I think I agree with Steve's entire letter except for this part:
"Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago"
When Steve first announced Carbon and Cocoa he said that Carbon was going to be where most software would be written initially. Go look up that expo on YouTube. He made it very clear. In fact weren't Apple's iApps just rewritten for Cocoa last year in Snow Leopard?!? It seems like I started hearing about third party apps being rewritten for Cocoa about 2-3 years ago. Steve's 10 year time frame seems grossly exaggerated. I am pretty sure that Lightroom has always been Cocoa and that came out several years ago.
I never said Apple DON"T provide good development tools.
I said that's ALL that is necessary to ensure their adoption. No need for SDK restrictions, arm twisting and guns pointed at people's heads.
And some tools that are restricted by Apple's new SDK agreement are capable of producing good iPhone apps. Case in point, Now Playing. Consistently regarded as the best movie app on the iPhone. Apparently in was developed using tools that are forbidden by the SDK agreement.
How is that a 'good' thing for the platform?
Steve articulated very well why Apple needs to become the sole provider of the SDKs (i.e. the development tools) for the iPhone platform (and OS X too, for that matter). I gave a particular example of it. If that's not enough to sink in, then I don't know what will.
Now developers aren't vowing to leave in mass but its pretty obvious that there's a lot of discomfort associated with the new SDK agreement.
I really believe that users are smart enough to figure out the good apps from the bad. IMO, when you have a robust platform like the iPhone/iPad currently enjoys these restrictions seem unnecessary. I can understand Apple's concerns but they are fighting an imaginary enemy. The iPhone platform enjoys success that the Mac never had. Apple just needs to create the best possible tools they can and the developers will use them. They aren't stupid either.
Did you actually read the link you supplied. I tried but I didn't see anyone that was actually ever a Mac developer. Well there was one who was upset that his 3-day effort was turned down. Most weren't even developers, were PCrs, didn't have the hardware necessary to even start or just plain ignorant of what was involved or required.
And do-it-yourself home gardens fall short of the mass production of today's chemically altered farms, but that doesn't mean that a few of us still like to do things the old fashioned way and grow our own fresh produce. If it works, don't fix it. Just because something is "NEW" or "POPULAR" doesn't make it right for everyone.
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best ? night and day ? to make you everybody else, means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight, and never stop fighting." ?E.E. Cummings
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company, but both have elements of an open platform in their closed business model - Adobe in the fact that it's not platform specific, and there's no "big brother" watching what you do with their product a la Apple, while Apple supports a few open standards (but not in the realm of Audio. In that area, they only support their own proprietary format + mp3s.)
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
He's made no secret of where he thinks the market is going, both before and after he rejoined Apple. It is, after all, Apple inc. now and instead of Apple Computers.
Did you actually read the link you supplied. I tried but I didn't see anyone that was actually ever a Mac developer. Well there was one who was upset that his 3-day effort was turned down. Most weren't even developers, were PCrs, didn't have the hardware necessary to even start or just plain ignorant of what was involved or required.
Yeah, have you ever heard of Now Playing? Pocket Flicks?
The developer is Metasyntactic. He posted numerous times in the thread.
Shamyl Zakariya, Brad Oliver, fitten, Ian Wood are all developers as well (or claim to be and I have no reason to believe otherwise).
"While Adobe's Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system."
Wow, that's rich! One proprietary dinosaur of a company bad-mouthing another. Apple is just as proprietary as Adobe, if not more so. Nice try, Steve!
"Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open"
Steve articulated very well why Apple needs to become the sole provider of the SDKs (i.e. the development tools) for the iPhone platform (and OS X too, for that matter). I gave a particular example of it. If that's not enough to sink in, then I don't know what will.
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
I think there is room for other reasonable opinions on this matter.
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company, but both have elements of an open platform in their closed business model - Adobe in the fact that it's not platform specific, and there's no "big brother" watching what you do with their product a la Apple, while Apple supports a few open standards (but not in the realm of Audio. In that area, they only support their own proprietary format + mp3s.)
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
I think everything you stated is incorrect.
Mp3 isn't open
You didn't mention AAC, WAV, WMA or AIFF that are in iTunes and not owned by Apple. Only ALAC is.
H.264 is not "old" is the best codec available and still ramping up in usage
Flash isn't competing with H.264 because Flash also can use H.264. Flash for video is competing with HTML5's video tag.
Apple isn't denying Flash as noted by Macs being shipped with Flash and even creating an API that seems specifically geared for Adobe to make use of with H.264 decoding in Flash v10.1
Apple is also not allowing Flash apps turned iPhone app using CS5, which does make these Flash apps and therefore does make Apple money so the App Store strangelhold argument doesn't make sense.
Apple has created JS frameworks to make webpages look and feel like an iPhone app so, again, the argument that it's all about the App Store strangelhold argument doesn't make sense.
Writing for both platforms has never worked out and Jobs arguments against it are mirrored by the many comments stated well before this letter.
Because one arm of a business is more sucessful does not mean that the other arms are being cut off. Mac sales are at an all time high and Apple has made many innovations to make the Mac the best choice for my needs.
Even the idea that Macs are being fazed out is beyond silly when Apple reportedly makes more profit from PC sales than any other PC vendor by far.
I'm pretty surprised he felt compelled to write this letter. If Adobe Flash is going to circle the drain, let it. If not, so what? Adobe makes products that complement the Mac, why call them out?
How about because Adobe and most of the rest of the tech world has been criticizing Apple with no reply or defense (until now)?
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company,
Where did he say Apple is an open company. He said he wants the internet to be open.
Quote:
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec,
Flash isn't competing with H.264, Flash uses H.264. Flash is competing with HTML5, which also uses H.264.
How do you figure H.264 is old, its only been in wide use for the past five years or so.
Quote:
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
He clearly explained why he did not like cross platform ports. It had nothing to do with protecting App Store dominance. Apple has done nothing to stop developers from developing apps for both iPhone and Android.
Quote:
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future...
Sales of mobile devices dwarf sales of PC's. When a new market is growing and an old market is shrinking. You generally would say the new market is the future.
Perhaps, but Steve Jobs claiming H.264 is "open" is an absolute falsehood. It is nothing of the sort. That's why Firefox and Opera are not adopting it.
"H.264 is neither free nor open-source. If...you want to use H.264 to serve HTML5 video in your browser, you need to pay MPEG LA, the owners of the codec, a $5 million licensing fee. This has raised some eyebrows by the likes of Mozilla Firefox, who want HTML5?s video compression standard to be the free, open-source Ogg Theora. Their argument, summarized, is it?s foolish to build the next decade?s internet video standards upon the back of a licensed codec when there?s a free alternative that works nearly as well."
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
As I said, I have lived it through experience with third party development tools (CodeWarrior) getting in the way of smooth platform transitions. I'm not blindly accepting anything, especially as gospel. Now you are just being snarky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac
I think there is room for other reasonable opinions on this matter.
You have yet to demonstrate that you even understand the actual issue with third party SDKs and how paralyzing they can be to platform momentum. So your opinion is of questionable authority.
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
You make it sound like the everyone's position was formed because of this letter when the Steve's comments are just reinforcing what most of us have been saying about Flash since 2007.
Well, OK, I suppose I jumped the gun on that one. (Although I still have my doubts.) In any case...
The HP Slate is not even shipping. Detail specs are not verifiable. How can it be used in a present tense argument? How can it be used in ANY argument outside of speculation?
Thompson
Currently release date appears to be June, so it is most likely already being produced in advance of release. I'd say it is out of the prototype phase. Specs have been previously leaked from a presentation HP gave internally.
I never said it could be used in a present tense, I was just trying to correct your statement about it's expected battery life. Given that a lot of devices seem to give 80% of the rated lifetime, that would mean 4-5 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
How are MBPs not "mobile"? The laptop market has been exploding for a few years now, the notebook market has been slowing down, smartphone sales continue to climb, the iPad and a bunch of other new tablet devices are all out this year. I don't see how anyone could not agree that we're moving toward more mobility in our computing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
You make it sound like the everyone's position was formed because of this letter when the Steve's comments are just reinforcing what most of us have been saying about Flash since 2007.
Only 2007? Flash has been awful for a lot longer than that Directly related to the iPhone sure 2007 works.
Comments
"Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago"
When Steve first announced Carbon and Cocoa he said that Carbon was going to be where most software would be written initially. Go look up that expo on YouTube. He made it very clear. In fact weren't Apple's iApps just rewritten for Cocoa last year in Snow Leopard?!? It seems like I started hearing about third party apps being rewritten for Cocoa about 2-3 years ago. Steve's 10 year time frame seems grossly exaggerated. I am pretty sure that Lightroom has always been Cocoa and that came out several years ago.
I never said Apple DON"T provide good development tools.
I said that's ALL that is necessary to ensure their adoption. No need for SDK restrictions, arm twisting and guns pointed at people's heads.
And some tools that are restricted by Apple's new SDK agreement are capable of producing good iPhone apps. Case in point, Now Playing. Consistently regarded as the best movie app on the iPhone. Apparently in was developed using tools that are forbidden by the SDK agreement.
How is that a 'good' thing for the platform?
Steve articulated very well why Apple needs to become the sole provider of the SDKs (i.e. the development tools) for the iPhone platform (and OS X too, for that matter). I gave a particular example of it. If that's not enough to sink in, then I don't know what will.
That's all I'll say on this aspect of the topic.
Thompson
You should read the replies in this thread.
Now developers aren't vowing to leave in mass but its pretty obvious that there's a lot of discomfort associated with the new SDK agreement.
I really believe that users are smart enough to figure out the good apps from the bad. IMO, when you have a robust platform like the iPhone/iPad currently enjoys these restrictions seem unnecessary. I can understand Apple's concerns but they are fighting an imaginary enemy. The iPhone platform enjoys success that the Mac never had. Apple just needs to create the best possible tools they can and the developers will use them. They aren't stupid either.
Did you actually read the link you supplied. I tried but I didn't see anyone that was actually ever a Mac developer. Well there was one who was upset that his 3-day effort was turned down. Most weren't even developers, were PCrs, didn't have the hardware necessary to even start or just plain ignorant of what was involved or required.
"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best ? night and day ? to make you everybody else, means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight, and never stop fighting." ?E.E. Cummings
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. ...
While on the other hand, this is factual prose? Seriously?
Almost everything you say here is either wrong or wildly exaggerated and you are taking Steve Jobs to task for his "rhetoric"???? Yikes!
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
He's made no secret of where he thinks the market is going, both before and after he rejoined Apple. It is, after all, Apple inc. now and instead of Apple Computers.
Did you actually read the link you supplied. I tried but I didn't see anyone that was actually ever a Mac developer. Well there was one who was upset that his 3-day effort was turned down. Most weren't even developers, were PCrs, didn't have the hardware necessary to even start or just plain ignorant of what was involved or required.
Yeah, have you ever heard of Now Playing? Pocket Flicks?
The developer is Metasyntactic. He posted numerous times in the thread.
Shamyl Zakariya, Brad Oliver, fitten, Ian Wood are all developers as well (or claim to be and I have no reason to believe otherwise).
Did you read the thread?
"While Adobe's Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system."
Wow, that's rich! One proprietary dinosaur of a company bad-mouthing another. Apple is just as proprietary as Adobe, if not more so. Nice try, Steve!
"Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open"
Steve articulated very well why Apple needs to become the sole provider of the SDKs (i.e. the development tools) for the iPhone platform (and OS X too, for that matter). I gave a particular example of it. If that's not enough to sink in, then I don't know what will.
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
I think there is room for other reasonable opinions on this matter.
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company, but both have elements of an open platform in their closed business model - Adobe in the fact that it's not platform specific, and there's no "big brother" watching what you do with their product a la Apple, while Apple supports a few open standards (but not in the realm of Audio. In that area, they only support their own proprietary format + mp3s.)
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
I think everything you stated is incorrect.
I'm pretty surprised he felt compelled to write this letter. If Adobe Flash is going to circle the drain, let it. If not, so what? Adobe makes products that complement the Mac, why call them out?
How about because Adobe and most of the rest of the tech world has been criticizing Apple with no reply or defense (until now)?
Steve: "Flash, not so magical."
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company,
Where did he say Apple is an open company. He said he wants the internet to be open.
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec,
Flash isn't competing with H.264, Flash uses H.264. Flash is competing with HTML5, which also uses H.264.
How do you figure H.264 is old, its only been in wide use for the past five years or so.
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
He clearly explained why he did not like cross platform ports. It had nothing to do with protecting App Store dominance. Apple has done nothing to stop developers from developing apps for both iPhone and Android.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future...
Sales of mobile devices dwarf sales of PC's. When a new market is growing and an old market is shrinking. You generally would say the new market is the future.
Perhaps, but Steve Jobs claiming H.264 is "open" is an absolute falsehood. It is nothing of the sort. That's why Firefox and Opera are not adopting it.
"H.264 is neither free nor open-source. If...you want to use H.264 to serve HTML5 video in your browser, you need to pay MPEG LA, the owners of the codec, a $5 million licensing fee. This has raised some eyebrows by the likes of Mozilla Firefox, who want HTML5?s video compression standard to be the free, open-source Ogg Theora. Their argument, summarized, is it?s foolish to build the next decade?s internet video standards upon the back of a licensed codec when there?s a free alternative that works nearly as well."
http://www.cultofmac.com/h-264-will-...ugh-2016/28982
"nearly as well"
Weak!
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
As I said, I have lived it through experience with third party development tools (CodeWarrior) getting in the way of smooth platform transitions. I'm not blindly accepting anything, especially as gospel. Now you are just being snarky.
I think there is room for other reasonable opinions on this matter.
You have yet to demonstrate that you even understand the actual issue with third party SDKs and how paralyzing they can be to platform momentum. So your opinion is of questionable authority.
Thompson
If you accept Steve's word as the gospel then fine.
You make it sound like the everyone's position was formed because of this letter when the Steve's comments are just reinforcing what most of us have been saying about Flash since 2007.
Well, OK, I suppose I jumped the gun on that one. (Although I still have my doubts.) In any case...
The HP Slate is not even shipping. Detail specs are not verifiable. How can it be used in a present tense argument? How can it be used in ANY argument outside of speculation?
Thompson
Currently release date appears to be June, so it is most likely already being produced in advance of release. I'd say it is out of the prototype phase. Specs have been previously leaked from a presentation HP gave internally.
http://www.devicemag.com/2010/04/06/...e-date-leaked/
I never said it could be used in a present tense, I was just trying to correct your statement about it's expected battery life. Given that a lot of devices seem to give 80% of the rated lifetime, that would mean 4-5 hours.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
How are MBPs not "mobile"? The laptop market has been exploding for a few years now, the notebook market has been slowing down, smartphone sales continue to climb, the iPad and a bunch of other new tablet devices are all out this year. I don't see how anyone could not agree that we're moving toward more mobility in our computing.
You make it sound like the everyone's position was formed because of this letter when the Steve's comments are just reinforcing what most of us have been saying about Flash since 2007.
Only 2007? Flash has been awful for a lot longer than that
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/04/...ith-adobe-ceo/
While Steve is confident in his company, this guy just sounds arrogant. There is a difference.