What would an average user would want to create that needs to be an app? Digital greeting cards?
Maybe it's more along the lines of Automator or Applescript, for end users or enterprises to create custom use apps. Doesn't Android have an Automator-like app that they're testing now?
Easier to use tools will allow people to develop that previously could not, due to the difficulty of Objective-C/Xcode.
And often tools make programming easier by hiding detail. And the more detail hidden away, the more general the code generated. And the more general the code, the less domain specific knowledge it can leverage for any one particular app. Less efficient apps = more CPU wastage, more memory used, less battery life, worse for the environment, lower opinion of the device overall by customers.
Nice one Apple! Don't you care about the overall quality of your products? Or the trees!?
There is, of course, another way of looking at it. Environments that generalize away the "boilerplate" allow developers to focus on the innovative aspects of their apps, leading to an expansion of new ideas and environments.
Quite the U-turn, isn't it? No consistency whatsoever -- except in the determination to stay on top.
Is this a U-turn or the natural progression of an maturing platform. Apple started with no SDK and released on about 9 months later with the App Store going live a year after the original iPhone launched. Would it have been better to release a poor option to devs like Palm did with the first WebOS SDK or does it make sense for Apple, devs and consumers to build out in a controlled and sensible fashion?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh
The Federal Trade Commission probably called Jobs and told him he was going to jail if he didn't stop trying to rule the world.
There is, of course, another way of looking at it. Environments that generalize away the "boilerplate" allow developers to focus on the innovative aspects of their apps, leading to an expansion of new ideas and environments.
That is the role of the OS. When app-level entities try to usurp that role they cause the kinds of problems Steve Jobs mentioned in his Thoughts on Flash.
Phillip Shoemaker, director of applications technology at Apple and the man who runs the App Store, has a side business called Gray Noodle. Gray Noodle is responsible for quality iPhone apps like Animal Farts, a urination simulator called iWiz
it doesn't take 3rd party tools to make lousy apps. it doesn't even take 3rd party PEOPLE.
Phillip Shoemaker, director of applications technology at Apple and the man who runs the App Store, has a side business called Gray Noodle. Gray Noodle is responsible for quality iPhone apps like Animal Farts, a urination simulator called iWiz
it doesn't take 3rd party tools to make lousy apps. it doesn't even take 3rd party PEOPLE.
No, it's just much easier, is all he was saying. And he's right, of course.
Might be complete nonsense, but I wonder if this could have anything to do with the new mystery app in iLife 11 - some form of simple development tool for the average user to create an app which is then ported to iOS ready format - apple could hardly create a tool to let users do this and then stop other tools (such as flash) from doing the same. Just a though, might be rubbish.
Unlikely. Apple already has provisions that let them do things they don't allow 3rd parties to do (some uses of location services is one example).
The most likely reason for this change is that Apple stood a good chance of losing this battle with the FTC. Rather than Apple getting a reputation of needing to be "set straight" by regulators, which could then come back to bite them in future confrontations, Apple ended the fight before it started.
What a terrible thing to say. Competition is a very good thing. Unless you're a shareholder I guess.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
I agree with what you’re saying but as a general rule I say the simple answer bikertwin is also correct.
Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, there is no general rule. Sometimes it may even appear to be on the surface, but a deeper examination may reveal the negative. Sometimes it really is good.
What I object to is the thoughtless repetition of the sentiment that, "competition is [always] good," when, in fact, it's contrary to the facts, and a dangerous exercise in self-deception to proclaim, "All will be well, there is competition!"
Is this a U-turn or the natural progression of an maturing platform. Apple started with no SDK and released on about 9 months later with the App Store going live a year after the original iPhone launched. Would it have been better to release a poor option to devs like Palm did with the first WebOS SDK or does it make sense for Apple, devs and consumers to build out in a controlled and sensible fashion?
Adapt and prosper or lag and desist. On a pace, or in a race.
When you have the things, the timing, and the place worked out, things tend to naturally fall into place. A tautology for the winner, a curse for the whiner.
This is what is called "controlled development" in a competitive and unforgiving environment.
Might be complete nonsense, but I wonder if this could have anything to do with the new mystery app in iLife 11 - some form of simple development tool for the average user to create an app which is then ported to iOS ready format - apple could hardly create a tool to let users do this and then stop other tools (such as flash) from doing the same. Just a though, might be rubbish.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
So, all you are really saying, is that for a business, the owners or the shareholders, a lack of competition is good. That is sort of what he meant when he said "Unless you're a shareholder I guess". Obviously, for a business, or anyone involved in it, a lack of competition is good.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
Well,
a) Blackintosh is just here to troll, so no point in giving him any reinforcement.
b) I don't mean it's not good for Apple, or for myself, I mean that competition, like natural selection (a form of competition) is an essentially goalless force. Natural selection does not drive the evolution of species toward some perfect, "good" design, it merely results in some individuals, best adapted to their conditions of life, reproducing in greater numbers and dominating the future genome.
Likewise, competition in business does not necessarily result in the "best" companies being successful (unless you define "best" as successful), or in the "best" products succeeding in the marketplace, or even necessarily the "best" outcomes for consumers. It is merely a process wherein some companies succeed at the expense of others, but the effects of that success, in product quality, consumer benefit, or any other measure, are not necessarily good or bad, except perhaps for the successful and unsuccessful companies.
Comments
What would an average user would want to create that needs to be an app? Digital greeting cards?
Maybe it's more along the lines of Automator or Applescript, for end users or enterprises to create custom use apps. Doesn't Android have an Automator-like app that they're testing now?
You bet.
Quite the U-turn, isn't it? No consistency whatsoever -- except in the determination to stay on top.
Apple has ONLY one goal: Make as much money as possible. They will do anything to get there.
Easier to use tools will allow people to develop that previously could not, due to the difficulty of Objective-C/Xcode.
And often tools make programming easier by hiding detail. And the more detail hidden away, the more general the code generated. And the more general the code, the less domain specific knowledge it can leverage for any one particular app. Less efficient apps = more CPU wastage, more memory used, less battery life, worse for the environment, lower opinion of the device overall by customers.
Nice one Apple! Don't you care about the overall quality of your products? Or the trees!?
There is, of course, another way of looking at it. Environments that generalize away the "boilerplate" allow developers to focus on the innovative aspects of their apps, leading to an expansion of new ideas and environments.
Quite the U-turn, isn't it? No consistency whatsoever -- except in the determination to stay on top.
Is this a U-turn or the natural progression of an maturing platform. Apple started with no SDK and released on about 9 months later with the App Store going live a year after the original iPhone launched. Would it have been better to release a poor option to devs like Palm did with the first WebOS SDK or does it make sense for Apple, devs and consumers to build out in a controlled and sensible fashion?
The Federal Trade Commission probably called Jobs and told him he was going to jail if he didn't stop trying to rule the world.
At least your posts are consistent.
Get ready for all the apps written by retards!
Yes, iFart was a work of true genius.
There is, of course, another way of looking at it. Environments that generalize away the "boilerplate" allow developers to focus on the innovative aspects of their apps, leading to an expansion of new ideas and environments.
That is the role of the OS. When app-level entities try to usurp that role they cause the kinds of problems Steve Jobs mentioned in his Thoughts on Flash.
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
What a terrible thing to say. Competition is a very good thing. Unless you're a shareholder I guess.
No, competition can result in a race to the bottom, as has happened in the PC industry.
Yes, iFart was a work of true genius.
Phillip Shoemaker, director of applications technology at Apple and the man who runs the App Store, has a side business called Gray Noodle. Gray Noodle is responsible for quality iPhone apps like Animal Farts, a urination simulator called iWiz
it doesn't take 3rd party tools to make lousy apps. it doesn't even take 3rd party PEOPLE.
Phillip Shoemaker, director of applications technology at Apple and the man who runs the App Store, has a side business called Gray Noodle. Gray Noodle is responsible for quality iPhone apps like Animal Farts, a urination simulator called iWiz
it doesn't take 3rd party tools to make lousy apps. it doesn't even take 3rd party PEOPLE.
No, it's just much easier, is all he was saying. And he's right, of course.
No, it's just much easier, is all he was saying. And he's right, of course.
i agree, but it also allows quality developers to work in their "native" development tools.
Might be complete nonsense, but I wonder if this could have anything to do with the new mystery app in iLife 11 - some form of simple development tool for the average user to create an app which is then ported to iOS ready format - apple could hardly create a tool to let users do this and then stop other tools (such as flash) from doing the same. Just a though, might be rubbish.
Unlikely. Apple already has provisions that let them do things they don't allow 3rd parties to do (some uses of location services is one example).
The most likely reason for this change is that Apple stood a good chance of losing this battle with the FTC. Rather than Apple getting a reputation of needing to be "set straight" by regulators, which could then come back to bite them in future confrontations, Apple ended the fight before it started.
What a terrible thing to say. Competition is a very good thing. Unless you're a shareholder I guess.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
I agree with what you’re saying but as a general rule I say the simple answer bikertwin is also correct.
Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, there is no general rule. Sometimes it may even appear to be on the surface, but a deeper examination may reveal the negative. Sometimes it really is good.
What I object to is the thoughtless repetition of the sentiment that, "competition is [always] good," when, in fact, it's contrary to the facts, and a dangerous exercise in self-deception to proclaim, "All will be well, there is competition!"
Is this a U-turn or the natural progression of an maturing platform. Apple started with no SDK and released on about 9 months later with the App Store going live a year after the original iPhone launched. Would it have been better to release a poor option to devs like Palm did with the first WebOS SDK or does it make sense for Apple, devs and consumers to build out in a controlled and sensible fashion?
Adapt and prosper or lag and desist. On a pace, or in a race.
When you have the things, the timing, and the place worked out, things tend to naturally fall into place. A tautology for the winner, a curse for the whiner.
This is what is called "controlled development" in a competitive and unforgiving environment.
Might be complete nonsense, but I wonder if this could have anything to do with the new mystery app in iLife 11 - some form of simple development tool for the average user to create an app which is then ported to iOS ready format - apple could hardly create a tool to let users do this and then stop other tools (such as flash) from doing the same. Just a though, might be rubbish.
What mystery app?
First I've heard about that rumor!
iPad CoBOL? AlGol? Neat Linear Programming (and feed blending)? APL (need reverse italics)? CICS?
Seriously-- Asked an answered, Steve said he would welcome a HyperCard app on the iPad, If somebody would write one... Bill Atkinson writes iapps!
RunRev had/has a HyperCard-like app development tool that runs on a Mac or PC.
http://www.runrev.com/products/revmobile/overview/
.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
So, all you are really saying, is that for a business, the owners or the shareholders, a lack of competition is good. That is sort of what he meant when he said "Unless you're a shareholder I guess". Obviously, for a business, or anyone involved in it, a lack of competition is good.
September 9, 2010 will be remembered as the day when HELL FINALLY FROZE OVER...
Weird timing, huh? Two more days and "Houston, we have a PR problem" on our hands.
I say... awesome Apple, it's about time they woke up.
No it's not a terrible thing to say; it's accurate. So many folks always pipe in with "competition is good!" like some kind of a mantra. If I have a product to market, I want to dominate that market, not kindly split it down the middle with my competitors: I want them out of business. You may or may not benefit from that, and any assumption on the part of consumers is just that, an assumption.
With all due respect, dismissing the original poster as a shareholder is a dubious assertion: he/she might be a small business owner who knows better.
Well,
a) Blackintosh is just here to troll, so no point in giving him any reinforcement.
b) I don't mean it's not good for Apple, or for myself, I mean that competition, like natural selection (a form of competition) is an essentially goalless force. Natural selection does not drive the evolution of species toward some perfect, "good" design, it merely results in some individuals, best adapted to their conditions of life, reproducing in greater numbers and dominating the future genome.
Likewise, competition in business does not necessarily result in the "best" companies being successful (unless you define "best" as successful), or in the "best" products succeeding in the marketplace, or even necessarily the "best" outcomes for consumers. It is merely a process wherein some companies succeed at the expense of others, but the effects of that success, in product quality, consumer benefit, or any other measure, are not necessarily good or bad, except perhaps for the successful and unsuccessful companies.