or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Former labor secretary suggests FTC police banks rather than Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Former labor secretary suggests FTC police banks rather than Apple

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Former secretary of labor Robert Reich, who served under Bill Clinton during the Microsoft monopoly trial, has published a high profile article castigating the Federal Trade Commissions' purported investigation of Apple.

The article asks "Why is the Federal Trade Commission threatening Apple with a possible lawsuit for abusing its economic power, but not even raising an eyebrow about the huge and growing economic (and political) muscle of JP Morgan Chase or any of the other four remaining giant banks on Wall Street?"

Reich wrote, "Our future well being depends more on people like Steve Jobs who invent real products that can improve our lives, than it does on people like [JPMorgan Chase chief executive] Jamie Dimon who invent financial products that do little other than threaten our economy."

If Apple is wrong on Flash, it will fail

"Apples supposed sin," Reich notes, "was to tell software developers that if they want to make apps for iPhones and iPads they have to use Apple programming tools. No more outside tools (like Adobes Flash format) that can run on rival devices like Googles Android phones and RIMs BlackBerrys.

"Whats wrong with that? Apple says its necessary to maintain quality. If consumers disagree they can buy platforms elsewhere. Apple was the worlds #3 smartphone supplier in 2009, with 16.2 percent of worldwide market share. RIM was #2, with 18.8 percent. Google isnt exactly a wallflower. These and other firms are innovating like mad, as are tens of thousands of independent developers. If Apples decision reduces the number of future apps that can run on its products, Apple will suffer and presumably change its mind."

If big banks go wrong, everybody fails

Reich notes that among the massive banks, "if one of them makes a bad decision it can take us all down."

"So why is the FTC nosing around Apple and not around Wall Street? Because the Federal Trade Commission Act allows the agency to stop 'unfair methods of competition' almost anywhere in the economy except in the financial sector. Banks are explicitly excluded. Another reason for financial reform."

Reich concludes, "Hands off Apple. But cut the big banks down to size."

Adobe seeking antitrust help to preserve its Flash monopoly

Adobe has recently intensified its complaints against Apple related to the company's refusal to distribute Flash. Adobe's strategy for using its Flash and AIR platforms to allow software to be written once and run on multiple devices is taking a beating by the iPhone OS' lack of support for third party plugin platforms, including Flash, AIR, Java and Silverlight.

Adobe chief technology officer Kevin Lynch recently described the current landscape as being like 19th century railroads, where "people were using different gauged rails." The problem for Adobe is that in the 19th century, that problem was solved by government decree that railroads adopt a free, open standard for interoperability, and not by forced adoption of a third party vendor's proprietary rail gauge.

Apple has already adopted HTML5 and related free, open web standards as the common rail gauge for web applications on the iPhone OS, even developing frameworks to assist in the creation of web pages that look and act like native apps.

At the same time, Apple also operates its native App Store as a custom, proprietary platform that operates on its own gauge, much like high speed rail, where interoperability with common rail traffic is not necessary or even desirable.

Adobe's Flash is a proprietary rail gauge of its own, and despite its monopoly over dynamic content on the desktop, it simply does not yet run on mobile devices.

In the video below, an Android prototype tablet is presented as running Flash, "unlike the iPad," despite crashing on an attempt to play YouTube videos. Like other iPhone OS devices, iPad plays YouTube without need for Flash.
post #2 of 43
Finally something reasoned to read.
post #3 of 43
Flash doesn't even run reliably on an Android tablet... I don't know how much good can come from Adobe giving their employees smaller Android phones running Flash.
post #4 of 43
Reich is a pretty smart guy. And cool too. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWliy...=youtube_gdata
post #5 of 43
"Adobe's Flash is a proprietary rail gauge of its own, and despite its monopoly over dynamic content on the desktop, it simply does not yet run on mobile devices."

Flash is a rusted out, tin lizzie, and if it ran on the iPhone it would only clog up the tracks. If Adobe's technical director spent half as much time getting his house in order instead of wining like a middle-school diva-wannabe who didn't get an invite to the cool party, then maybe they would have a product worth saving.
post #6 of 43
If Flash is the only metric the competition is using to make its case against the iPad, then god help them.

If Google releases a wooden box with a sundial on top THAT RUNS FLASH, they'll be touting how much better it is than an iPad. Reminds me of the days when critics thought the iPhone sucked because of its lack of cut-and-paste, one measly feature.
post #7 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

reich is a pretty smart guy. And cool too. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwliy...=youtube_gdata

--- lmao!! ---
post #8 of 43
Finally a voice of reason. I predict he will soon be silenced by the stampeding herd of beltway morons and well financed third party interests. Too bad because he is right fscking on target.
post #9 of 43
What a great article. Reich's analysis is good, but Prince McLean's railroad analysis is fantastic. Is it your own work? I'm a patent attorney at a relatively large firm. I was reading this article for its antitrust content. However, I'd have to say McLean's analysis of the railroad analogy is a knock out argument. Ouch! How embarrassing for Adobe. Someone should pass the analysis on to Steve Jobs so he can work it into a presentation at the WWDC.
post #10 of 43
I absolutely don't want Air on iPad or iPod/iPhone... I haven't yet used an Air app that didn't either suck or suck the life out of my machine...and Flash is just as bad. The only thing I miss in my iPad experience is those darn Facebook games...

Not to mention that cross-developed apps will never feel like native apps... i still have that feeling when I use Firefox... feels like a PC app translated to the Mac... and it sucks the life out of my machine too... hence I use Safari now.
post #11 of 43
I find myself agreeing with a lot of Reich's comments and articles. Or at least parts of them. Spending during a recession is sometimes necessary. The problem is what kind of spending. Any govt. program with a mix of massive spending and targeted tax cuts will have detractors. Personally, I would have gone with higher tax cuts for a broad base of small businesses.

But Reich championed NAFTA so at least he understands the power of free trade. And he champions Apple so he obviously values free market competition. I wish Obama would take a listen.
post #12 of 43
It seems bizarre that the FTC would investigate Apple, whose only "monopoly" is with regard to the content on the products they invent and market, on behalf of a company, Adobe, who have an actual monopoly on the software used to develop certain kinds of internet content. Sadly, so few judges have a good understanding of how computer technology works and so are likely to make rulings based on misinformation and misunderstanding.

It would be helpful, when looking at a closed system like the iPhone or iPad, to look at other closed technology systems. Is GM or Toyota forced to install air conditioners or stereos or fuel injection systems that aren't part of their auto design? Both of those companies control a far larger share of the auto market than Apple does either the computer market or the mobile phone markets. Or even the more limited smartphone market. If suppliers want to provide parts for factory installation by those companies, then they must build them according to company specifications. Companies that build parts for the auto after market build those parts in accordance with the design of the car. Would anyone even think of demanding that major auto makers leave room in their designs for after market parts that are different in size or power requirements or connectivity to those installed at the factory? No, of course not. Every car on the road would be the Powell Motors Homer.

For that matter, could anyone imagine a patent being granted for "A car that can run on gasoline but also has a battery for electric power and can be plugged in to a standard outlet," with a crude drawing of a car with an extension cable running to it for accompanying documentation? But if the Patents Office thought about autos the way they do software and computer gadgets, GM and Toyota and Nissan would all be on the verge of being on the receiving end of billion dollar lawsuits.
post #13 of 43
I'm surprised to see Reich weigh in on this, but I'm glad that he did and I totally agree with him.

I have sometimes found reich to be a little dogmatic, but I think he has generally been on target these last few years.
post #14 of 43
I agree. The FTC investigation has made me so angry that I just went to the FTC website and filed a complaint against the FTC for fraud, waste, and abuse in investigating one of the most innovative companies in America. Apple has bent over backward to keep its platform development open. After having worked in a government organization for the last 18 years, I am 100% sure there are several individuals within the FTC that are receiving money or favors for pushing this little investigation...where was the FTC when the banks were crashing and Bernie was on the take? This is ridiculous.
post #15 of 43
All excellent comments so far....wasn't a big fan of Reich until I saw a lot on "This Week with....."

Very intelligent guy and makes some very valid points.

Can't remember where I read it, perhaps WSJ, but an attorney weighed in saying that the FTC would only have a case if Apple were the only OS/cellphone provider...clearly not the case, ergo no 'monopoly!'

Oh well, once again a portion of, albeit small, Apple's resources are diverted from creating game changing sw/hd and dealing with frivolous diversions!
post #16 of 43
Awesome, always liked him.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #17 of 43
Quote:
"Apples supposed sin," Reich notes, "was to tell software developers that if they want to make apps for iPhones and iPads they have to use Apple programming tools. No more outside tools (like Adobes Flash format) that can run on rival devices like Googles Android phones and RIMs BlackBerrys.

"Whats wrong with that? Apple says its necessary to maintain quality.


What developers says is that if it costs $70,000 to develop a app for most all platforms, it costs another $70,000 to recode it for Apple´s exclusive devices.

Crap apps can appear on either, a $100 brush doesn´t a artist make. A good artist can use any tool, the talent is in the hands, just that they are better with better tools.

This is not about quality, this is about the war on Flash. Because the process of abolishing Flash doesn´t improve the quality of crappy apps made according to Apple´s directions.

Apple should have never gotten into the App Store business and closed their devices, they should have made the devices open and restrict things in the iPhone OS instead.

There are nearly 200,000 crap apps on the App Store, only a small portion are made by Flash, so how is Steve going to attempt to improve the quality of those apps?

Love Steve, but I smell sh*t and it stinks.
post #18 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holderad View Post

...

...where was the FTC when the banks were crashing and Bernie was on the take? This is ridiculous.

My understanding is that, per the FTC Act, the banking industry is not in their purview.

If my interpretation is correct, title 15 > chapter 2 > subchapter I > § 57a > subsection (f) only establishes that the FTC mandates that the banking institutions "establish a separate division of consumer affairs which shall receive and take appropriate action upon complaints with respect to such acts or practices by banks or savings and loan institutions."
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #19 of 43
In many cases, code from creating an app for the iPhone can be reused when making it for another platform. For example, anything C that doesn't call specifically Apple APIs. So $70k for Apple and spending the same amount to create it on another platform is probably bullshit. There are 200k apps on the App Store, so you're saying all the apps on the App Store are crap? Yeah, this is why you have no credibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CurtisEMayle View Post

My understanding is that, per the FTC Act, the banking industry is not in their purview.

This is correct. So if the FTC isn't the one who polices the banks, who does? Only FDIC?
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

There are nearly 200,000 crap apps on the App Store, only a small portion are made by Flash, so how is Steve going to attempt to improve the quality of those apps?

Love Steve, but I smell sh*t and it stinks.

The only bad smell around here is your attitude towards the iPhone apps: you've labelled every single app as crap in the App store; that's simply untrue.

The iPhone is the first mobile I've owned that's actually grown on me the more I use it and I I've had a lot of mobiles during the past twelve years. Apple weren't the first to have an App store for their mobiles - you may be surprised to know that it was possible to get mini Java apps for Nokia phones as early as 2002 - but it was the first to create an appealing and straightforward way to acquire and manage apps on your phone.

My previous phone was a HTC TyTn II aka Tilt. It had Windows Mobile 6.0 which I later upgraded to 6.1. It was usable but I found the user interface bizarre and illogical, not a patch on the iPhone. It had an unpleasant habit of frequently resetting itself, often midway through a call. I got an iPhone and have never looked back since.

I'm with Steve on this issue of third party development tools, it encourages going to the lowest common denominator, perhaps even laziness.
Using them is like using Google translate to publish a book in a different language.
It's possible but would it be the best translation to carry the nuances of meaning and expression from the original into the target language?

Adobe is looking desperate. There are plenty of other smartphone operating systems yet Adobe insists on forcing itself into the iPhone mansion.
post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

Crap apps can appear on either, a $100 brush doesn´t a artist make. A good artist can use any tool, the talent is in the hands, just that they are better with better tools.

The fact that bad apps can be made with any tool is irrelevant. The question is, when all else is equal (ability of the developer, originality of the idea, financial resources, etc), will apps made with Apple's own tools be better than apps made with cross-platform tools that do not take advantage of iPhone-specific features?

And the answer depends entirely on the value of those iPhone-specific features. If Apple has a better platform, then apps that take advantage of that platform will be better than those that don't, all else being equal.

And let me just say this again: "ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL". And in case you still don't get it, here it is in Latin "ceteris paribus". And if you need a link, here it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceteris_paribus
post #22 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

What developers says is that if it costs $70,000 to develop a app for most all platforms, it costs another $70,000 to recode it for Apple´s exclusive devices.

Crap apps can appear on either, a $100 brush doesn´t a artist make. A good artist can use any tool, the talent is in the hands, just that they are better with better tools.

This is not about quality, this is about the war on Flash. Because the process of abolishing Flash doesn´t improve the quality of crappy apps made according to Apple´s directions.

Apple should have never gotten into the App Store business and closed their devices, they should have made the devices open and restrict things in the iPhone OS instead.

There are nearly 200,000 crap apps on the App Store, only a small portion are made by Flash, so how is Steve going to attempt to improve the quality of those apps?

Love Steve, but I smell sh*t and it stinks.

Thing is this, no one is forcing that developer to re-code their app for Apple's exclusive devices its the developers choice and desire to have their app on the exclusive devices henceforth they have to be willing to do what it takes to get it there. And with the exception of few apps, I highly question that lofty 70K price tag you used very few show 70K worth of development cost, and if they did spend that much maybe they should spend the whole 140K in 1 place and actually make a quality app period rather than the crap they are coming up with. Until recently you couldnt just write a desktop app for PC and easily port it to Mac, when Apple used the "classic OS9" & previous the app had to be written to specifically run on that OS. We can all also remember the past in System 7 when dev's were allowed to write and code whatever they wanted and access the full OS what a disaster it was with all the extensions, and how many "conflicts" that were constantly arising out of that. And no a "$100 brush" doesnt make an artist the talent is in the hands this is totally true, but without the BEST tools they cant do their BEST work, granted that work may still be crappy in the eyes of some or many I think Picasso's works are ugly as sin...but that's me....Apple is saying that the tools they have created to build the apps for the OS that THEY designed are the best because they are always up to date in their abilities to access the new API's & features and that they are designed so that they create an app without any extra layers between the user and the OS allowing the app to be produced without any secondary interpretation layer. That extra layer is equivalent to a guy putting on 2 condoms, sure he can still get the job done but it dont necessarily feel as good nor does he benefit from it, and in some cases it causes problems not thought about because the manufacturer didnt design them to be worn that way. You say they never should have got into the app store business and closed their devices....ok so who's going to host the store?? who's going to send out a notification badge when the app updates?? who's going to make sure that something isnt malware isnt being made to look like the best app out there?? Apples point in doing the store them-self is to provide a single source for their user base to go to in-order to get the full library of apps that are available and to be able to find them without looking for hours and to provide a singular place to have to enter in your payment info (im not sure i'd want every fly by night app dev having my info especially my credit card info) the point is to be seamless. You say "make their devices open and restrict things in the iPhone OS instead"....1st that's an oxymoron, secondly if they restricted the OS more what would that accomplish other than having just as many people probably including yourself bitc*ing about how the devs cant access something controlled by the OS so they cant make the app do what it could/should do. It's not up to Steve to improve the quality of any app, that's the dev's responsibility, and the only way we can encourage them to is to not buy their app and to post reviews if we did how bad it sucks. I myself would like to see the app store have a user based system that caused apps to get removed from the store, each account can only vote 1x and each account requires a separate credit card with a unique "real name" so an app couldnt be spammed off the store. If Adobe wanted to do something that would just go back and say "na na :P" to Apple, then why dont they develop something that will allow an app created with Apples tools to convert it to the other platforms using flash??? It's Apple's product be it the phone/pod/pad they designed it & the OS that runs it, no one is making anyone buy it or develop for it, if someone doesnt like playing in the sandbox.....then dont.....people need to get over the "I want everything and I want it my way right now" attitude and learn that you have the choice to buy whatever device you like, they know the rules and limitations when they do and so do the people that dev for it....and if they dont like those rules and limitations then dont buy or dev for it, that's the best way to create change, vote with your dollar!!!
post #23 of 43
Reich is a genius. Adobe is desperate.
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

What developers says is that if it costs $70,000 to develop a app for most all platforms, it costs another $70,000 to recode it for Apple´s exclusive devices.

Right, and you came up with that detailed cost comparison in what way? Your own personal experience as a "real" software developer?
post #25 of 43
Reich has been really wrong on so many things that I can only guess that he either uses Apple products or he is a shareholder for him to make these statements.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #26 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Reich has been really wrong on so many things that I can only guess that he either uses Apple products or he is a shareholder for him to make these statements.

When you make statements like, please provide proof, so we can take your statement seriously.
Apple must allow developers to use Adobe flash technology to develop apps and when the iPhone OS is being upgraded and those apps may not be compatible due to various reasons, wait for Adobe to get their crap together and provide a solid update, as they have done for OSX.
Then Adobe are most probably crying to the powers that be because one BIG source of revenue has ben cut off by Apple. Adobe your software is not open standard, i.e., WE have to depend on you to provide solid updates and in the past your record has been lousy.

Get over it and move on, tell your CEO to man up and stop acting like cry baby.
post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Reich has been really wrong on so many things that I can only guess that he either uses Apple products or he is a shareholder for him to make these statements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

When you make statements like, please provide proof, so we can take your statement seriously.

SpamSandwich is just giving an *opinion*, so no proof necessary. Even my nine year old knows the difference.

Why is Reich getting ink on Commerce Department material?

I also can presume Reich may have a balloon loan ready to blow up in his face... Unfortunately, the same financial instrument for government is call a Bond. Maybe he wants a way to be wipe out the bondholders' money, too...
post #28 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukevaxhacker View Post

SpamSandwich is just giving an *opinion*, so no proof necessary. Even my nine year old knows the difference.

I couldn't have said it any better.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #29 of 43
Reich has been wrong on so many issues, but because steve is right, i think he has hit this one out of the park
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
Household: MacBook, iPad 16gb wifi, iPad 64gb wifi, iPad Mini 32gb, coming iPhone 5S, iPhone 4S 32gb, iPhone 32gb, iPod Touch 4th gen x1, iPod nano 16gb gen 5 x2, iPod nano gen 3 8gb, iPod classic...
Reply
post #30 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

What developers says is that if it costs $70,000 to develop a app for most all platforms, it costs another $70,000 to recode it for Apple´s exclusive devices.

Any developer that says that is either a clueless twit or below a knuckle dragging conservative in terms of brain power.

Anybody who has done any actual programing knows this statement is garbage.
post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

This is correct. So if the FTC isn't the one who polices the banks, who does? Only FDIC?

FDIC or in the case of banks with National in the name the OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency)
post #32 of 43
The reason why Apple is so successful and able to exert 'economic power' over its so-called competitors is quite simple. Apple, and Jobs in particular, is just much smarter than the rabble they keep trouncing in the market place. Apple has a very clear and well focussed product design philosophy which covers both hardware, software and services. It maintains tight control over all aspects of design and implementation while adopting industry standards wherever possible. And customers, as opposed to techo geeks, really appreciate this strategy - hence they buy Apple products and create Apple's mythical 'economic power'. Where can I send by bill for this advice to the FTC?
post #33 of 43
He was in the Clinton administration it says...

I wonder if his old friend Al Gore drew his attention to the issue, after Steve drew Al's?
post #34 of 43
Amen.

The competition would be better off developing their platforms instead of bribing the press to tout their crap and the authorities to "investigate" apple.
post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

Apple should have never gotten into the App Store business and closed their devices, they should have made the devices open and restrict things in the iPhone OS instead.

Love Steve, but I smell sh*t and it stinks.

I respect your opinion, but bear in mind that it's just that, your opinion, which is negated by a landslide by the apparent facts here.
post #36 of 43
The FTC should instead investigate the terrorist Adobe for using its terror Flash bomb to crash Apple's system. Apple has been tolerating this terrorist for far too long and has finally decided to remove the Flash bomb. What's wrong with that? The FTC should set its priority right and not allow terrorists to create havoc.
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Awesome, always liked him.

Robert Reich may qualify as "genius", but his views on economic policy are ill-informed (not attempting to derail the thread, but Reich is the subject at hand).

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Robert Reich may qualify as "genius", but his views on economic policy are ill-informed (not attempting to derail the thread, but Reich is the subject at hand).

Reich is NOT the real subject at hand, and you have tried to derail the thread.

Also ill-informed is your notion that national health care of some sort is unconstitutional.
post #39 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by lxngtnguy View Post

Thing is this, no one is forcing that developer to re-code their app for Apple's exclusive devices its the developers choice and desire to have their app on the exclusive devices henceforth they have to be willing to do what it takes to get it there. And with the exception of few apps, I highly question that lofty 70K price tag you used very few show 70K worth of development cost, and if they did spend that much maybe they should spend the whole 140K in 1 place and actually make a quality app period rather than the crap they are coming up with. Until recently you couldnt just write a desktop app for PC and easily port it to Mac, when Apple used the "classic OS9" & previous the app had to be written to specifically run on that OS. We can all also remember the past in System 7 when dev's were allowed to write and code whatever they wanted and access the full OS what a disaster it was with all the extensions, and how many "conflicts" that were constantly arising out of that. And no a "$100 brush" doesnt make an artist the talent is in the hands this is totally true, but without the BEST tools they cant do their BEST work, granted that work may still be crappy in the eyes of some or many I think Picasso's works are ugly as sin...but that's me....Apple is saying that the tools they have created to build the apps for the OS that THEY designed are the best because they are always up to date in their abilities to access the new API's & features and that they are designed so that they create an app without any extra layers between the user and the OS allowing the app to be produced without any secondary interpretation layer. That extra layer is equivalent to a guy putting on 2 condoms, sure he can still get the job done but it dont necessarily feel as good nor does he benefit from it, and in some cases it causes problems not thought about because the manufacturer didnt design them to be worn that way. You say they never should have got into the app store business and closed their devices....ok so who's going to host the store?? who's going to send out a notification badge when the app updates?? who's going to make sure that something isnt malware isnt being made to look like the best app out there?? Apples point in doing the store them-self is to provide a single source for their user base to go to in-order to get the full library of apps that are available and to be able to find them without looking for hours and to provide a singular place to have to enter in your payment info (im not sure i'd want every fly by night app dev having my info especially my credit card info) the point is to be seamless. You say "make their devices open and restrict things in the iPhone OS instead"....1st that's an oxymoron, secondly if they restricted the OS more what would that accomplish other than having just as many people probably including yourself bitc*ing about how the devs cant access something controlled by the OS so they cant make the app do what it could/should do. It's not up to Steve to improve the quality of any app, that's the dev's responsibility, and the only way we can encourage them to is to not buy their app and to post reviews if we did how bad it sucks. I myself would like to see the app store have a user based system that caused apps to get removed from the store, each account can only vote 1x and each account requires a separate credit card with a unique "real name" so an app couldnt be spammed off the store. If Adobe wanted to do something that would just go back and say "na na :P" to Apple, then why dont they develop something that will allow an app created with Apples tools to convert it to the other platforms using flash??? It's Apple's product be it the phone/pod/pad they designed it & the OS that runs it, no one is making anyone buy it or develop for it, if someone doesnt like playing in the sandbox.....then dont.....people need to get over the "I want everything and I want it my way right now" attitude and learn that you have the choice to buy whatever device you like, they know the rules and limitations when they do and so do the people that dev for it....and if they dont like those rules and limitations then dont buy or dev for it, that's the best way to create change, vote with your dollar!!!

You may have a lot of good stuff to say in this post .... too bad it's so unreadable I can't get through it .... try remembering that "paragraphs are your friend".
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post


Love Steve, but I smell sh*t and it stinks.


Try checking your underwear.
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Former labor secretary suggests FTC police banks rather than Apple