Does any company spend more than the minimum resources possible porting to OS X?
Which OS X ported products are superior to their original Windows versions?
There have been times that I have preferred Office for Mac over Windows. MS these days seems to generally try to keep the Mac version up to spec..in some case with unique to the Mac features. Given the history between MS and Apple, that is saying a lot.
Sometime a little extra effort over the minimum can have big payoffs.
There IS no full version of Flash for ANY mobile device. Even Flash 10.1 which may come out this summer if Adobe ever manages to hit a target, requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so it will not run on any phone with the iPhone's specs.
I don't know how Apple can be said to have banned something that doesn't exist.
They did, however, say that Flash is a lousy technology for mobile devices - and the fact that no one else has it today confirms that.
This rumor is nonsense. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the mobile phone space or even the smart phone market, so DOJ has nothing to say about it. FTC does not have regulatory authority to control how a vendor works with application developers, either.
I think someone was listening to the Adobe shill-trolls in this group.
Again, more people talking about what they don't understand. You can build iphone apps with adobe's CS5 version of flash which will run as iphone apps, natively, and on current iphone hardware. Flash PLAYER has nothing to do with the native applications. That's merely a plugin for the browser (in this case mobile safari) and is completely irrelevant to the authors point.
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
I just downloaded the flash cs5 trial from adobe.com, got a simple animation with critters running around. So I compiled it to the iPhone, it does not go through XCode but creates object files, assembly files during build time. It does create ARM code.
I then copied the app and ran it to my iPhone and boy it was laggy. I rebooted and still was laggy around 10fps and stops for a few milliseconds in between. I launched Instruments to test CPU and app analysis. To my observation, there are way way too many libSystem.dylib calls just to draw one frame.
As an iPhone developer, I never seen something so highly unoptimized even if is AOT compiled in arm.
Also, the actual Flash IDE app is not well written. I have Geektool running polling for system.log and running Flash CS5 gives me tons of NSAutoreleasePool warnings every second. NSAutoreleasepool manages object memory/garbage collection and prevents memory leak. Now I know why adobe apps crashes upon quit!
Can I get a copy of the source-- it's been a long time since I coded any Flash. I'd like to see this for myself. I am an iPhone developer and have every version of the iPhone and iPad.
That's a hard sell to make in court because Apple utilizes ISO standard C languages which means your code in fact could be used elsewhere so long as the code isn't accessing Apple only API.
In fact Apple does NOT have the dominant platform also factors in. They're are chasing RIM like everyone else and RIM will support Flash.
I'm not saying it's not a raw deal for developers but Apple's rules are akin to what developers programming for the Playstation or the Wii do. In fact Sony said all games must be 3D for the Playstation 3 (if you wish to be approved easily). There goes the market the many 2D sidescrollers and more. But it's their platform and their right to tailor how they see fit seeing as how if consumers don't like it there's the Xbox and Wii.
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Looks like 80% of the people responding did NOT understand AT ALL what this is all about. Its not about flash support, its about tools to convert flash into iphone OS code. Apple wants to forbid it, which is clearly illegal if you ask me.
Just because you don't like the taste, doesn't make it FUD and doesn't mean it isn't true. Apple is quite clear that they do not allow, i.e. ban, flash on the iPhone platform. How is it FUD to state what even Steve says is true? It is a simple fact that Apple does not allow Flash, mobile or otherwise, on the iPhone and they have clearly spelt out their reasons, most of which are quite valid.
Defending Apple works best when it is informed and not a knee-jerk.
Anyhoo, back to reality, this investigation has little chance of going anywhere unless the gov is willing to narrowly define the market in question as the iPhone OS platform.
Most of the posters on here don't even understand the word FUD.
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
True, and though they're #1 in sales dollars, in the long run Android devices will overtake them especially if they continue down the path they're going.
I realize to some degree it's different, but this is no different then folks making after-market exhaust or anything else for cars, truck, motorcycles. Most of these items say "Installing this item may or will void the manufactures warranty.
So why doesn't Apple just take this approach? Yes, I understand they will take a ton of flack over this, in that, many folks will not see that is Flash causing the problem, and they will go into the Apple store, email or call Apple tech support only to find, they screwed up, and the NEW Battery is coming out of their pocket - if of course Apple can proof that have and run applications using Flash.
Now they / Apple could put down the gloves long enough to get Adobe to see the error of it's ways, but that's not going to put money in their pocket like Flash will.
But on another note, does the government have the right to say, what a company can and can't allow on their systems? If Apple can proof that it's a bad thing having and using Flash, how could the government possible see this though?
I can't believe after all of this there are still people that don't understand the difference between supporting Flash in a web browser and allowing the Adobe Flash IDE to export native iPhone applications.
The distinction is irrelevant in this context.
Apple's experience (Based on decades of experience) is that cross-compiled applications are, in general, junk and they have no desire to support junk on their platform.
Now, they can simply reject cross-compiling which produces 99.9% junk applications and risk losing the 0.1% of cross-compiled apps that might be any good, or they can evaluate each app individually. Aside from the immensely greater expense of the latter, the whiners would then complain that their rules aren't clear and too many apps are being rejected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG
Without expressing any opinion on the ultimate merits of any specific charges, the relevant market seems to be the telephone app market. The anticompetative action would be the dominant player specifying that any apps it sells cannot be manufactured in a manner which would allow any competing store to sell it for other devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
For what it's worth as of 01/2010 Apple controlled 99.4% of the market in question.
Let's say that your data is correct (I'm very skeptical, but I'll accept it for the sake of argument0.
Android fans claim that there are 40,000 apps for Android and there are 180,000 apps for iPhone. So 180,000 apps exist to obtain 99.4% of the market, yet 40,000 apps have been created for the remaining 0.6% (actually less because Android does not have ALL of the non-iPhone market). So Android apps are far, far more prevalent than their market share would predict, and therefore they are not being artificially hindered. Your argument just disappeared.
Can I get a copy of the source-- it's been a long time since I coded any Flash. I'd like to see this for myself. I am an iPhone developer and have every version of the iPhone and iPad.
TIA, Dick Applebaum.
.
He shouldn't need to reboot his phone for an app... ever... and i've seen people write quality apps for iphone which were animated. My expectation is you can write crappy apps or you can write good apps and largely it depends on if you know what you're doing... this is much the same as is the case with objective c as it's fairly easy to get a crashy app with lots of memory leaking if you're naive about what you're doing.
Adobe should to do what every technology company should do in the face of competition.
Innovate.
I mean, as a tech company, isn't the purpose to push boundaries and find new and better ways of doing things? Even M$ seem to have realised that you shouldn't diss people who are better than you, you should admire them and use it as inspiration to do better yourself.
The app store isn't a free market. Apple owns it and if developers don't want to leverage the unique parts of the platform they can choose not to make software. Simple as that.
If a dominant player institutes rules which cause developers to choose not to make software, then the dominant player has acted in an anticompetative manner. If they have no monopoly power in the relevant market, all is OK.
But when they use thier monopoly power in telephone apps to stifle competition in the handset market, regulators perk up.
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
There are a number of cross-platform tools for the mobile platform. Apple just blocked them... I gather that is what the inquiry is about!
In any case a quick Google search (grain of salt) tells me Apple control >99% of the application revenue in the mobile market space.
They are essentially using this dominance (does >99% constitute a monopoly??) to tell developers that if they write an application for the iPhone it can't run on another OS.
The main difference being that Apple have way more control of the mobile market then Microsoft have over the desktop market.
Apple sells 99% of all mobile apps. The other carriers who have mobile stores (other than the Android store) have absolute shit. The Apple store was the first app store and had 100% of mobile app sales for awhile. The only people buying them had iPhones. Apple was not doing anything to keep people from selling apps thru different phones and they still aren't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Not free if you have to buy a Mac. Apple is happy to sell a Windows user an iPhone but prohibits them from writing applications for it without first purchasing a Mac. Just pointing out that small detail. I couldn't care less about Windows users, but it is a little hypocritical. Maybe Apple should release a Windows version of Xcode.
If you jailbreak an iPhone you can code on it and run your testing as well. Same for an iPad I suppose. You would have needed to buy an iPhone/iPad for testing purposes anyway, so $100 for a low end iPhone and another $100 for the yearly dev cost. A Mac Mini can be had for $600 (or less for older models) if you wanted to go that route.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Last I saw RIM has 41% of the market and Apple has 25.4%, putting them in 2nd place. That may have been US only figures tho.
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
Looks like 80% of the people responding did NOT understand AT ALL what this is all about. Its not about flash support, its about tools to convert flash into iphone OS code. Apple wants to forbid it, which is clearly illegal if you ask me.
"Clearly illegal"???
Then you should have no problem citing the specific statute which Apple is violating and the case law which supports your allegation that setting standards for developers is illegal.
I'll be waiting for the details. Oh, and 'antitrust' is not a statute. Be specific - or stop with the trolling.
Comments
Mmm... I guess, then, the answer is for Apple to expand XCode, Cocoa and the SDK to allow iPhone developers to write apps for Android.
Lets see... these Apple tools only run on Macs... shouldn't Apple be forced to implement the tools on Windows, Linux, etc.?
.
I don't think that has anything to do with the current situation. Apple has no market power there.
Does any company spend more than the minimum resources possible porting to OS X?
Which OS X ported products are superior to their original Windows versions?
There have been times that I have preferred Office for Mac over Windows. MS these days seems to generally try to keep the Mac version up to spec..in some case with unique to the Mac features. Given the history between MS and Apple, that is saying a lot.
Sometime a little extra effort over the minimum can have big payoffs.
I wish you'd stop publicizing Adobe FUD.
There IS no full version of Flash for ANY mobile device. Even Flash 10.1 which may come out this summer if Adobe ever manages to hit a target, requires an 800 MHz A8 processor - so it will not run on any phone with the iPhone's specs.
I don't know how Apple can be said to have banned something that doesn't exist.
They did, however, say that Flash is a lousy technology for mobile devices - and the fact that no one else has it today confirms that.
This rumor is nonsense. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the mobile phone space or even the smart phone market, so DOJ has nothing to say about it. FTC does not have regulatory authority to control how a vendor works with application developers, either.
I think someone was listening to the Adobe shill-trolls in this group.
Again, more people talking about what they don't understand. You can build iphone apps with adobe's CS5 version of flash which will run as iphone apps, natively, and on current iphone hardware. Flash PLAYER has nothing to do with the native applications. That's merely a plugin for the browser (in this case mobile safari) and is completely irrelevant to the authors point.
For what it's worth as of 01/2010 Apple controlled 99.4% of the market in question.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...es-in-2009.ars
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
I just downloaded the flash cs5 trial from adobe.com, got a simple animation with critters running around. So I compiled it to the iPhone, it does not go through XCode but creates object files, assembly files during build time. It does create ARM code.
I then copied the app and ran it to my iPhone and boy it was laggy. I rebooted and still was laggy around 10fps and stops for a few milliseconds in between. I launched Instruments to test CPU and app analysis. To my observation, there are way way too many libSystem.dylib calls just to draw one frame.
As an iPhone developer, I never seen something so highly unoptimized even if is AOT compiled in arm.
Also, the actual Flash IDE app is not well written. I have Geektool running polling for system.log and running Flash CS5 gives me tons of NSAutoreleasePool warnings every second. NSAutoreleasepool manages object memory/garbage collection and prevents memory leak. Now I know why adobe apps crashes upon quit!
Can I get a copy of the source-- it's been a long time since I coded any Flash. I'd like to see this for myself. I am an iPhone developer and have every version of the iPhone and iPad.
TIA, Dick Applebaum.
.
That's a hard sell to make in court because Apple utilizes ISO standard C languages which means your code in fact could be used elsewhere so long as the code isn't accessing Apple only API.
In fact Apple does NOT have the dominant platform also factors in. They're are chasing RIM like everyone else and RIM will support Flash.
I'm not saying it's not a raw deal for developers but Apple's rules are akin to what developers programming for the Playstation or the Wii do. In fact Sony said all games must be 3D for the Playstation 3 (if you wish to be approved easily). There goes the market the many 2D sidescrollers and more. But it's their platform and their right to tailor how they see fit seeing as how if consumers don't like it there's the Xbox and Wii.
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Just because you don't like the taste, doesn't make it FUD and doesn't mean it isn't true. Apple is quite clear that they do not allow, i.e. ban, flash on the iPhone platform. How is it FUD to state what even Steve says is true? It is a simple fact that Apple does not allow Flash, mobile or otherwise, on the iPhone and they have clearly spelt out their reasons, most of which are quite valid.
Defending Apple works best when it is informed and not a knee-jerk.
Anyhoo, back to reality, this investigation has little chance of going anywhere unless the gov is willing to narrowly define the market in question as the iPhone OS platform.
Most of the posters on here don't even understand the word FUD.
Most of the posters on here don't even understand the word FUD.
Or the acronym
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
True, and though they're #1 in sales dollars, in the long run Android devices will overtake them especially if they continue down the path they're going.
So why doesn't Apple just take this approach? Yes, I understand they will take a ton of flack over this, in that, many folks will not see that is Flash causing the problem, and they will go into the Apple store, email or call Apple tech support only to find, they screwed up, and the NEW Battery is coming out of their pocket - if of course Apple can proof that have and run applications using Flash.
Now they / Apple could put down the gloves long enough to get Adobe to see the error of it's ways, but that's not going to put money in their pocket like Flash will.
But on another note, does the government have the right to say, what a company can and can't allow on their systems? If Apple can proof that it's a bad thing having and using Flash, how could the government possible see this though?
I don't know ?
Skip
I can't believe after all of this there are still people that don't understand the difference between supporting Flash in a web browser and allowing the Adobe Flash IDE to export native iPhone applications.
The distinction is irrelevant in this context.
Apple's experience (Based on decades of experience) is that cross-compiled applications are, in general, junk and they have no desire to support junk on their platform.
Now, they can simply reject cross-compiling which produces 99.9% junk applications and risk losing the 0.1% of cross-compiled apps that might be any good, or they can evaluate each app individually. Aside from the immensely greater expense of the latter, the whiners would then complain that their rules aren't clear and too many apps are being rejected.
Without expressing any opinion on the ultimate merits of any specific charges, the relevant market seems to be the telephone app market. The anticompetative action would be the dominant player specifying that any apps it sells cannot be manufactured in a manner which would allow any competing store to sell it for other devices.
For what it's worth as of 01/2010 Apple controlled 99.4% of the market in question.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...es-in-2009.ars)
Let's say that your data is correct (I'm very skeptical, but I'll accept it for the sake of argument0.
Android fans claim that there are 40,000 apps for Android and there are 180,000 apps for iPhone. So 180,000 apps exist to obtain 99.4% of the market, yet 40,000 apps have been created for the remaining 0.6% (actually less because Android does not have ALL of the non-iPhone market). So Android apps are far, far more prevalent than their market share would predict, and therefore they are not being artificially hindered. Your argument just disappeared.
Can I get a copy of the source-- it's been a long time since I coded any Flash. I'd like to see this for myself. I am an iPhone developer and have every version of the iPhone and iPad.
TIA, Dick Applebaum.
.
He shouldn't need to reboot his phone for an app... ever... and i've seen people write quality apps for iphone which were animated. My expectation is you can write crappy apps or you can write good apps and largely it depends on if you know what you're doing... this is much the same as is the case with objective c as it's fairly easy to get a crashy app with lots of memory leaking if you're naive about what you're doing.
Innovate.
I mean, as a tech company, isn't the purpose to push boundaries and find new and better ways of doing things? Even M$ seem to have realised that you shouldn't diss people who are better than you, you should admire them and use it as inspiration to do better yourself.
Come on Adobe, up your game.
The app store isn't a free market. Apple owns it and if developers don't want to leverage the unique parts of the platform they can choose not to make software. Simple as that.
If a dominant player institutes rules which cause developers to choose not to make software, then the dominant player has acted in an anticompetative manner. If they have no monopoly power in the relevant market, all is OK.
But when they use thier monopoly power in telephone apps to stifle competition in the handset market, regulators perk up.
Capitalism works best with competition.
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
There are a number of cross-platform tools for the mobile platform. Apple just blocked them... I gather that is what the inquiry is about!
In any case a quick Google search (grain of salt) tells me Apple control >99% of the application revenue in the mobile market space.
They are essentially using this dominance (does >99% constitute a monopoly??) to tell developers that if they write an application for the iPhone it can't run on another OS.
The main difference being that Apple have way more control of the mobile market then Microsoft have over the desktop market.
Apple sells 99% of all mobile apps. The other carriers who have mobile stores (other than the Android store) have absolute shit. The Apple store was the first app store and had 100% of mobile app sales for awhile. The only people buying them had iPhones. Apple was not doing anything to keep people from selling apps thru different phones and they still aren't.
Not free if you have to buy a Mac. Apple is happy to sell a Windows user an iPhone but prohibits them from writing applications for it without first purchasing a Mac. Just pointing out that small detail. I couldn't care less about Windows users, but it is a little hypocritical. Maybe Apple should release a Windows version of Xcode.
If you jailbreak an iPhone you can code on it and run your testing as well. Same for an iPad I suppose. You would have needed to buy an iPhone/iPad for testing purposes anyway, so $100 for a low end iPhone and another $100 for the yearly dev cost. A Mac Mini can be had for $600 (or less for older models) if you wanted to go that route.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Last I saw RIM has 41% of the market and Apple has 25.4%, putting them in 2nd place. That may have been US only figures tho.
While you raise good points, I think that if any company had as big a slice of the game market as Apple has of the telephone app market, they too might be the subject of an inquiry.
While the Apple platform comprises a tiny, tiny slice of the worldwide phone market, the app store has a much bigger piece of the telephone application market.
I'd be surprised if that was not the subject of the inquiry. Apple is NOT dominant in the cellphone market. They are not even in the top 5.
Apps are not universal. So app market for iPhone and app market for Android (any other mobileOS) MAY NOT BE treated as the same market for legal purposes.
Or the acronym
*sips coffee*
It's too early on a monday for this thread. Back to work I go. I stand corrected.
Looks like 80% of the people responding did NOT understand AT ALL what this is all about. Its not about flash support, its about tools to convert flash into iphone OS code. Apple wants to forbid it, which is clearly illegal if you ask me.
"Clearly illegal"???
Then you should have no problem citing the specific statute which Apple is violating and the case law which supports your allegation that setting standards for developers is illegal.
I'll be waiting for the details. Oh, and 'antitrust' is not a statute. Be specific - or stop with the trolling.