A bit disingenuous to start your story off with a line that you "interviewed" Steve Jobs when in reality you asked a question at a stock holders meeting. An interview implies a face to face detailed conversation or at the very least a series of questions or something a little more intimate than asking a question over a mic far away in a crowded room.
I was wondering about that. In fact, I remember the another shareholder writing about DED's 'interview'. He was very annoyed that DED acted like a dick to get the microphone in order to ask a question that had very little to do with the shareholders' meeting.
I enjoy reading DED articles because he commands enormous historical facts. The facts that Android thieves want to hide so they want the world to believe Android is not a copycat of iOS.
For this article I like to add that the first iPhone is limited in its capacity. Thus initially Apple is not warm to third party development because too many apps on the first iPhone might degrade its performance. Old users will remember initially iOS will quit an app as soon as user hits the home button.
I was wondering about that. In fact, I remember the another shareholder writing about DED's 'interview'. He was very annoyed that DED acted like a dick to get the microphone in order to ask a question that had very little to do with the shareholders' meeting.
``Six years later, his answers are now haunting Google's rival Android platform because the search giant has failed to heed the advice leaking from the top of Apple's ship. ''
Something amiss in this statement:
``Six years later, his answers are now haunting Apple's rival [Google] Android platform because the search giant has failed to heed the advice leaking from the top of Apple's ship.
Yes they sure know who to copy although I still believe Eric was a mole feeding them info as he got it, albeit conceptual, I doubt directors had access to actual data. Had the iPhone never been released and Google had gone ahead to take on BB with their rip off, I wonder how history would have played out.
I would think systems such as Maemo (pre-MeeGo) could have had a better chance.
Compared to Android 1.6 or iOS 3 of the time, Maemo 5 had a lot to offer.
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Correct... the more successful devs can afford to develop for two or more platforms... maybe by hiring additional developers.
But what about a first time developer? Do they develop for both iOS and Android?
Probably not... it's been proven, time and time again, that the iOS App Store is where you'll have a better chance of success. And that's where they focus their efforts first.
We don't hear this very often: "Amazing Android app finally ported to iOS"
As for the popular apps... don't most of them get popular on iOS first... and then go to Android? And some apps never go to Android at all...
As for the popular apps... don't most of them get popular on iOS first... and then go to Android? And some apps never go to Android at all...
Popular Photography's app recommendation lists, for example, are always "iOS only, iOS only, iOS only, iOS and Android, iOS only..." Occasionally an "Android only", but they're the worst of the bunch.
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Apple has an App Store exclusives page up listing:
more than three dozen new releases
more than three dozen popular apps
more than three dozen popular games
So that's over 9 times the "dozen apps" you asked for. You could also go through the top iOS games yourself and note how many are on Android.
Thing is, the Android versions are also often lower quality, crashier, full of ads, and rarely updated. Few apps take any real advantage of new Android features, and many do not work on anything but a select number of devices. On top, app developers from Facebook to Samsung take advantage of the non-security of Android to collect far more data and monitor the apps you install and launch and the people you call.
So yes, there's a vast difference. Also the fact that Apple pays out twice as much to developers than everyone else combined.
I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.
Jeez, I didn't see any whining in the opinion piece. It was a good article with just the right amount of gloating and self-satisfied "told-you-so" stirred in.
I expect some more of the same next week and look forward to it.
So yes, there's a vast difference. Also the fact that Apple pays out twice as much to developers than everyone else combined.
Apple may pay out way more to developers then all the other platforms combined, but Microsoft will throw money at you if you even look like you might write a shitty app for their pathetic platform.
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Uh, no. Smart developers develop for iOS first, then Android second (if at all). Large companies (like Facebook or major banks) have to develop for all platforms as their success depends on it. The rest of the developers who have to make a choice will pick iOS. This is still true despite that whiny little Eric Schmidt predicting that developers would shift to Android because of market share (it's been 19 months Eric, why hasn't it happened yet?).
List a dozen? Didn't you try this pathetic argument some time ago?
Popular Photography's app recommendation lists, for example, are always "iOS only, iOS only, iOS only, iOS and Android, iOS only..." Occasionally an "Android only", but they're the worst of the bunch.
Apple device owners tend to do more mobile web browsing, as has been widely known for awhile. But they're also increasingly likely to stay with apps over time – reports have shown that iOS users are more loyal to the apps they download, for instance.
But perhaps most importantly is the fact that some number of Android owners aren't downloading mobile applications at all. Google tacitly acknowledged this fact earlier this month, when it made a change to the way it measures Android version adoption on its Developers site. The company explained that, going forward, it would only show data reflecting those devices that had visited the Google Play Store.
Or in other words, there are enough Android devices out there which are not visiting the Google Play Store to affect the data that developers most care about – people who might download their apps.
In short... even though there are more Android users out there... iOS users tend to engage with their phone more... and download, use and pay for more apps.
No wonder why iOS tends to be where apps begin their life.
If this journalist could get an interview with Steve Jobs, surely he could spend the time looking into future Apple products. Maybe he can try to dig up some details about the A7, or possibly unannounced OS features. You know, the news that actually matters.
You either need a dictionary, or need to develop basic reading comprehension. (I hope it's not the latter, unless you're still in middle school.)
What will DED say when hackers do find an exploitable flaw in iOS? All major DRM systems on every every platform have been broken so far, even those with many many layers of defense-in-depth. Will he say that Apple took shortcuts? Charlie Miller along found 20 OSX 0-day attacks. Is that the famous Apple build quality? Shipping a desktop OS with 20 security holes?
The reality is, all complex software systems have exploitable holes, it is impossible to create a 100% secure system. The idea that Google didn't put any thought into security is ludicrous, if DED actually knew anything about computer software and knew how the Android APK exploit worked, he'd see it isn't a flaw in the architecture, but a flaw in the implementation, the signature check code. So regardless of whether Android had a central Certificate Authority model, or a self-signed model, the exploit would still be there.
There have been flaws in widely used crypto/SSL libraries used by hundreds and thousands of applications, like OpenSSL and GnuTLS. This happens all the time, and many European blackhat hackers have made a business out of selling such exploits to nation states and other blackhats. Android's exploit was found in part because the source code is available.
I love how DED also tries to insinuate that Apple invented the concept of a "web app", a concept which goes all the way back to Active Desktop on Windows and Netscape Desktop. DED has a command of the historical facts already - a command of cherry picking information which conveniently leaves out the whole story, in order to fit a childish hero-worshipping narrative about Apple.
There was nothing technologically innovative about the App Store, the concept of downloadable and installable apps, digitally signed apps, sandboxed apps, apps for money, and on and on, all predated iOS by a decade. Paid J2ME apps on feature phones hit 1 billion installs before 2007. Ryoichi Mori patented SuperDistribution in 1983 which used DRM signing for encrypted app distribution.
Alot of the work, both academic and proof of implementation, was done by companies like Sun Microsystems or General Magic way before, ironically, General Magic was started by ex-Apple employees and Apple ended up suing them and shipping the Newton. The basic architecture since then, has been the same. Sandbox plus signatures for verification.
But this is the problem with zealots -- taking what is a common occurrence in the software industry, people finding exploits because of bugs, and turn it into a one side story complete with lots of bullshit assumptions.
I don't think he interviewed Steve. He asked a question at the shareholder meeting mentioned later in the article. If that was it, that's no interview for the record.
That's how I read it too.
Perhaps there is some hyperbole, but clearly his larger points make a great deal of sense. Also, as someone else mentioned, his sense of Apple history is superb.
That said, he could tone it down a notch, and it would all be more effective.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Why Android doesn't have great apps
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
A bit disingenuous to start your story off with a line that you "interviewed" Steve Jobs when in reality you asked a question at a stock holders meeting. An interview implies a face to face detailed conversation or at the very least a series of questions or something a little more intimate than asking a question over a mic far away in a crowded room.
I was wondering about that. In fact, I remember the another shareholder writing about DED's 'interview'. He was very annoyed that DED acted like a dick to get the microphone in order to ask a question that had very little to do with the shareholders' meeting.
I enjoy reading DED articles because he commands enormous historical facts. The facts that Android thieves want to hide so they want the world to believe Android is not a copycat of iOS.
For this article I like to add that the first iPhone is limited in its capacity. Thus initially Apple is not warm to third party development because too many apps on the first iPhone might degrade its performance. Old users will remember initially iOS will quit an app as soon as user hits the home button.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
I was wondering about that. In fact, I remember the another shareholder writing about DED's 'interview'. He was very annoyed that DED acted like a dick to get the microphone in order to ask a question that had very little to do with the shareholders' meeting.
URL?
Something amiss in this statement:
``Six years later, his answers are now haunting Apple's rival [Google] Android platform because the search giant has failed to heed the advice leaking from the top of Apple's ship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Yes they sure know who to copy although I still believe Eric was a mole feeding them info as he got it, albeit conceptual, I doubt directors had access to actual data. Had the iPhone never been released and Google had gone ahead to take on BB with their rip off, I wonder how history would have played out.
I would think systems such as Maemo (pre-MeeGo) could have had a better chance.
Compared to Android 1.6 or iOS 3 of the time, Maemo 5 had a lot to offer.
It was a very capable OS (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMXvsTbbYDo)
Sorry for going off topic, on with the show!
Quote:
Originally Posted by iOSx
Can we get more Apple news, and less Android hate?
No one is forcing you to read it.
Correct... the more successful devs can afford to develop for two or more platforms... maybe by hiring additional developers.
But what about a first time developer? Do they develop for both iOS and Android?
Probably not... it's been proven, time and time again, that the iOS App Store is where you'll have a better chance of success. And that's where they focus their efforts first.
We don't hear this very often: "Amazing Android app finally ported to iOS"
As for the popular apps... don't most of them get popular on iOS first... and then go to Android? And some apps never go to Android at all...
Popular Photography's app recommendation lists, for example, are always "iOS only, iOS only, iOS only, iOS and Android, iOS only..." Occasionally an "Android only", but they're the worst of the bunch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Apple has an App Store exclusives page up listing:
more than three dozen new releases
more than three dozen popular apps
more than three dozen popular games
So that's over 9 times the "dozen apps" you asked for. You could also go through the top iOS games yourself and note how many are on Android.
Thing is, the Android versions are also often lower quality, crashier, full of ads, and rarely updated. Few apps take any real advantage of new Android features, and many do not work on anything but a select number of devices. On top, app developers from Facebook to Samsung take advantage of the non-security of Android to collect far more data and monitor the apps you install and launch and the people you call.
So yes, there's a vast difference. Also the fact that Apple pays out twice as much to developers than everyone else combined.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phone-UI-Guy
I'm not saying that. The information about Google and Android is fine. My issue is with the tone in which he writes. It is very negative and wears on me at least. Hard to make even half way through this one. The information is great. The underlying message "Google takes shortcuts because building a quality and secure OS is not its priority" is also fine. You can make a point and cite facts without sounding like you are whining about it.
Jeez, I didn't see any whining in the opinion piece. It was a good article with just the right amount of gloating and self-satisfied "told-you-so" stirred in.
I expect some more of the same next week and look forward to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Apple has an App Store exclusives page up listing:
more than three dozen new releases
more than three dozen popular apps
more than three dozen popular games
So that's over 9 times the "dozen apps" you asked for. You could also go through the top iOS games yourself and note how many are on Android.
Both platforms have a lot of "exclusives", but how many are in the top 100?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections
So yes, there's a vast difference. Also the fact that Apple pays out twice as much to developers than everyone else combined.
Apple may pay out way more to developers then all the other platforms combined, but Microsoft will throw money at you if you even look like you might write a shitty app for their pathetic platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
This "platform war" meme is for phone makers and fans, but the more successful devs don't generally buy into it, simply developing for both.
How many of these popular iOS apps aren't available for Android? Can you list even a dozen from the top 100 iOS apps that aren't also in Google Play?
Uh, no. Smart developers develop for iOS first, then Android second (if at all). Large companies (like Facebook or major banks) have to develop for all platforms as their success depends on it. The rest of the developers who have to make a choice will pick iOS. This is still true despite that whiny little Eric Schmidt predicting that developers would shift to Android because of market share (it's been 19 months Eric, why hasn't it happened yet?).
List a dozen? Didn't you try this pathetic argument some time ago?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez
Both platforms have a lot of "exclusives", but how many are in the top 100?
Umm... the only exclusive Android apps I could find were malware, and they were VERY popular. Probably filled the whole top 100 slots.
Thanks
I found another interesting article here: http://www.tuaw.com/2013/04/19/why-companies-are-still-deploying-ios-apps-first/
But perhaps most importantly is the fact that some number of Android owners aren't downloading mobile applications at all. Google tacitly acknowledged this fact earlier this month, when it made a change to the way it measures Android version adoption on its Developers site. The company explained that, going forward, it would only show data reflecting those devices that had visited the Google Play Store.
Or in other words, there are enough Android devices out there which are not visiting the Google Play Store to affect the data that developers most care about – people who might download their apps.
In short... even though there are more Android users out there... iOS users tend to engage with their phone more... and download, use and pay for more apps.
No wonder why iOS tends to be where apps begin their life.
You either need a dictionary, or need to develop basic reading comprehension. (I hope it's not the latter, unless you're still in middle school.)
Hint: It says 'editorial'. Not 'news.'
What will DED say when hackers do find an exploitable flaw in iOS? All major DRM systems on every every platform have been broken so far, even those with many many layers of defense-in-depth. Will he say that Apple took shortcuts? Charlie Miller along found 20 OSX 0-day attacks. Is that the famous Apple build quality? Shipping a desktop OS with 20 security holes?
The reality is, all complex software systems have exploitable holes, it is impossible to create a 100% secure system. The idea that Google didn't put any thought into security is ludicrous, if DED actually knew anything about computer software and knew how the Android APK exploit worked, he'd see it isn't a flaw in the architecture, but a flaw in the implementation, the signature check code. So regardless of whether Android had a central Certificate Authority model, or a self-signed model, the exploit would still be there.
There have been flaws in widely used crypto/SSL libraries used by hundreds and thousands of applications, like OpenSSL and GnuTLS. This happens all the time, and many European blackhat hackers have made a business out of selling such exploits to nation states and other blackhats. Android's exploit was found in part because the source code is available.
I love how DED also tries to insinuate that Apple invented the concept of a "web app", a concept which goes all the way back to Active Desktop on Windows and Netscape Desktop. DED has a command of the historical facts already - a command of cherry picking information which conveniently leaves out the whole story, in order to fit a childish hero-worshipping narrative about Apple.
There was nothing technologically innovative about the App Store, the concept of downloadable and installable apps, digitally signed apps, sandboxed apps, apps for money, and on and on, all predated iOS by a decade. Paid J2ME apps on feature phones hit 1 billion installs before 2007. Ryoichi Mori patented SuperDistribution in 1983 which used DRM signing for encrypted app distribution.
Alot of the work, both academic and proof of implementation, was done by companies like Sun Microsystems or General Magic way before, ironically, General Magic was started by ex-Apple employees and Apple ended up suing them and shipping the Newton. The basic architecture since then, has been the same. Sandbox plus signatures for verification.
But this is the problem with zealots -- taking what is a common occurrence in the software industry, people finding exploits because of bugs, and turn it into a one side story complete with lots of bullshit assumptions.
Anyway, here you go: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/11/safari-charlie-discovers-security-flaw-in-ios-gets-booted-from-dev-program/
Proof of lazy Apple not caring about build quality and shipping unfinished, buggy code?
DED is possibly the worst Apple beat writer I've ever seen.
Perhaps there is some hyperbole, but clearly his larger points make a great deal of sense. Also, as someone else mentioned, his sense of Apple history is superb.
That said, he could tone it down a notch, and it would all be more effective.
Have they?
Perhaps you should wait until they do, instead of speculating.