KVR Audio

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:22 am

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/12/gruber ... -it-video/

Reverse Engineer · Post by **Reverse Engineer** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:57 am

apple was right about what?

anyway, section 3.3.1 doesn't only affect flash developers. basically, it's akin to microsoft saying synthmaker/synthedit (or any other development platform they care to single out,) effects and synths should be banned from running on windows...just because. some may think this a good thing, others aren't so simple minded.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:06 pm

Gruber wrote:"I think that they're right to disallow platforms, cross-platform, meta-platforms, to be built on top of the native iPhone touch and the app store."

Just so that we're clear; what's barred is basically any application not directly developed in C++, Objective-C, C, or Javascript via the Webkit.

That includes all applications built by any other toolchain than Apple's, whether it targets a virtual machine, generates native code, or generates fully working, properly compilable code in C++, Objective C++ or Javascript that can then be used in XCode. The latter underlines the fact that the multitasking-compatibility argument is bullshit.

It's almost literally as if Microsoft turned round and barred everyone from making software for the PC which wasn't compiled directly from their C++ or C# compiler. It's that much an abuse of monopoly.

Here's the most insightful article Ive come across:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/ ... ndroid.ars

By targetting crossplatform and middleware tiers, Apple are trying to prevent developers from building their applications for the iPhone alongside other platforms. They want developers to have no choice; iPhone-only or not at all. They dont want people to have a choice of platform on which to run their apps, and they dont want developers to build for them and their competition. They're trying hard to build the kind of monopoly even Microsoft wouldn't have dared to; they're trying to lock out developers who wont build only for them.

Note that this thing about 'middleware makes crap apps' is about as bogus as it gets. Apple havent cared about crap apps until now. The apps store wasbuilt on crap fart apps and trivial bollocks in the first place, and the app review process didnt have objections because app quality isnt an issue when you want to talk about the large number of apps you offer. Its only an issue when you want to lock out developers who might build for some other platform as well.
Remember, the thing that makes an application substandard is the framework its written in. If its not C++, Objective-C, or Javascript, then it'll be 'substandard'. Even compared to fart apps.

Steve Jobs wrote:intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform

What is it that Quartz Composer does again?

And only 2 and a half years since Apple said they werent going to release an SDK to begin with, since delivering apps via the web was sufficient?

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2007/ ... future.ars

The more it goes on, the less justifiable this seems. Not only do Apple not want you developing on someone else's toolchain, they want to restrict you from being able to develop an app for the iPhone and other platforms

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:13 pm

Please edit title to 'Apple remove your rights, iPhone developers get over it"

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:20 pm

Here's what seems to be the core of the 'Apple are right' argument from that page:

"Imagine if Flash was allowed to do this and a year from now let's say 10% of the apps in the app store are going through Flash rather than writing specifically through x-code to the native SDK and Apple wants to do something with iPhone OS 5 a year from now that isn't compatible with the output right now of Adobe Flash CS5. Well all of a sudden 10% of the apps in the app store can't be updated to the latest version until Adobe updates their developer tools."

Here it is with perspective restored:

"Imagine if Flash was allowed to do this and a year from now let's say 10% of the apps in the app store are going through Flash rather than writing specifically through x-code to the native SDK and Apple wants to do something with iPhone OS 5 a year from now that isn't compatible with the output right now of Adobe Flash CS5. Well all of a sudden 10% of the apps in the app store can't be updated to the latest version until Adobe updates the output stage of their developer tools, although of course they'll still work on existing systems.
And the 90% of apps that aren't written in Flash may need to be rebuilt too, because there's nothing that can possibly guarantee that they wont be incompatible in some way too, if Apple are going to change the 'format' of whatever an application needs to be. They'll probably also have to be resubmitted to the App Store and the developer will have to wait for approval again. "

duncanparsons · Post by **duncanparsons** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:23 pm

I quite like the juxtaposition of spaceman's link, and his sig 'That would be an ecumenical matter'.. given the quasi-cult status of Apple Inc, it's kinda appropriate.

One even might add a 'Down with this sort of thing' with a '(Careful Now)' to round it off

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:32 pm

Forbidden middleware, which will result in sub-standard apps:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2892

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:43 pm

Middleware which creates 'substandard apps' so will not be allowed on iPhone:

http://www.macruby.org/

(Check the 'Contact' link for dashings of extra irony)

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:50 pm

duncanparsons wrote:I quite like the juxtaposition of spaceman's link, and his sig 'That would be an ecumenical matter'.. given the quasi-cult status of Apple Inc, it's kinda appropriate.

One even might add a 'Down with this sort of thing' with a '(Careful Now)' to round it off

The 'Down with this sort of thing' seems to be well catered for

1-2-Many · Post by **1-2-Many** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:00 pm

Apple always did seem to behave like a fascist organization

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:02 pm

Want more irony? Tap Tap Revenge is one of the apps Jobs demoed during the iPhone 4 keynote.

Its allegedly partially written in Lua and runs an interpreter.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1253371

sockofgold · Post by **sockofgold** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:03 pm

whyterabbyt wrote: It's almost literally as if Microsoft turned round and barred everyone from making software for the PC which wasn't compiled directly from their C++ or C# compiler. It's that much an abuse of monopoly.

Yes, but it's Apple doing it, so somehow people tend to think it's okay.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:04 pm

sockofgold wrote:
whyterabbyt wrote: It's almost literally as if Microsoft turned round and barred everyone from making software for the PC which wasn't compiled directly from their C++ or C# compiler. It's that much an abuse of monopoly.
Yes, but it's Apple doing it, so somehow people tend to think it's okay.

Indeed. The wonderful fallacy of 'Apple can do no wrong because Microsoft have done some'.

spaceman · Post by **spaceman** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:05 pm

whyterabbyt wrote: It's almost literally as if Microsoft turned round and barred everyone from making software for the PC which wasn't compiled directly from their C++ or C# compiler. It's that much an abuse of monopoly.

yes, but look what kind of crap is available for PC

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:14 pm

spaceman wrote:yes, but look what kind of crap is available for PC

Dunno, I'm not the one changing my DAW every fortnight like you and Theo. <cough>

Apple was right, Adobe get over it?