or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Changes to Apple's developer agreement could spur antitrust inquiry
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Changes to Apple's developer agreement could spur antitrust inquiry

post #1 of 209
Thread Starter 
The U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission are pursuing an antitrust inquiry over Apple's changes to its iPhone developer agreement, which banned the porting of Adobe Flash apps to the iPhone OS, according to the New York Post.

The Post reported on Monday that the DOJ and FTC are "locked in negotiations" over which will formally begin the antitrust proceedings. Both are allegedly looking into Apple after the Cupertino, Calif., company added a clause to its developer agreement for the upcoming iPhone OS 4 software upgrade. That addition specifically prohibits the development of applications using "an intermediary translation or compatibility layer too," which bans the porting of software originally written for Adobe's Flash, Sun's Java or Microsoft's Silverlight/Mono to the iPhone OS.

Apple's change prompted Adobe to abandon further development of an application included in its just-released Creative Suite 5 that allows developers to port Flash applications to the iPhone OS. Such applications will be rejected from the App Store for the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad under the new developer agreement.

The Post noted that an inquiry does not mean any action will necessarily be taken against Apple. Inquiries are initiated to determine whether a complete investigation will be conducted.

"Regulators, this person said, are days away from making a decision about which agency will launch the inquiry," author Josh Kosman wrote. "It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."

The news comes just days after Apple co-founder Steve Jobs wrote a scathing essay on Adobe Flash, criticizing the Web format as unfit for the modern era of mobile computing. Flash was created for the "PC era," Jobs said, for use with PCs and mice. But he argued the format is not meant for touchscreens and results in poor battery life for mobile devices like the iPhone and iPad.

Jobs also contended that intermediary tools, like the one found in Adobe's CS5 for porting Flash to the iPhone OS, result in substandard applications and result in developers who are dependent on a system that will not offer all of the latest features of Apple's own development tools.

Adobe's CEO quickly fired back, disputing Jobs' claim that most Mac OS X crashes are caused by Flash, and instead suggesting those crashes are an issue with Apple's operating system. He also said the comments about Flash draining battery life were "patently false."

As Apple has banned Adobe Flash from its mobile devices, Adobe has responded by embracing Apple's chief competitor in the handset space, Google Android. This weekend, one report alleged that Adobe has plans to give its employees new Android phones running Flash Player 10.1, the new mobile version of the format set to be introduced at Google's I/O conference in May.

The Post noted that while Apple has continually portrayed itself as the underdog, its $237.6 billion market cap now exceeds Walmart, the largest retailer in the world. In addition, Apple last week became the largest phone maker in the U.S. after rival Motorola reported sales of 8.5 million handsets in the quarter, less than Apple's own sales of 8.75 million iPhones.
post #2 of 209
What market are they supposedly monopolising? Not the smartphone market. The iPhone market?!
If you define the market small enough, anyone is in breach of antitrust.
post #3 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As Apple has banned Adobe Flash from its mobile devices,

I wish you'd stop publicizing Adobe FUD.

There IS no full version of Flash for ANY mobile device. Even Flash 10.1 which may come out this summer if Adobe ever manages to hit a target, requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so it will not run on any phone with the iPhone's specs.

I don't know how Apple can be said to have banned something that doesn't exist.

They did, however, say that Flash is a lousy technology for mobile devices - and the fact that no one else has it today confirms that.


This rumor is nonsense. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the mobile phone space or even the smart phone market, so DOJ has nothing to say about it. FTC does not have regulatory authority to control how a vendor works with application developers, either.

I think someone was listening to the Adobe shill-trolls in this group.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #4 of 209
This has been coming for a while. Whilst I'm not sure you can say Apple have a large enough market share in any market to actually warrant action, but Apple have been acting in a way that was likely to eventually have regulators sniffing around.
post #5 of 209
Given the debate this was inevitable and I guess nothing strange as such.

Will it lead to anything? In my opinion no. Why should it? I will not argue - arguments will follow soon enough and I don't think arguments will support that Apple's breaching any antitrust laws on any side of any lakes in the world.
post #6 of 209
This will come to nothing.
There's no "there" there!
post #7 of 209
This won't go anywhere.

When it the last time the DoJ did anything beneficial for consumers? Go ahead...I'll wait.


They simply cannot tell Apple what programming languages they have to support. There is no anti-trust here as people don't "have" get an iPhone if they want Flash.

To the Dept of Justice. Stop wasting my f****ing tax dollars on frivolous BS. No one is afraid of the DoJ. If if was the IRS coming then that'd be different.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #8 of 209
It'll come to nothing. But let them "inquire." Nothing wrong with that.
post #9 of 209
I love Photoshop and Photoshop I used Flash for years . good tool, HTML5 and CSS3 are the future ! Adobe has made the Mac platform a second class citizen for far too long. what do they expect ?? ANTITRUST ???? The world is upside-down with BS these days and ignorance is the rule of the day !!! Media BS !!!
post #10 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The Post reported on Monday

Don't worry true believers. I live in New York City, and trust me the paper is a rag that my dog won't even poop on.This is just link fodder. It has the lowest circulation of any of the dailies here and is owned by Newscorp. Enough said.
post #11 of 209
Nope, sorry, the idiots here are the Washington Post. They pulled this out of their ass. I can't even stretch my thinking far enough to imagine just what Apple has done that might be a violation. This is pure FUD.
post #12 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I wish you'd stop publicizing Adobe FUD.

There IS no full version of Flash for ANY mobile device. Even Flash 10.1 which may come out this summer if Adobe ever manages to hit a target, requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so it will not run on any phone with the iPhone's specs.

I don't know how Apple can be said to have banned something that doesn't exist.

They did, however, say that Flash is a lousy technology for mobile devices - and the fact that no one else has it today confirms that.


This rumor is nonsense. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the mobile phone space or even the smart phone market, so DOJ has nothing to say about it. FTC does not have regulatory authority to control how a vendor works with application developers, either.

I think someone was listening to the Adobe shill-trolls in this group.

Quote:
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Steven P. Jobs, April 2010

Just because you don't like the taste, doesn't make it FUD and doesn't mean it isn't true. Apple is quite clear that they do not allow, i.e. ban, flash on the iPhone platform. How is it FUD to state what even Steve says is true? It is a simple fact that Apple does not allow Flash, mobile or otherwise, on the iPhone and they have clearly spelt out their reasons, most of which are quite valid.

Defending Apple works best when it is informed and not a knee-jerk.

Anyhoo, back to reality, this investigation has little chance of going anywhere unless the gov is willing to narrowly define the market in question as the iPhone OS platform.

"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 #13 of 209
As stated, no version of Flash is available and the specs of the iPhone are below the 10.1, so it's hard for Apple to ban something non-existant.

"It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."

Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Apple is quite clear that they do not allow, i.e. ban, flash on the iPhone platform. How is it FUD to state what even Steve says is true? It is a simple fact that Apple does not allow Flash, mobile or otherwise, on the iPhone and they have clearly spelt out their reasons, most of which are quite valid.

Ok so currently they are banning the incredibly shitty, incomplete Flash Lite? Boo hoo. Most cell phones don't support that program either. Apple is hardly alone here. Until 10.1 is relased, there is no full fledged version of Flash in the mobile arena
post #14 of 209
Apple should have nothing to worry about on this one. The iAD issue though is likely to be considered monopolistic behavior though, since they are using dominance in one area (mobile devices) to dominate a separate space (mobile advertising). Wonder what their lawyers and PR people have planned to say...
post #15 of 209
If forced to allow these apps into the App Store Apple could label them as such "Apple is not responsible for the performance of your mobile device or any possible security issues that may occur from using such app." When the apps fail to sell developers will freely abandon Flash as a tool and write using Apple sanctioned code. By letting these apps fail Adobe and Flash are shown for what they are, part of past technology and limited to dead market.
post #16 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

As stated, no version of Flash is available and the specs of the iPhone are below the 10.1, so it's hard for Apple to ban something non-existant.

"It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."

Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?



Ok so currently they are banning the incredibly shitty, incomplete Flash Lite? Boo hoo. Most cell phones don't support that program either. Apple is hardly alone here. Until 10.1 is relased, there is no full fledged version of Flash in the mobile arena

Sure. They have valid reasons for banning Flash.

But how does one state that there is no ban and to claim so is FUD and then argue that the reasons for the ban are justified by how shitty Flash is. Logic shouldn't go out the window when trying to make a point. In fact, it often helps.

"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 #17 of 209
Apple's under no obligation to promote cross platform tools. We still live in a capitalistic society and you are free to compete vigorously so long as you don't abuse monopoly powers.

Apple can easily make the case for why Flash is inferior as an iPhone development language.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #18 of 209
self-removed
post #19 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?




I think that the concern is when the dominant player institutes rules that hinder competing companies.

In this instance, the dominant app seller will not allow apps on its platform if they are manufactured in a manner which allows them to be also sold by competitors.

I don't know if the concern is valid or not.
post #20 of 209
self-removed
post #21 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

I think that the concern is when the dominant player institutes rules that hinder competing companies.

In this instance, the dominant app seller will not allow apps on its platform if they are manufactured in a manner which allows them to be also sold by competitors.

I don't know if the concern is valid or not.

I think it would depend on the reasons for Apple disallowing Flash. If Flash was considered a "peer" programming language to C/C++/Objective C etc then it would be harder for Apple to justify their motives but Flash is primarily a web based tool that can aid in developing basic apps but it's raison d'être is creating cross platform apps and I don't know what Gov expects to tell a company that they must work against their own best interests and aid their competition.

Apple has roughly 25% of the smartphone market. A far cry from a monopoly.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #22 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

Wow, did you even read the article. This is about Apps that were originally written in flash, and they were converted to the iPhone through a process that converts the flash code to objective C, then complies it for the iPhone. There were tons of apps in the app store that were ported this way. What they means is they are NOT flash, but they were ported FROM flash. Apple has banned those. The fact of the matter is those apps were not flash, they ran well, but Apple is banning them anyway because the original source code was flash. There is no reason to ban the apps because they worked very well. Apple just dosn't want to allow flash on their phones, and having apps that were once flash opens the door for them to have to let flash on the devices. That would ruin their monopoly/jail of their App store. Honestly, I could care less if the iPhone has flash or not. I don't want a cool phone, I want a phone that can do everything I need it to do. So ban flash, fine, but SJ needs to keep his mouth shut with bashing Adobe because the other 95% of us in the world love flash and don't need SJ preaching untrue garbage just to undermine a competitor. It's one thing to say no to something, and another to say no and attack it as if what he has to say applies to every computer out there. If Apple's OS's were written better, maybe it would be more stable like on Windows machines.

How in the world would allowing ported flash apps open "the door for them to have to let flash on the devices"? This just doesn't make sense at all. Even if they allowed Adobe tools to create native iPhone apps, that in now way makes it more likely for them to allow native flash on the iPhone. As you yourself noted, CS5 was to create native apps from Flash apps.

As far as Apple being 'written better' to allow Flash to be 'more stable like on Windows machines' that again doesn't make much sense. Apple's OS X OSes are renown for their stability. Flash being crash prone on Macs would seem to more likely be an Adobe issue than the OS. When you put minimal resources into a product, as Adobe has done with their Mac products, that is often the case.

"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 #23 of 209
Apple isn't keeping Adobe from implementing Flash or associated products on other mobile platforms. It's merely setting the standard for how third-party apps are written for the iPhone OS.
This is Apple's privilege, right, and obligation.

I think the outcome of the Conde Nast publishing system for the iPad will be a key event affecting the future of Flash.

If one looks at this situation and considers the respective Flash and iPhone OS properties as peers, first of all, Apple has done ALL the legwork to develop its own iPhone system: its OS, its hardware, its third-party app developer system, its retail distribution system, its online store, its Applecare program, etc., etc., all of which represents a very major investment in time, talent, and money. Apple needs, therefore, to do everything in its power to foster, protect, and expand that system in order to ensure its continuing, desirability, viability and profitability.

Its amended policy prohibiting outside code is meant to foster the continuing smooth operation of its software/hardware system and to ensure that Apple is free to make changes and enhancements while remaining free of arbitrary third-party influences.

If Flash is indeed a worthy competitor, then let Abobe develop its own mobile platform around Flash to a similar degree that Apple has for its iPhone OS system.

Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.

All I've seen so far is laziness, idle envy, jealousy, and parasitic maneuverings. Pretty sad.

Daniel Swanson

Reply

Daniel Swanson

Reply
post #24 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.

No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #25 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.

Seriously, you are calling the iPhone kernel 'clunky' compared to Android? Perhaps you would like to expand on why you feel xnu/mach/BSD is 'clunky' when compared to the linux kernel in Android. I'd be very interested.

"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 #26 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.

That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
post #27 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.

Really...where are the glowing reports of Flash operating perfectly on other mobile platforms? Working "well" , which I have a hard time agreeing with, on the web is wholly different than working well as an iPhone development tool.

Yes Mac OS X is junk. We should all take druble's word on that because he's omniscient. Next.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I think it would depend on the reasons for Apple disallowing Flash. If Flash was considered a "peer" programming language to C/C++/Objective C etc then it would be harder for Apple to justify their motives but Flash is primarily a web based tool that can aid in developing basic apps but it's raison d'être is creating cross platform apps and I don't know what Gov expects to tell a company that they must work against their own best interests and aid their competition.

Apple has roughly 25% of the smartphone market. A far cry from a monopoly.

Two things are nebulous: The relevant market and the reasons for the anticompetitive behavior.

I don't even think Flash is relevant. The ban on cross-compiled apps is relevant.
post #29 of 209
So let's imagine that Apple is eventually forced to allow Flash on the iPhone and iPad. It's a lose-lose for Apple. The probability that Flash will run properly and quickly on these devices is almost 0%. Then the same "let ME choose what I put on my device" crowd will be bashing Apple, not Adobe, all over the internet. Forums will be started, polls will be taken, open letters to Steve Jobs will appear. Personally, I think Steve Jobs is much more willing to take the heat over not allowing Flash than trying to explain or defend the crappy performance of iPhones and iPads hobbled by Flash.
post #30 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.

<When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.>

you already have the answer. go get an android. it is far superior so you say. now you have nothing to complain about as you have been shown the path to goodness.
post #31 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

As stated, no version of Flash is available and the specs of the iPhone are below the 10.1, so it's hard for Apple to ban something non-existant.

"It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."

Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?



Ok so currently they are banning the incredibly shitty, incomplete Flash Lite? Boo hoo. Most cell phones don't support that program either. Apple is hardly alone here. Until 10.1 is relased, there is no full fledged version of Flash in the mobile arena


Why no such inquiries about developers being force to choose developing for OS X/linux/Win etc ?
Bullshit, just bullshit
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
post #32 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post

This will come to nothing.
There's no "there" there!

Agreed. Absolute waste of time and tax dollars.
post #33 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.


But those new markets cannot be accessed unless your iPhone development work gets duplicated for all the rest of the platforms.

This is a major barrier to entry. I don't know if it is a violation or not.
post #34 of 209
druble's skills in prediction at work

Quote:
Originally Posted by druble;

I don't think you have to worry about people copying it. Apple is already copying others, except Apples equipment will not stack up to what is currently out there. Don't expect amazing things. I hear it is going to get a giant ipod, and you will be limited to the app store for programs. What a world without walls, try an existing slate such as this one that is just as sexy in appearance as anything apple would make:

http://www.windowsfordevices.com/c/a...and-Seline-10/

Well you were sorta right about the big iPod thing. Wrong about everything else. 1 million sales in 4 weeks means you lose.

I'm figuring you're wrong about Flash as well.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #35 of 209
[QUOTE=druble;1625288]Wow, did you even read the article. This is about Apps that were originally written in flash, and they were converted to the iPhone through a process that converts the flash code to objective C, then complies it for the iPhone. There were tons of apps in the app store that were ported this way. What they means is they are NOT flash, but they were ported FROM flash. Apple has banned those.

According to the CEO of Adobe, there are just over 100 apps currently in the app store that were ported from Flash. Out of how many hundreds of thousands? I would hardly call that a ton. Here is a link.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...okescreen.html
post #36 of 209
I just downloaded the flash cs5 trial from adobe.com, got a simple animation with critters running around. So I compiled it to the iPhone, it does not go through XCode but creates object files, assembly files during build time. It does create ARM code.

I then copied the app and ran it to my iPhone and boy it was laggy. I rebooted and still was laggy around 10fps and stops for a few milliseconds in between. I launched Instruments to test CPU and app analysis. To my observation, there are way way too many libSystem.dylib calls just to draw one frame.

As an iPhone developer, I never seen something so highly unoptimized even if is AOT compiled in arm.

Also, the actual Flash IDE app is not well written. I have Geektool running polling for system.log and running Flash CS5 gives me tons of NSAutoreleasePool warnings every second. NSAutoreleasepool manages object memory/garbage collection and prevents memory leak. Now I know why adobe apps crashes upon quit!
post #37 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.

So, umm, you know that Flash on the Mac is a distinct (though much is shared) codebase written to a different platform and set of APIs? If it runs well on Windows (which it really doesn't, but let's ignore that) you should automatically expect it run well on Macs?

No, it couldn't have anything to do with Adobe allocating minimal resources to porting the product to Mac OS X.

hmurchison is right. Next.

"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 #38 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by druble View Post

That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.

If you are a developer please stop developing for OS X or iPhone. Apps coded by such s***d f**k cannot be any good.
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
MacBook 5,1, MacPro 4,1
Reply
post #39 of 209
I thought part of the changes in wording were also related to upcoming iPhone OS changes...specifically multitasking. Ported apps would not be able to communicate status changes, etc.

Apple can certainly make the arugument that ported apps will make the user experience suffer...which I believe they (Apple) already has. Apple hasn't cornered the smartphone market, and the tools the are supporting are open to all developers...where's the fire?
post #40 of 209
"Hey look, over there, isn't that AdMob?"

Probably something along those lines, seeing as Google just bought one of the dominant advertisers on the iPhone App platform.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh View Post

Apple should have nothing to worry about on this one. The iAD issue though is likely to be considered monopolistic behavior though, since they are using dominance in one area (mobile devices) to dominate a separate space (mobile advertising). Wonder what their lawyers and PR people have planned to say...
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Changes to Apple's developer agreement could spur antitrust inquiry