I like Apple less and less with everything they do like this. What business of theirs is it what tools a developer uses? The app that results runs natively... I REALLY don't like the following:
"The prohibition may also be a roadblock for Appcelerator and its Titanium SDK or the similar PhoneGap, both of which are designed to build native mobile apps using web technologies such as HTML and JavaScript. The clause specifically limits JavaScript for use in web apps, and does not allow it to link against the native Cocoa Touch APIs."
Google and others have done amazing web apps with HTML+JavaScript. Hate on Flash all you want Apple, but why oppose using these cross-platform tools? If you'll let me run it as a webpage, why won't you let me run it as an app that resides on my device so I don't have to be connected to the web to use it? Infuriating. Why not let developers create apps that can either run over the web or locally from a device, on any platform!? That's the future I want to live in, not under Apple's proprietary monopoly.
(Clearly this is aimed at Google's Chrome OS, and their emphasis on web apps.)
No, he's quite right, fanboy. This is Apple desperately trying to create a monopoly again, like when they locked up their hardware in the 80s. Jobs still hasn't learned from Gates.
Filtering out crapware is great, but restricting how it's developed is irrational.
I like Apple less and less with everything they do like this. What business of theirs is it what tools a developer uses? The app that results runs natively... I REALLY don't like the following:
"The prohibition may also be a roadblock for Appcelerator and its Titanium SDK or the similar PhoneGap, both of which are designed to build native mobile apps using web technologies such as HTML and JavaScript. The clause specifically limits JavaScript for use in web apps, and does not allow it to link against the native Cocoa Touch APIs."
Google and others have done amazing web apps with HTML+JavaScript. Hate on Flash all you want Apple, but why oppose using these cross-platform tools? If you'll let me run it as a webpage, why won't you let me run it as an app that resides on my device so I don't have to be connected to the web to use it? Infuriating. Why not let developers create apps that can either run over the web or locally from a device, on any platform!? That's the future I want to live in, not under Apple's proprietary monopoly.
(Clearly this is aimed at Google's Chrome OS, and their emphasis on web apps.)
Apple is banking on the mobile market surpassing the consumer desktop market in the near future...the next frontier one might say. At this point, Flash has made no real inroads into the mobile market, so, I doubt they are happy about this.
Flash already has content and developers. Rolling them into this new niche is a no-brainer. Java left a vacuum, and Adobe is going to fill it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkmassel
Also, Adobe engineers don't have access to the low level stuff Apple does. I'd be surprised if they can write a compiler that works just as well as Apple's
You mean ARM? Apple doesn't write their own compiler. There is nothing secret about producing ARM code. All the phones use it. Nintendo DS uses it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by randytayler
No, he's quite right, fanboy. This is Apple desperately trying to create a monopoly again, like when they locked up their hardware in the 80s. Jobs still hasn't learned from Gates.
Filtering out crapware is great, but restricting how it's developed is irrational.
This behavior is shocking; that instead of doing everything possible to create a platform for the next 20 years, Steve is taking every opportunity to demonstrate Apple is not qualified for the job.
Flash already has content and developers. Rolling them into this new niche is a no-brainer. Java left a vacuum, and Adobe is going to fill it.
The only thing missing from their equation is the software, which unfortunately they don't have. When your platform doesn't scale well, you either change or simply don't go there.
What Adobe doing is like one day Microsoft decides to just port Desktop Windows to a phone.
Now how fun watching JooJoo play some youtube videos with flash.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.
I think Unity3d is a great test case. It is widely used for very popular games. Will Apple continue to allow Unity programs but not programs going through some other toolkit? Will Apple enforce this selectively and use it to ban things they don't like while allowing things that they do?
And there's lots of 3rd party toolkits coming and available now.
Crazy question: If someone ports an app (a new app), how will Apple know?
There are always going to be tell-tale signs inside the binary. It's like CSI: Cupertino. They don't care whether it is apparent; Apple is going to hammer a developer who tries it, because they are doing this for anti-competitive reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ixho
Now how fun watching JooJoo play some youtube videos with flash.
Speaking of Flash, how is everybody liking the 10.1 release candidate?
I'm now convinced Apple is doing this is for security reasons - runtimes potentially let apps download data to change their behaviour - the app is not the app Apple approved. Console manufacturers have similar restrictions on how apps can be written.
I'm wondering though, have I missed something, but what happens to all the apps already on the App Store that are using, say, Unity?
Crazy question: If someone ports an app (a new app), how will Apple know?
I'm guessing Apple probably thought of this and has a solution. I don't know much about the process, but doesn't Apple need to see the source code currently to detect the use of private APIs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdahl
There are always going to be tell-tale signs inside the binary. It's like CSI: Cupertino. They don't care whether it is apparent; Apple is going to hammer a developer who tries it, because they are doing this for anti-competitive reasons.
Yes heaven forbid Apple try to control the ecosystem they created. If you don't like it, don't use it. Better yet, develop your own app store and devices that use it and make whatever rules you want.
Also I haven't seen any evidence that Apple is looking to "hammer" or demonize developers who don't abide by their policies. Last time I checked they just tell the developer where they violated the rules and ask them to resubmit.
Actually I don't think it's trying to cut Adobe AIR out of the loop at all.
according to my interpretation, it's basically banning people from calling the library functions with customized scripts. Like some game engines might have a set of functions that it could be called by scripts. Eventually those functions are just calling some cocoa framework functions. What this is prohibiting is having that layer of script in between the cocoa framework and the program.
What they need to do now is write a better interpretation layer from say Unity 3D (or Adobe AIR) to XCode.
Actually, I think exactly the opposite will happen. The App Store drives iPhone sales, and this hurts the app store. In addition, it DRAMATICALLY impacts the ability to do custom vertical solutions based on pre-existing frameworks. I think this decision will quickly turn the iPhone into a second-class development platform that gets bad ports months after the fact, just like apple did to the Mac.
Tools like Unity3d can now no longer be used to create top-shelf games (C# based), and sone innovative no-programming dev environments that were coming out will likely go to android. With every decision like this that Apple makes they drive away dozens of good developers from the platform.
I don't think so. Apple has over 80 million mobile OS devices on the market right now. Android and Blackberry markets are fragmented across a variety of phones, resolutions, etc. Windows Phone 7 has sold 0 devices so far. Most devs will jump through a few hoops to address that large of a market.
I'm now convinced Apple is doing this is for security reasons - runtimes potentially let apps download data to change their behaviour - the app is not the app Apple approved. Console manufacturers have similar restrictions on how apps can be written.
Is this the same Apple who doesn't care how long security holes sit in their products when it doesn't appear to be widely exploited?
Quote:
I'm wondering though, have I missed something, but what happens to all the apps already on the App Store that are using, say, Unity?
Some awesome and popular games use the Unity engine (you can’t even tell which ones unless you look online) and my own upcoming game does too. And I know others in the same boat.
There’s no good reason why we Unity developers should spend tons of time and money making games people want, pay our money to Apple, and then without warning or good reason, be left in the cold.
And Unity encourages innovation: it’s usable by 1 and 2-person teams of indie developers who aren’t part of some big corporation. They can take risks and come up with crazy new game concepts, or crazy twists on old ones. Unity is an amazing creative tool. Try Samurai Way of the Warrior for an example—it’s quite unique, and I’m sure it would have cost 10x as much to make without Unity. Us little guys can’t afford that—so it’s Unity or nothing. (Other good tools are also affected—but Unity is the one I know.)
This doesn’t hurt the big companies who can hire a team to do what Unity does without one. This hurts the little guy.
And it’s one more example of why EVERY developer should be afraid: if Apple will shut out great games forever, with no warning, then how can you be sure you won’t be next? It creates massive risk—to the tune of bankruptcy at Apple’s whim, even if you play by all the rules.
Let’s hope this is another blunder that Apple reverses quickly.
To be clear: I’m not arguing that Apple doesn’t have the legal right to do this to developers. And I’m not arguing that the iPhone is dead if they do. I am arguing that doing this is WRONG and will keep some great, unique games from seeing the light. Games I want to play, and games I want to make. (And one I already have! I just paid my fee to Apple... for nothing?)
Some awesome and popular games use the Unity engine (you can?t even tell which ones unless you look online) and my own upcoming game does too. And I know others in the same boat.
I think Unity might be aware of it, there's no way apple will make such a big change without notify the most popular game engine developer on iPhone, unless of course not even Apple is aware of the potential problem.
Some awesome and popular games use the Unity engine (you can?t even tell which ones unless you look online) and my own upcoming game does too. And I know others in the same boat.
There?s no good reason why we Unity developers should spend tons of time and money making games people want, pay our money to Apple, and then without warning or good reason, be left in the cold.
And Unity encourages innovation: it?s usable by 1 and 2-person teams of indie developers who aren?t part of some big corporation. They can take risks and come up with crazy new game concepts, or crazy twists on old ones. Unity is an amazing creative tool. Try Samurai Way of the Warrior for an example?it?s quite unique, and I?m sure it would have cost 10x as much to make without Unity. Us little guys can?t afford that?so it?s Unity or nothing. (Other good tools are also affected?but Unity is the one I know.)
This doesn?t hurt the big companies who can hire a team to do what Unity does without one. This hurts the little guy.
And it?s one more example of why EVERY developer should be afraid: if Apple will shut out great games forever, with no warning, then how can you be sure you won?t be next? It creates massive risk?to the tune of bankruptcy at Apple?s whim, even if you play by all the rules.
Let?s hope this is another blunder that Apple reverses quickly.
To be clear: I?m not arguing that Apple doesn?t have the legal right to do this to developers. And I?m not arguing that the iPhone is dead if they do. I am arguing that doing this is WRONG and will keep some great, unique games from seeing the light. Games I want to play, and games I want to make. (And one I already have! I just paid my fee to Apple... for nothing?)
This is a good argument. I will point out though that we have NO idea what Apple intends to do with this. They haven't rejected any apps yet because of this, it's not even clear what this paragraph in the agreement even means. I doubt that Apple is trying to target the independent developer. On the contrary they go out of their way to embrace the "small guy". (I think I remember the one-man-shop who wrote "Trism" getting his own video at an apple event a while ago).
If I had to guess, I'd say this is a direct shot at Adobe Flash CS5, and that this will either be revised or go unenforced on things like Unity. Who knows, this paragraph may disappear next week.
Comments
"The prohibition may also be a roadblock for Appcelerator and its Titanium SDK or the similar PhoneGap, both of which are designed to build native mobile apps using web technologies such as HTML and JavaScript. The clause specifically limits JavaScript for use in web apps, and does not allow it to link against the native Cocoa Touch APIs."
Google and others have done amazing web apps with HTML+JavaScript. Hate on Flash all you want Apple, but why oppose using these cross-platform tools? If you'll let me run it as a webpage, why won't you let me run it as an app that resides on my device so I don't have to be connected to the web to use it? Infuriating. Why not let developers create apps that can either run over the web or locally from a device, on any platform!? That's the future I want to live in, not under Apple's proprietary monopoly.
(Clearly this is aimed at Google's Chrome OS, and their emphasis on web apps.)
No, he's quite right, fanboy. This is Apple desperately trying to create a monopoly again, like when they locked up their hardware in the 80s. Jobs still hasn't learned from Gates.
Filtering out crapware is great, but restricting how it's developed is irrational.
Huh. So... How can I filter YOU out?
Oh, wait....
heh .. its a ploy to drive down Adobe stock price so it can be really cheap for Apple to buy it up
That's a really expensive way to kill Flash, considering it being phased out is just a matter of time.
"The prohibition may also be a roadblock for Appcelerator and its Titanium SDK or the similar PhoneGap, both of which are designed to build native mobile apps using web technologies such as HTML and JavaScript. The clause specifically limits JavaScript for use in web apps, and does not allow it to link against the native Cocoa Touch APIs."
Google and others have done amazing web apps with HTML+JavaScript. Hate on Flash all you want Apple, but why oppose using these cross-platform tools? If you'll let me run it as a webpage, why won't you let me run it as an app that resides on my device so I don't have to be connected to the web to use it? Infuriating. Why not let developers create apps that can either run over the web or locally from a device, on any platform!? That's the future I want to live in, not under Apple's proprietary monopoly.
(Clearly this is aimed at Google's Chrome OS, and their emphasis on web apps.)
Do you have any idea what you are talking about?
Apple is banking on the mobile market surpassing the consumer desktop market in the near future...the next frontier one might say. At this point, Flash has made no real inroads into the mobile market, so, I doubt they are happy about this.
Flash already has content and developers. Rolling them into this new niche is a no-brainer. Java left a vacuum, and Adobe is going to fill it.
Also, Adobe engineers don't have access to the low level stuff Apple does. I'd be surprised if they can write a compiler that works just as well as Apple's
You mean ARM? Apple doesn't write their own compiler. There is nothing secret about producing ARM code. All the phones use it. Nintendo DS uses it.
No, he's quite right, fanboy. This is Apple desperately trying to create a monopoly again, like when they locked up their hardware in the 80s. Jobs still hasn't learned from Gates.
Filtering out crapware is great, but restricting how it's developed is irrational.
This behavior is shocking; that instead of doing everything possible to create a platform for the next 20 years, Steve is taking every opportunity to demonstrate Apple is not qualified for the job.
Flash already has content and developers. Rolling them into this new niche is a no-brainer. Java left a vacuum, and Adobe is going to fill it.
The only thing missing from their equation is the software, which unfortunately they don't have. When your platform doesn't scale well, you either change or simply don't go there.
What Adobe doing is like one day Microsoft decides to just port Desktop Windows to a phone.
Now how fun watching JooJoo play some youtube videos with flash.
I think Unity3d is a great test case. It is widely used for very popular games. Will Apple continue to allow Unity programs but not programs going through some other toolkit? Will Apple enforce this selectively and use it to ban things they don't like while allowing things that they do?
And there's lots of 3rd party toolkits coming and available now.
http://www.runrev.com/products/revmobile/overview/
http://iphonedevtools.com/
http://www.genuitec.com/mobile/
http://gamesalad.com/
Did Apple just shut down all these toolkits?
X-Code or No-Code sounds rather harsh and arbitrary.
GameSalad and Unity boards are already buzzing with speculation on this.
- Jasen.
Crazy question: If someone ports an app (a new app), how will Apple know?
There are always going to be tell-tale signs inside the binary. It's like CSI: Cupertino. They don't care whether it is apparent; Apple is going to hammer a developer who tries it, because they are doing this for anti-competitive reasons.
Now how fun watching JooJoo play some youtube videos with flash.
Speaking of Flash, how is everybody liking the 10.1 release candidate?
I'm wondering though, have I missed something, but what happens to all the apps already on the App Store that are using, say, Unity?
Crazy question: If someone ports an app (a new app), how will Apple know?
I'm guessing Apple probably thought of this and has a solution. I don't know much about the process, but doesn't Apple need to see the source code currently to detect the use of private APIs?
There are always going to be tell-tale signs inside the binary. It's like CSI: Cupertino. They don't care whether it is apparent; Apple is going to hammer a developer who tries it, because they are doing this for anti-competitive reasons.
Yes heaven forbid Apple try to control the ecosystem they created. If you don't like it, don't use it. Better yet, develop your own app store and devices that use it and make whatever rules you want.
Also I haven't seen any evidence that Apple is looking to "hammer" or demonize developers who don't abide by their policies. Last time I checked they just tell the developer where they violated the rules and ask them to resubmit.
Mayes
according to my interpretation, it's basically banning people from calling the library functions with customized scripts. Like some game engines might have a set of functions that it could be called by scripts. Eventually those functions are just calling some cocoa framework functions. What this is prohibiting is having that layer of script in between the cocoa framework and the program.
What they need to do now is write a better interpretation layer from say Unity 3D (or Adobe AIR) to XCode.
Actually, I think exactly the opposite will happen. The App Store drives iPhone sales, and this hurts the app store. In addition, it DRAMATICALLY impacts the ability to do custom vertical solutions based on pre-existing frameworks. I think this decision will quickly turn the iPhone into a second-class development platform that gets bad ports months after the fact, just like apple did to the Mac.
Tools like Unity3d can now no longer be used to create top-shelf games (C# based), and sone innovative no-programming dev environments that were coming out will likely go to android. With every decision like this that Apple makes they drive away dozens of good developers from the platform.
I don't think so. Apple has over 80 million mobile OS devices on the market right now. Android and Blackberry markets are fragmented across a variety of phones, resolutions, etc. Windows Phone 7 has sold 0 devices so far. Most devs will jump through a few hoops to address that large of a market.
I'm now convinced Apple is doing this is for security reasons - runtimes potentially let apps download data to change their behaviour - the app is not the app Apple approved. Console manufacturers have similar restrictions on how apps can be written.
Is this the same Apple who doesn't care how long security holes sit in their products when it doesn't appear to be widely exploited?
I'm wondering though, have I missed something, but what happens to all the apps already on the App Store that are using, say, Unity?
It's real easy. Just change your App.
Speaking of Flash, how is everybody liking the 10.1 release candidate?
Some porn sites doesn't work, but that's fine I guess....
There’s no good reason why we Unity developers should spend tons of time and money making games people want, pay our money to Apple, and then without warning or good reason, be left in the cold.
And Unity encourages innovation: it’s usable by 1 and 2-person teams of indie developers who aren’t part of some big corporation. They can take risks and come up with crazy new game concepts, or crazy twists on old ones. Unity is an amazing creative tool. Try Samurai Way of the Warrior for an example—it’s quite unique, and I’m sure it would have cost 10x as much to make without Unity. Us little guys can’t afford that—so it’s Unity or nothing. (Other good tools are also affected—but Unity is the one I know.)
This doesn’t hurt the big companies who can hire a team to do what Unity does without one. This hurts the little guy.
And it’s one more example of why EVERY developer should be afraid: if Apple will shut out great games forever, with no warning, then how can you be sure you won’t be next? It creates massive risk—to the tune of bankruptcy at Apple’s whim, even if you play by all the rules.
Let’s hope this is another blunder that Apple reverses quickly.
To be clear: I’m not arguing that Apple doesn’t have the legal right to do this to developers. And I’m not arguing that the iPhone is dead if they do. I am arguing that doing this is WRONG and will keep some great, unique games from seeing the light. Games I want to play, and games I want to make. (And one I already have! I just paid my fee to Apple... for nothing?)
Some awesome and popular games use the Unity engine (you can?t even tell which ones unless you look online) and my own upcoming game does too. And I know others in the same boat.
I think Unity might be aware of it, there's no way apple will make such a big change without notify the most popular game engine developer on iPhone, unless of course not even Apple is aware of the potential problem.
Some awesome and popular games use the Unity engine (you can?t even tell which ones unless you look online) and my own upcoming game does too. And I know others in the same boat.
There?s no good reason why we Unity developers should spend tons of time and money making games people want, pay our money to Apple, and then without warning or good reason, be left in the cold.
And Unity encourages innovation: it?s usable by 1 and 2-person teams of indie developers who aren?t part of some big corporation. They can take risks and come up with crazy new game concepts, or crazy twists on old ones. Unity is an amazing creative tool. Try Samurai Way of the Warrior for an example?it?s quite unique, and I?m sure it would have cost 10x as much to make without Unity. Us little guys can?t afford that?so it?s Unity or nothing. (Other good tools are also affected?but Unity is the one I know.)
This doesn?t hurt the big companies who can hire a team to do what Unity does without one. This hurts the little guy.
And it?s one more example of why EVERY developer should be afraid: if Apple will shut out great games forever, with no warning, then how can you be sure you won?t be next? It creates massive risk?to the tune of bankruptcy at Apple?s whim, even if you play by all the rules.
Let?s hope this is another blunder that Apple reverses quickly.
To be clear: I?m not arguing that Apple doesn?t have the legal right to do this to developers. And I?m not arguing that the iPhone is dead if they do. I am arguing that doing this is WRONG and will keep some great, unique games from seeing the light. Games I want to play, and games I want to make. (And one I already have! I just paid my fee to Apple... for nothing?)
This is a good argument. I will point out though that we have NO idea what Apple intends to do with this. They haven't rejected any apps yet because of this, it's not even clear what this paragraph in the agreement even means. I doubt that Apple is trying to target the independent developer. On the contrary they go out of their way to embrace the "small guy". (I think I remember the one-man-shop who wrote "Trism" getting his own video at an apple event a while ago).
If I had to guess, I'd say this is a direct shot at Adobe Flash CS5, and that this will either be revised or go unenforced on things like Unity. Who knows, this paragraph may disappear next week.
-Mayes