KVR Audio

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:06 am

bmanic wrote:That is really funked up! Have you sent apple an email demanding a refund? I've heard people successfully doing this when apps refuse to work/get too bloated after an update.

Surely that must be illegal. I hope those developers go bust.

I thought about it but for just over a pound it didn't seem worth it. I doubt it is illegal even if it should probably be - they seem to have been able to get away with it quite openly. However I do think that if Apple want to ensure this iAd doesn't alienate iPhone users, that they should make damn sure this sort of thing is not allowed to happen again, which was my main point really.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 9:33 am

whyterabbyt wrote:
UltraJv wrote:Another interesting move :

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/09 ... dk_change/
That's almost certainly aimed directly at Adobe, but if it affects Titanium, then it possibly effects Unity et.c. as well.

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphon ... h_compiler

apparently it's propably to do with multitasking
http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles ... #13082-1-0

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 11:14 am

spaceman wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote:
UltraJv wrote:Another interesting move :

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/09 ... dk_change/
That's almost certainly aimed directly at Adobe, but if it affects Titanium, then it possibly effects Unity et.c. as well.

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphon ... h_compiler
apparently it's propably to do with multitasking
http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles ... #13082-1-0

Ive gotta say that's the most bullshit attempt at a rationale yet. Nothing prevents code generated from a third-party toolchain from properly using the multitasking environment of the OS. The new conditions, however, dont ban apps that dont use the multitasking API properly, they ban apps built in a third-party toolchain. Full stop.

Remember; there's three iPhone generations worth of apps (how may tens of thousands do apple say it is?) which dont utilise any of the new multitasking stuff at all. Are they all retrospectively banned from v4 of the OS?

Here's the fallacy it hinges on:

The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

By the time the application has been installed on the iPhone, its 'structure' is that of something which has been compiled to ARM code. Nothing prevents any other toolchain from building the same 'structures' (whatever those supposedly are), at the compilation stage. The toolchain Apple use is based on the GPLd GCC compilers for f**ks sake.
Its handwaving bullshit, pure and simple. The objective is control over the hardware and software iPhone developers have to buy.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:55 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:
Its handwaving bullshit, pure and simple. The objective is control over the hardware and software iPhone developers have to buy.

well yes, that's never been a secret, hasn't it?

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:36 am

To blow some live in this..

Why is Google so keen on buying AdMob, even after they already 'snatched' them away from Apple?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/12/admob_iad/

Apple reveals iPhone OS 4 with iAd. Great revenue for developers!