo to the iPhone.

The only way ANY developer will re-write their iPhone App for WinMo is if Microsoft bribes/pays them.
post #60 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

You do realize that WinMo has a much larger market share than the iPhone OS right? The iPhone OS is growing at a faster rate and it dominates the web traffic category, but WinMo is still crushing it in overall market share.

I'm not a M$ fanboy and I have an iPhone 3GS, but ignoring the true market share numbers is just stupid.

Well there is market share and installed base. The latest installed base numbers for the platforms by their respective owners, that is users that can use the applications stores (that's what the article is about), are:

Windows Mobile (6.0+6.1): 30 million (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/e...09WPC2009.mspx)
iPhone OS: 45 million (ca. 26 million iPhones, 19 million iPod Touches) (http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/07...nference-call/)

When it comes to market share of devices sold in a period, Windows Mobile held 11.8% through 2008, the iPhone 8.2% (that is not counting iPod Touch units). (http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/13/g...bers-for-2008/)

For Q1 2009 Gartner names Apple as no. 3 smartphone os vendor after Symbian and BlackBerry OS (http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=985912), again, excluding iPod Touches.

I would not say that either platform is "crushing" the other, I leave it to your judgement.

But when it comes to a unified platform where a developer can sell an app unchanged to all users, iPhone OS beats Windows Mobile hands down (even when the "Windows Marketplace for Mobile" would be open today, which it is not)

just saying
Ciao, Alex
post #61 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

Look at it all in perspective though. The IDE XCode isn't even close to free when you consider the extra couple $1000 you paid for the Apple hardware. On the surface it seems like a good deal, but break it down and I can buy a PC, Windows and Visual Studio for far less than a Mac with "free" XCode. I'm not arguing which one is better, etc.. just saying the price argument is flawed.

Considering you can get a MacMini for $599 and it is more than powerful enough to run XCode and develop iPhone apps, your statement is completely false.
post #62 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Actually a lot of people CHOOSE to use a windows mobile phone on their own accord. They like being able to CHOOSE things on their own, where as with the iphone, Apple CHOOSES which apps are too naughty for your wittle eyes.

The iphone is nice, but there are countless people that will attest their love for windows mobile who have COME FROM the iphone.

This discussion will head into a windows mobile vs iphone direction, I can feel it.

Be gone troll.
post #63 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

I don't think they'll be a whole lot of folks porting iPhone apps to Windows Mobile.

There's only one thing worse than using a PoS OS like Windows. That's using a PoS OS with a small market share like Windows Mobile.

No, this is a smart move for MS. There are -many- developers that will port their apps, because the app store is a business for them. A lot of these guys already are working on porting to Pre and also to Android. It makes great fiscal sense to do this.
post #64 of 128
HA!!! A better browsing experience that an Iphone. This guy must be living in an alternate universe. WinMo 6.5 browser is horrible and works like a piece of dog turd. The Iphone has the best browser around, even blackberry users admit that, this guy is living in a Microsoft Dream world if he thinks this.

I laughed out loud when I read that little tidbit. Microsoft is a laggard now and they have to admit it!!!!
post #65 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618 View Post

No, this is a smart move for MS. There are -many- developers that will port their apps, because the app store is a business for them. A lot of these guys already are working on porting to Pre and also to Android. It makes great fiscal sense to do this.

I think the most you can say is that it could make fiscal sense for some apps in some cases. Porting and maintaining a port is going to require an investment by the developer. Whether that investment will be justified by the return is an open question at best.
post #66 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

Look at it all in perspective though. The IDE XCode isn't even close to free when you consider the extra couple $1000 you paid for the Apple hardware. On the surface it seems like a good deal, but break it down and I can buy a PC, Windows and Visual Studio for far less than a Mac with "free" XCode. I'm not arguing which one is better, etc.. just saying the price argument is flawed.

Interesting. I read through this thread and here's what I noticed from chronster and dev012:
Apple restricts apps
iPhone doesn't have Flash
Macs are expensive

Anyone notice the MS marketing strategy in this? I'm not going to make unfounded accusation, but if you are being paid for this, enjoy those MS paychecks while you can. Congress is working on making it illegal to pay people to plant marketing data in blogs and forums.
post #67 of 128
it seems odd that m$ has recently put on a full court press against apple.
between m$'s first quarterly loss, the ignorant pc buyers, ballmer the blowhard and this guy you'd think apple ran the world.

to clear up;
"porting programs from ... Objective-C to C# is relatively painless, because both are Java-like languages"

uhhhhh, you mean java is C-like, or doesn't a pioneer get any credit anymore.
post #68 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

People who realize it makes no sense to pay 2x more for a macbook when they could get a PC that does everything they need.

Unless they want to enjoy the system too. Additionally, with the Mac, they can run Windows on it when they like and have both platforms available for development.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #69 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

No way man. There's always gonna be dorky websites that offer quick flash games.

Dorky websites & quick flash games. Exactly the previous poster's point. Is that the best you got?

Thompson
post #70 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by dev012 View Post

I can develop just fine on my $499 Dell Latitude that came with Vista. Add VS to that and you're way under the price of the cheapest Macbook. Just because there are PC's that are more expensive doesn't mean that's required to develop in VS. For Apple though it is required because they don't offer any affordable models.

Oh sure, I could develop using a Mac Mini just fine as well. However, if you work on large software projects, the extra time you spend recompiling with a slow computer on a daily basis is far more expensive than the extra cost of a faster computer.

Bottom to top compile time for the current project I'm working on:

2.0 GHz Mac Mini w/ 2 GB RAM: 15 minutes
2 x 2.8 GHz Mac Pro w/ 4 GB RAM: 3 minutes

The Windows developers report similar speed differences between those with newer (faster) machines and those with older (slower) machines.

So really, that faster computer more than pays for itself with the increased productivity over the 3 or so years you use it.
 
Reply
 
Reply
post #71 of 128
WinMo is a complete POS, and yet that POS has had flash support for the last 5 years............
post #72 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

you like to throw that word around a lot don't you? ignorant...

couldn't get a job astroturfing for the health insurance industry, eh?
post #73 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

As far as supporting "all the versions" of WM: It's not as hard as you think. Some of the new stuff with 6.5 might not easily be backward compatible with 6.1 or 6.0, but what I've found is if it works on 6.1, it tends to work all the way back to 5.0. I've never had an issue running something designed for 5.0 on 6.1.


Nah, pretty much ever windows mobile phone feels clunky so the user experience is pretty much the same LOL

Honestly though, the differences between phones and the experiences ARE just like computers, where the newest ones are always faster and give a better experience.


I can attest to your compatibility statement, everything, aside from TCPMP worked from WM5 to WM6.1. However, I believe MS stated the App Store would only be available on 6.1 and up.

As far as different experiences, I can't really agree. As far as WM goes, I've used the OS since it was 5.0 with my MPX220. I've also used the HTC 8125, HTC 8525, HTC 8925, Pantech Duo, and Samsung Blackjack. All were very sluggish. And after a few months with them, they became even slower. It was almost a daily routine hard resetting my phone for it to function. The HTC 8925 was the last straw. It was the most powerful smart phone I had to date, and It still ran no faster than my 5.0 powered phones. I give HTC props for creating very innovative designs, and phones that last pretty well. I'm also glad to see they're exploring Android pretty heavily now, which I think has blown WM out of the water since 1.0.

I watched a video of 6.5 online, and it still looks sluggish. If the rumors are true that 7.0 is a recoded, built from the ground up OS, they may be back in the game, but there's no excuse for putting out garbage for the better part of a decade prior to this.

The reason Apple's App store works so well is that it comes already installed in the phone, and there are only 3 phones these applications can run on. There's really not too many compatibility issues as of yet, aside from maybe the GPS Apps on the 1st generation. Also, Apple hasn't left their first generation users in the dust. They too have been given the 3.0 update. Albeit, it may not offer all of the 3.0 updates, it was still updated to fix bugs and offer a few cool features. My WM phones get 1 update, and every time I was left with more bugs and headaches than what I started with. I think anyone with an HTC 8925 can attest to that!
post #74 of 128
Well, if the Windows platform is so great, why do they have to try and urge developers to port apps from the Apple Mobile platform? If Windows 6.5 is so good, the developers will just flock to it on their own. Did Apple mention anything about porting Windows Mobile apps to the iPhone. Hell, no. They just put out the SDK and let the developers do their thing. Microsoft always seems like it's on the defense and trying to take stuff from Apple. Why is Apple even being mentioned by Microsoft if their WinMo platform is so large and strong? It's been around a long, long time and if anyone wanted to develop apps for WinMo, they certainly would have done so by now. Since the WinMo platform can use Flash games and apps, they've already got thousands of those, so why worry about what Apple has.
post #75 of 128
Has Apple not proved to everyone that design/production/control of their hardware and design/production/control of their software is the recipe for a gratifying user experience and thereby company success?

Yes, competition is good...have at it, Google, Symbian, MS, etc., but don't vilify Apple for a proven modus operandi.

If Apple were a company to rest on its laurels we would still be using OS9, the iPod Classic, the original Shuffle, the first gen iPhone and a "plastic" white laptop.

I'm not one to belly ache about what Apple is not doing. I have great confidence the Apple PHD's will continue to improve their product offerings and stay well ahead of the competition.

Apple, generally and Steve Jobs specifically, have been able to corral the nerds/engineers into providing tech that actually works and is a pleasure to work on! Unlike MS, HP, Dell, Nokia, Symbian, Sony, LG, Motorola, Gateway, etc., etc., which is a nightmare to work on compared to the Apple products.
post #76 of 128
And don't forget, the day after iPhone OS 3.0 was released to the public, MILLIONS of iPhones upgraded to it, so developers immediately could use the latest API's and know they could sell their 3.0-specific apps (if they didn't want to support the older version) right away. Only if their app required new hardware capabilities, then they would need to wait for sales of the latest iPhone.

Microsoft has publicly announced that there is no upgrade path for existing phones for v6.5 or v7.0 (which is planned to be released less than six months later). So developers have the additional hurdle of having an install base of zero if they target v6.5 or v7.0 with their apps.

Microsoft may have, in total, more phones running a version of wince, but it's incredibly hard for developers to actually support all the different models of phones, each with a slightly different revision of wince, with different screens, processors, buttons and RAM. You aren't just coding for wince, you need to develop for each of the actual phones you want to support.
post #77 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

And don't forget, the day after iPhone OS 3.0 was released to the public, MILLIONS of iPhones upgraded to it, so developers immediately could use the latest API's and know they could sell their 3.0-specific apps (if they didn't want to support the older version) right away. Only if their app required new hardware capabilities, then they would need to wait for sales of the latest iPhone.

Microsoft has publicly announced that there is no upgrade path for existing phones for v6.5 or v7.0 (which is planned to be released less than six months later). So developers have the additional hurdle of having an install base of zero if they target v6.5 or v7.0 with their apps.

Microsoft may have, in total, more phones running a version of wince, but it's incredibly hard for developers to actually support all the different models of phones, each with a slightly different revision of wince, with different screens, processors, buttons and RAM. You aren't just coding for wince, you need to develop for each of the actual phones you want to support.

Good points. If I was a developer I would steer clear of anything MS offers! It's a crap organization that produces crap time and time again.
post #78 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadIvan View Post

Be gone troll.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadIvan View Post

Interesting. I read through this thread and here's what I noticed from chronster and dev012:
Apple restricts apps
iPhone doesn't have Flash
Macs are expensive

Anyone notice the MS marketing strategy in this? I'm not going to make unfounded accusation, but if you are being paid for this, enjoy those MS paychecks while you can. Congress is working on making it illegal to pay people to plant marketing data in blogs and forums.

Welcome to the forums. So far you haven't really added anything decent to the thread, but I'll cross my fingers for you and hope you stick around past 20 posts. The more the merrier.

By the way this thread just earned me enough to buy my family rice for dinner. We fight off starvation one more day. I'll be back tomorrow to collect my paycheck when I start my "Apple eats babies" thread.

But seriously, grow up. Use some intelligence and discuss what's said instead of brushing it off with name calling. That'll get you more respect from everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Dorky websites & quick flash games. Exactly the previous poster's point. Is that the best you got?

Thompson

He said they were dying out but they aren't. Why would they? Sure they're dorky, but plenty of DORKIER things are still around and thriving ::cough twitter cough::

Even if you're not into flash games, what about hulu? What about the fact that flash is so common these days? Surely you can speak to that point. I hope Apple does allow flash on the iphone. With that browser, I think it really would work great and people would get a lot out of it (even if they don't play the dorky games ;P)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

couldn't get a job astroturfing for the health insurance industry, eh?

I think you misread my post. I wasn't calling him ignorant, just saying he was throwing the word "ignorant" around a lot. Maybe I should edit.
post #79 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

It runs on countless devices, which amounts to a staggered, variable user experience, completely out of Microsoft's control. There are other issues, such as MS not knowing how to design UIs, but that's a different matter.

Is Microsoft's purchase of Danger going to change this? Is the real intent of this document to provide information to port to a Zune Phone with a consistent hardware configuration?
post #80 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Has Apple not proved to everyone that design/production/control of their hardware and design/production/control of their software is the recipe for a gratifying user experience and thereby company success?

Yes, competition is good...have at it, Google, Symbian, MS, etc., but don't vilify Apple for a proven modus operandi.

QFT.

Apple certainly HAS proven that. But it's better for some to go on denying it, and when one of the also-rans manages to innovate, inpsire, and otherwise show some shred of originality, they'll be the first ones to say "see? told ya." Which goes to pove that even a broken clock is right twice a day.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft details how to port programs from Apple's App Store