or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's relaxing of App Store rules has 'muted' effect on Adobe
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's relaxing of App Store rules has 'muted' effect on Adobe

post #1 of 78
Thread Starter 
Apple's decision to allow intermediary tools to port software from formats like Flash to the iPhone did not have a significant effect on sales of Adobe products, the company's CEO said this week.

Chief Executive Shantanu Narayen took part in his company's quarterly earnings call on Tuesday, in which he was asked about Apple's decision to allow third-party development tools to port applications to the iPhone. That meant software created with Adobe's own Flash-to-iPhone compiler became acceptable on the App Store.

Narayen said that the day Apple announced the change, a number of applications created with Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler were approved, though he said the immediate effect on demand for Adobe Creative products was not significant.

"In the short run, I would say the impact was muted," he said.

But Narayen said he believes Adobe's tools give developers the opportunity to repurpose their applications and content for multiple formats and devices, allowing them to make their products available on a range of platforms, including Apple's wildly successful iOS mobile operating system.

The chief executive also said his company has talked with many content publishers who are concerned about making their content available on a range of devices, which he referred to as the "multi-screen problem." He said he believes Adobe's tools help to address that problem.

"Every publisher we talk to wants us to continue to help them author content and repurpose it across multiple devices," he said.

On Tuesday, Adobe announced that its net income for the third quarter was up 69 percent, but the company also gave an outlook for the fourth quarter that fell short of analyst expectations. Narayen said his company was taking a "cautious" view of the coming quarter, because back-to-school sales in the U.S. have been weaker than anticipated.

Narayen and Apple co-founder Steve Jobs exchanged a public war of words earlier this year, after Jobs published a letter in which he said Flash is the No. 1 cause of crashes on the Mac. Narayen fired back, and said that any issues are the fault of "the Apple operating system."

Adobe's CEO also contrasted his own company with Apple, saying the two corporations have different views of the world. He suggested that Apple has a "closed" view, while Adobe is pushing for "multi-platform."
post #2 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"Every publisher we talk to wants us to continue to help them author content and repurpose it across multiple devices," he said.

Adobe's CEO also contrasted his own company with Apple, saying the two corporations have different views of the world. He suggested that Apple has a "closed" view, while Adobe is pushing for "multi-platform."


That all makes perfect sense. Apple wants lock-in, but nobody else does.
post #3 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

That all makes perfect sense. Apple wants lock-in, but nobody else does.

Apple wants quality but no one else does. See, I can do it too.

Apple doesn't deserve much defense in my eyes as of late (Steve is getting more egotistical as he gets older), but Adobe certainly no better than Apple. They have a horrible history of monopolizing & closing their market. They snatch up any rising challengers & then disband them, they are certainly not deserving of a pat on the back for the way they've mucked up media content on the web. Sooner we can free the web from their greedy paws the better.
post #4 of 78
All this flash thing looks so much as the antennagate problem.

I agree with Jobs when he says flash days are over. I hate the damn thing. I only use it to watch videos that are not in h.264, and that is it. Everytime I enable the thing my overall web experience is SO crappy.

As of late, a lot of people started talking about Flash as a serious platform for development, but everybody with some insight knows it is not, thus you don't have any quality high performance flash application out there. Facebook brought a lot of games and I wonder how many people complain about it just due to that.

If Flash doesn't generate a binary for the iOS platform I particularly don't care, because as said before "it is a substandard" product.
post #5 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by igorleandro View Post

If Flash doesn't generate a binary for the iOS platform I particularly don't care, because as said before "it is a substandard" product.

How specifically does the format of the object code define the user interface?
post #6 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Adobe's CEO also contrasted his own company with Apple, saying the two corporations have different views of the world. He suggested that Apple has a "closed" view, while Adobe is pushing for "multi-platform."

Nothing short of a complete reversal of truth. You got to love adobe these days...
post #7 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

That all makes perfect sense. Apple wants lock-in, but nobody else does.

Here you are again Newtron, spewing your BS. Apple wants the consumer to have a great experience. This has nothing to do with lock-in. It has a lot to do with flash being old tech crapware that doesn't work on mobile devices. Your ignorant rants are really tiresome. Who are you shilling for? Apple has opened its app store to programs like Netflix, Kindle ebooks, Pandora, and many other "competing" products so your idiotic claim of lock-in holds no truth. You need to improve your education.
post #8 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by igorleandro View Post

... I particularly don't care, because as said before "it is a substandard" product.

No, it is a "standard" product that comes preinstalled on every desktop, laptop and notebook sold in the entire world. You just don't like it.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #9 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

That all makes perfect sense. Apple wants lock-in, but nobody else does.

Not really true. Most companies would LOVE to have lock-in. M$ puts huge amounts of effort into achieving lock-in, and for many years they were very successful with it.

But in the last few years, Apple has been pushing it to a new extreme. And it's truly infuriating.

I've been using Apple products since the Apple II+, which was a beautifully open computer. They even included the schematic for the main logic board in the documentation that came with the machine. I've been with Apple through all their stupid decisions, the worst of which being the throwing away of control of the personal computer market in the early '80s. I was thrilled when Apple started doing well in the early 2000s. And then there's the iPhone.

And the iPhone is a good product - but it should be criminal to lock up a device to the extent Apple has with the iPhone. I shouldn't have to do a procedure called "jailbreaking" just so I can run software on a device which is MY PROPERTY without approval from Apple. It should be the default that I can run whatever I want on MY device.

So this arbitrary rule change is really not a step forward. Apple shouldn't be able to make rules like this in the first place.

And no, I'm not suggesting that they be forced to sell everything anybody writes in their app store. I'm saying that it should be illegal to keep someone else from setting up an alternative app store.
post #10 of 78
Good thing there's the ignore list for people like Newtron... whatever happened to TeckStud anyway? Did he suddenly morph into Newtron?

IMHO, DarkVader, I don't think its a bad thing that Apple has locked up the iPhone. If you don't want to use it because you're not comfortable with their practices, don't buy it. It's that simple. But on the subject of alternative app stores, there's a real problem with authentication and security. Who's to say that someone won't set up an app store that can then have some malware slip through the review process and we're back to Windows security on mobile. Except it's worse, because we don't want antivirus hogging up the CPU on our mobiles and we have extremely sensitive information like contacts and bank info stored on our phones nowadays. And I don't think anyone would trust users to be better at managing security on their phones than on their PCs or Macs.

I see it as a tradeoff. You can either have more security or more openness. I chose security. It's your choice, so if you want more openness, choose Android. Otherwise, stop complaining because that's the only way the system would work, with Apple as the gatekeeper, so as to potentially revoke certificates for apps to head off any potential security holes in bad apps. Certainly prevents malware writers from trying to submit apps in the app store, unlike Android Market.

Jailbreaking breaks a lot of those security measures, so you're leaving yourself open to attack if you were to download a bad app. Of course, you're assuming all apps on Cydia are good (and they have been so far, but who knows how long that will last). Making the situation worse is the OpenSSH and default root password debacle.

You'll certainly have the freedom to run malware as well as whatever you want on your iPhone if Apple followed your advice to the T.
post #11 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat View Post

Good thing there's the ignore list for people like Newtron... whatever happened to TeckStud anyway? Did he suddenly morph into Newtron?

Almost certainly, Newtron is tekstud.

Blackintosh is probably iGenius or MacTripper.

And, who know how many of them are posting under multiple aliases.

The troll merry-go-round never comes to a stop here at AI.
post #12 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezetation View Post

Apple wants quality but no one else does. See, I can do it too.

Apple doesn't deserve much defense in my eyes as of late (Steve is getting more egotistical as he gets older), but Adobe certainly no better than Apple. They have a horrible history of monopolizing & closing their market. They snatch up any rising challengers & then disband them, they are certainly not deserving of a pat on the back for the way they've mucked up media content on the web. Sooner we can free the web from their greedy paws the better.

Yeah, I was much too broad. I'll backpedal to firmer ground:

Apple wants lock-in, but many developers sure as hell don't.

And the average joe doesn't know and doesn't care.
post #13 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Narayen said that the day Apple announced the change, a number of applications created with Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler were approved, though he said the immediate effect on demand for Adobe Creative products was not significant.

"In the short run, I would say the impact was muted," he said.

The impact of the earnings call on ADBE sure hasn't been muted though. Down almost 20%.
post #14 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post


I'm saying that it should be illegal to keep someone else from setting up an alternative app store.

I don't know about illegal. But I would love to be able to get apps for my iPhone on download.cnet .com or at any of the other usual stores like Handango.

Apple runs a nice store, especially for some types of people. But prohibiting the wares of any other store is - indescribable to me.
post #15 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat View Post


Apple has locked up the iPhone. ...
don't buy it. It's that simple. ...
problem with authentication and security. ...
have some malware slip through ...
Windows security on mobile. ...
Except it's worse, ...
antivirus hogging up the CPU ...
we have extremely sensitive information...
I don't think anyone would trust users...
You can either have more security or more openness. ...
I chose security. ...
Apple as the gatekeeper, ...
potentially revoke certificates for apps ...
potential security holes...
bad apps. ...
prevents malware writers ...
Jailbreaking breaks ...
leaving yourself open to attack...
a bad app. ...
you're assuming all apps ...
Making the situation worse ...
default root password debacle...
freedom to run malware ...
...
...


All except FUD <deleted>.

I disagree with much of what is left.
post #16 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Narayen and Apple co-founder Steve Jobs exchanged a public war of words earlier this year, after Jobs published a letter in which he said Flash is the No. 1 cause of crashes on the Mac. Narayen fired back, and said that any issues are the fault of "the Apple operating system."

"Flash Player has stopped working" is certainly the most frequent cause of crashes for me on both Mac and Windows. The sooner it's dead and buried the better.
post #17 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post

And the iPhone is a good product - but it should be criminal to lock up a device to the extent Apple has with the iPhone. I shouldn't have to do a procedure called "jailbreaking" just so I can run software on a device which is MY PROPERTY without approval from Apple. It should be the default that I can run whatever I want on MY device.

So this arbitrary rule change is really not a step forward. Apple shouldn't be able to make rules like this in the first place.

And no, I'm not suggesting that they be forced to sell everything anybody writes in their app store. I'm saying that it should be illegal to keep someone else from setting up an alternative app store.

Apple, like Honda, Ford, GM, SONY, and just about every other company does not stop you from altering YOUR PROPERTY. You have every right to do so. However, if you decide to do so, there isn't a company or service in the world that is obligated to service and support your changes.

If I decide to install high-performance Holley carbs in my Lexus, I don't expect Toyota to stock, sell, service or support them. Or for sure, honor my warranty. BTW, there is no difference modifying my car or iPhone. They are still forms of "jailbreaking."

And there are alternatives to Apples iTune Store. Where does it say that it is illegal to keep someone else from setting up an alternative app store or you need Apple's approval to run software on a device which is YOUR PROPERTY?
post #18 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post

And the iPhone is a good product - but it should be criminal to lock up a device to the extent Apple has with the iPhone. I shouldn't have to do a procedure called "jailbreaking" just so I can run software on a device which is MY PROPERTY without approval from Apple. It should be the default that I can run whatever I want on MY device.

I'm saying that it should be illegal to keep someone else from setting up an alternative app store.



I'm not trying to jump on you for having an opinion that I don't happen to agree with, but ... two points: One: I still don't understand why a lot of people don't seem to understand Apple's stance on the "walled garden" approach. .... The wall is there, not to keep you in .... but to keep the bad guys and their crap out! Do you have an open door policy on your home? ... obviously not, because in this day and age it would not make any sense. Now if you want to have that policy, that would be your choice ... go for it.

The main reason for the popularity of Apple is the "user experience of their product". There can be no debating that fact. That same user experience is a direct result of the Apple control over the integration of hardware and software, since they design both.

If, as an "experienced computer user" you want to expand the abilities of your device in a way that Apple thinks, either rightly or wrongly, would lessen the user experience on a device that still represents Apple ..... you can do that by jailbreaking. That is your right. What is not your right is to force Apple to follow your "recommendations" as to what a user experience" should be for all of us who may not agree with you.

Two: There is no law preventing anyone from opening up an alternative app store as, indeed, there are several in existence already .... and the fact that there already over 200,000 apps for sale that were not designed by Apple should be proof enough that Apple is not preventing that, as well.
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #19 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron;

That all makes perfect sense. Apple wants lock-in, but nobody else does.

Interesting, I wonder how many non-Adobe plugins and software can author and play back Flash 10 AS3 files. Do you know of any?

Also, I would like to ask why since several days ago you haven't replied to any of my posts even though I ask a legitimate question, such as the Flash one above.
post #20 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I don't know about illegal. But I would love to be able to get apps for my iPhone on download.cnet .com or at any of the other usual stores like Handango.

Apple runs a nice store, especially for some types of people. But prohibiting the wares of any other store is - indescribable to me.


Over 200,000 apps ... not designed by Apple .... is prohibitive???? .... not in my book it isn't.
Tell me, do you expect other "stores" to sell the wares of all their competitors. I think not. So why should Apple?
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #21 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I disagree with much of what is left.

Which is your right .... as is my right to disagree with you much of the time.
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #22 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Yeah, I was much too broad. I'll backpedal to firmer ground:

Apple wants lock-in, but many developers sure as hell don't.

And the average joe doesn't know and doesn't care.

But you mentioned Adobe was the one that didn't want lock-in. Now it's about the developers? Or the average Joe?

Backpedalling is one thing, running a mile in reverse is another.
post #23 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

Apple, like Honda, Ford, GM, SONY, and just about every other company does not stop you from altering YOUR PROPERTY. You have every right to do so. However, if you decide to do so, there isn't a company or service in the world that is obligated to service and support your changes.

If I decide to install high-performance Holley carbs in my Lexus, I don't expect Toyota to stock, sell, service or support them. Or for sure, honor my warranty. BTW, there is no difference modifying my car or iPhone. They are still forms of "jailbreaking."

Whatever, a better analogy would be that Apple put a special gas cap on their car and you can only fill up with Apple petro at special Apple gas stations... And there is nothing different about Apple Gas... But you avoid your vehicle warranty if you fill up somewhere else.

Tell me how that's awesome in any way shape or form?
post #24 of 78
I was one of Apples biggest fans. An evangelist even. I was extolling the virtues of the Mac because it was going to legitimately HELP people. Now... not so much. I Apple is getting greedy. I hate to say it but it is true.

You have the whole iPad market. It is simply a way for Apple to get cozy with publishers to enable the publishers to gain capital through a new medium, which also means a moumental gain for Apple as well.

Apple TV is now rental only. Not even an option to buy and keep your movie. apple's excuse is that people don't want to manage storage. Tell that to the innumerable DVR users out there...

You have the iPhone app store. you can't buy software anywhere else and you can develop it any other way. You can bet this is how they want it to be for the Mac too. And that is the direction they are headed.

iTunes. Trying to move on past the CD before it's even close to time just to force Apple users into relying on them and paying for it. Forget archiving or anything like that. The commonly and heavily used "Burn CD" icon is missing and apple is testing the waters to see how far they can push the agenda.

their tiff with Adobe is just another example of Apple's greed. They don't want Flash to be viable because it can basically do everything and Apple has not been helpful in working with them. Steve Job's lambast of Flash as old tech is a joke. If anything Flash was ahead of its time and still today does more than anyone can ask of it. Rather than trying to kill flash outright, Apple should have recommended improvements if they were worrying about it making the Mac look bad. but to be honest, the Windows version works great -- and Adobe is not the first to recognize areas of the Apple OS that cause issues with high performance software. I used to serve at a church that used MediaShout software and there was no Mac version at the time. The reason? A serious problem with Quicktime that apple was unwilling to address.

I still love my Mac and will probably keep up in the Apple ecosystem, but only so nice as it plays nice with others. i moved from Microsoft 5 years ago because of their practices. I'd hate to do it again.
post #25 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I don't know about illegal. But I would love to be able to get apps for my iPhone on download.cnet .com or at any of the other usual stores like Handango.

Apple runs a nice store, especially for some types of people. But prohibiting the wares of any other store is - indescribable to me.

I have to 100% agree on this.

I should have the say so on what runs on MY system. Not Apple, or MS or Google, or anybody else. And if someone makes software I want to use, I should be able to use it, no matter what Apple thinks about it. Apple can keep their store and most likely, I will buy only stuff on their, because of the security it affords, however, the option to buy elsewhere is what free enterprise is all about. Apple is being quite monopolistic these days. And definitely using such power.
post #26 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Whatever, a better analogy would be that Apple put a special gas cap on their car and you can only fill up with Apple petro at special Apple gas stations... And there is nothing different about Apple Gas... But you avoid your vehicle warranty if you fill up somewhere else.

Tell me how that's awesome in any way shape or form?

According to the more technologically-intimidated, it is because you have Apple's assurance that the gas is OK. Just like the apps in the curated app store.



But to further the analogy, Apple would seek to have it declared illegal to put other gas in "their" cars, going so far as to invent national security threats, and the USPTO would declare that in America, consumers have the right to use any gas they choose.

Apple would routinely change the engine's firmware so it would cease to function if it detected gas that didn't have Apple's sooper seekrit signature ingredient, and the user community would have to once again foil Apple's crap in order to use normal gas, instead of going to Apple's exclusive venue.

Other car manufacturers would tout that their cars will run on any brand of gas, and many Apple customers will say that the other gas is too sour for their taste, and that you get what you pay for, and that Apple's gas stations have a better User Experience, thankyouverymuch.
post #27 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkVader View Post


And the iPhone is a good product - but it should be criminal to lock up a device to the extent Apple has with the iPhone. I shouldn't have to do a procedure called "jailbreaking" just so I can run software on a device which is MY PROPERTY without approval from Apple. It should be the default that I can run whatever I want on MY device.

well, techinically, its NOT your property. you signed a two-year contract with a AT&T. the phone is not "officially" yours until that contract is up. that's why its only $99, $199, $299.

strangely until apple built the iphone, you heard no complaints about what a phone should be, how phone contracts should broken down, and the TRUE cost of a product, let alone smartphone specs and hacking. Apple builds a phone all of sudden there is a world of phone engineers and arm chair designers. shheesshhh...

before the iphone it was totally wasteland of disjointed UIs, and battery pulling for hard reboots...

Did you sign a contract when you bought any other apple or mac product?
post #28 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post

I was one of Apples biggest fans. An evangelist even. I was extolling the virtues of the Mac because it was going to legitimately HELP people. Now... not so much. I Apple is getting greedy. I hate to say it but it is true.

You have the whole iPad market. It is simply a way for Apple to get cozy with publishers to enable the publishers to gain capital through a new medium, which also means a moumental gain for Apple as well.

Apple TV is now rental only. Not even an option to buy and keep your movie. apple's excuse is that people don't want to manage storage. Tell that to the innumerable DVR users out there...

You have the iPhone app store. you can't buy software anywhere else and you can develop it any other way. You can bet this is how they want it to be for the Mac too. And that is the direction they are headed.

iTunes. Trying to move on past the CD before it's even close to time just to force Apple users into relying on them and paying for it. Forget archiving or anything like that. The commonly and heavily used "Burn CD" icon is missing and apple is testing the waters to see how far they can push the agenda.

their tiff with Adobe is just another example of Apple's greed. They don't want Flash to be viable because it can basically do everything and Apple has not been helpful in working with them. Steve Job's lambast of Flash as old tech is a joke. If anything Flash was ahead of its time and still today does more than anyone can ask of it. Rather than trying to kill flash outright, Apple should have recommended improvements if they were worrying about it making the Mac look bad. but to be honest, the Windows version works great -- and Adobe is not the first to recognize areas of the Apple OS that cause issues with high performance software. I used to serve at a church that used MediaShout software and there was no Mac version at the time. The reason? A serious problem with Quicktime that apple was unwilling to address.

I still love my Mac and will probably keep up in the Apple ecosystem, but only so nice as it plays nice with others. i moved from Microsoft 5 years ago because of their practices. I'd hate to do it again.

You see that gun to your head forcing you to use Apple products? Yeah, it's invisible.

Introducing a new product that's single-handedly revitalizing a once-dying industry (print media) is greedy and has absolutely nothing to do with keeping the industry alive.

All the zero people I know with a DVR swear by it, and the millions of Netflix users and Hulu watchers out there can't stand not owning what they're only going to watch once.

Hello, Cydia? Adobe? Yeah, apparently you guys don't exist.

I do agree that consumers want to go back to the $15-$20 album model where you pay full price when you only want to listen to one or two songs.

If Mac was at fault with Flash performance issues, then why is it equally bad on Linux? You also said one of the primary reasons Apple would reject Flash for iOS even if Adobe had one: high performance. It's a CPU hog, yes even on Windows, and us mobile device users like not having to keep plugged in.
post #29 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Whatever, a better analogy would be that Apple put a special gas cap on their car and you can only fill up with Apple petro at special Apple gas stations... And there is nothing different about Apple Gas... But you avoid your vehicle warranty if you fill up somewhere else.

Tell me how that's awesome in any way shape or form?


A worse analogy really. From my involvement of over 30 years in the automotive industry, it's been my experience that all auto manufacturers recommend a certain grade of fuel, and indeed, usually put a sticker under the fuel flap, with that recommendation, and if you use a certain fuel that did not meet their recommendations and was found to be at fault in wreaking havoc with the engine .... the warranty would not cover damages.
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #30 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by crift2012 View Post

well, techinically, its NOT your property. you signed a two-year contract with a AT&T. the phone is not "officially" yours until that contract is up. that's why its only $99, $199, $299.

That is incorrect.

The ownership of the phone passes to the buyer. The best that the vendor may retain is some sort of unperfected purchase-money security interest, but I doubt that they even have that.
post #31 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

I don't know about illegal. But I would love to be able to get apps for my iPhone on download.cnet .com or at any of the other usual stores like Handango.

Apple runs a nice store, especially for some types of people. But prohibiting the wares of any other store is - indescribable to me.

i know YOU think you are clever with the Newton/Newtron thing.. but if you can not understand why apple would not allow for instance Andrip apps into the APPLE store, then i do not think a description or even pretty pictures with small boxes and arrows would help either..
post #32 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbarriault View Post

All the zero people I know with a DVR

Seemingly, that is not a very representative sample of the relevant market. In point of fact, there are tens of millions, and perhaps more than 100 million households with DVRs.

Any conclusions you draw from the behavior of the sample you cite are therefor unreliable.
post #33 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post

I have to 100% agree on this.

I should have the say so on what runs on MY system. Not Apple, or MS or Google, or anybody else. And if someone makes software I want to use, I should be able to use it, no matter what Apple thinks about it. ..... most likely, I will buy only stuff on their, because of the security it affords,

Do you even think about how stupid these conflicting statements sound before you post ???

I agree ... I don't agree ... I agree ... I don't agree .... agghh , my head is spinning.
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #34 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by crift2012 View Post

if you can not understand why apple would not allow for instance Andrip apps into the APPLE store,

Please read my posts more carefully before stating conclusions about my understanding.
post #35 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

Whatever, a better analogy would be that Apple put a special gas cap on their car and you can only fill up with Apple petro at special Apple gas stations... And there is nothing different about Apple Gas... But you avoid your vehicle warranty if you fill up somewhere else.

Tell me how that's awesome in any way shape or form?

well your analogy is even worse... for many, many reasons just jumping off my head.

gas is expendable energy... like a battery...

apps are non-expendable, more like a modification to a car that does it only thing, and only depletes when you decide to delete them..

that was just the low hanging fruit... if that previous post was sarcasm, then i apologize..
post #36 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by crift2012 View Post

apps are non-expendable, more like a modification to a car that does it only thing, and only depletes when you decide to delete them..

t

Much like third-party car stereo systems? We can riff on that too.
post #37 of 78
What we know for sure is that Flash is crap regardless of its effect on Adobe's bottom line. My Safari web browser now has a new trick where open windows take 5-10 seconds to close when Flash is running. Otherwise, they close instantly, as they should.
post #38 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

According to the more technologically-intimidated, it is because you have Apple's assurance that the gas is OK. Just like the apps in the curated app store.

But to further the analogy, Apple would seek to have it declared illegal to put other gas in "their" cars, going so far as to invent national security threats, and the USPTO would declare that in America, consumers have the right to use any gas they choose.

Apple would routinely change the engine's firmware so it would cease to function if it detected gas that didn't have Apple's sooper seekrit signature ingredient, and the user community would have to once again foil Apple's crap in order to use normal gas, instead of going to Apple's exclusive venue.

Other car manufacturers would tout that their cars will run on any brand of gas, and many Apple customers will say that the other gas is too sour for their taste, and that you get what you pay for, and that Apple's gas stations have a better User Experience, thankyouverymuch.

You say you bought an iPhone even knowing about Apple's closed system... and then you complain. If that isn't the very definition of nuts.

To you and others like you... use someone else's product if you don't like Apple's product. Otherwise.. stfu.
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #39 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

No, it is a "standard" product that comes preinstalled on every desktop, laptop and notebook sold in the entire world. You just don't like it.

No. It does not come pre-installled on every desktop, laptop and notebook sold. It only comes on specific OEM vendor systems, pre-packaged.

It is also not a standard. It is a substandard product that is a locked-in product. It is a substandard product in terms of quality and performance. It is a substandard product in terms of not being an agreed upon industry standard.

We can go on and on.

HTML5 is a standard, not Flash binaries.
post #40 of 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

No. It does not come pre-installled on every desktop, laptop and notebook sold. It only comes on specific OEM vendor systems, pre-packaged.

It is also not a standard. It is a substandard product that is a locked-in product. It is a substandard product in terms of quality and performance. It is a substandard product in terms of not being an agreed upon industry standard.

We can go on and on.

HTML5 is a standard, not Flash binaries.

I believe you are wrong on all accounts.

I don't think you can name one computer brand that does not come with Flash.

There is no other product that can come even close in features and performance of Flash.

Regardless of whether a standards board has acknowledged it or not it is already on 99% of all computers used to surf the Internet.

HTML 5 is not an approved standard and it does not run well on the most prevalent browser in the market.

And no, we can't go on and on because that is all I have to say to you on this subject.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple's relaxing of App Store rules has 'muted' effect on Adobe