Quote:Original post by ukdeveloper I don't have an issue with Apple charging for the SDK/developers' programme, simply because it only encourages the serious and the capable. Same goes for the XNA Creators Club on the Xbox 360.
If you've got an unrestricted development platform, alongside an unrestricted sales/delivery platform, then you're going to invariably end up with swathes of half baked rubbish; annoying at best, dangerous at worst - what if someone's app bricks your phone or steals your data?
The difference between Apple and Microsoft here is that with Microsoft, you can develop without paying and only pay when you want to release. With Apple, you must pay to even develop.
I don't mind paying to release on a platforms "official" channel - it makes sense. However, I prefer if the platform provides an unofficial channel - and that I don't need to pay to try out the technology before building a serious piece of work in it.
Not entirely true as I have said before. You can use the iPhone simulator for free to test your work. You only need to pay when you want to deploy it on your device for final testing.
Admittedly it would be somewhat silly to wait until you have finished your app before testing it on the actual hardware but for simply playing around and testing things out the simulator should suffice.
As our prof once mentioned, the simulator can not mimic some functionality of the iPhone such as GPS capability or some motion. For apps like those, a price may actually be put on debugging.
Quote:Original post by ukdeveloper I don't have an issue with Apple charging for the SDK/developers' programme, simply because it only encourages the serious and the capable. Same goes for the XNA Creators Club on the Xbox 360.
The difference between Apple and Microsoft here is that with Microsoft, you can develop without paying and only pay when you want to release. With Apple, you must pay to even develop.
Well, yes and no; you can develop your XNA game on the PC for free of course, however even if you want to run it on your local XBox you need to hand over your cash for a Creators Club membership before you can do so.
Quote:Original post by zyrolasting As our prof once mentioned, the simulator can not mimic some functionality of the iPhone such as GPS capability or some motion. For apps like those, a price may actually be put on debugging.
The same is true of Android devices I believe. I don't think you can hold up Apple as being 'evil' without also criticising other companies doing the same thing.
Quote:
The same is true of Android devices I believe. I don't think you can hold up Apple as being 'evil' without also criticising other companies doing the same thing.
Again, I'm not that much of a hardass. I don't EVER truly follow the notion of X being 'better' than Y in such an abstract trade. I just do not see many occasions where I need to invest time or fork out money for something when 'free' (in both senses of the word) alternatives exist. The speaker that came into class told us that Apple works to empower us as individuals. Looking at what they need us to do in order to write code that implicitly supports them... I just... God, I can't think of a nice way to put it. Bottom line is, I see development in any form as more spontaneous and free than how I see Apple treat it.
Quote:
I don't have an issue with Apple charging for the SDK/developers' programme, simply because it only encourages the serious and the capable
Makes sense, but I think that's a little too optimistic. I always went on the notion that the serious and the capable can do whatever they wish, and they need no encouragement.
Okay man, I somewhat understand your frustation, but in a time when many CS universities have turned into java schools, you seriously expected that an Apple-funded program about iPhone dev was to be centered around *learning*? It doesn't take much thought to figure out that this program is part of the marketing department, not R&D! You got the stipend, as you said, you got a piece of paper that says you completed the program, whatever that may worth, move on. Don't tell me you enrolled because you expected to learn...with as many emulators and documentation on the internet as you like, you could do it on your own.
It's just the corporate world dude, with their horrible cliches, nonsensical slogans and buzzwords, but what can you do. Those stuff seem to work, so we just tolerate the stupidness, or get out :)
Let's not forget that Blackberry is 200 a year and the MSDN subscription to MS is a Minimum of 2k per year.
Objective C does lack some extensibility that MS has, but then again if you don't like it, make an add in.
All seminars from programming companies are always dumbed down. MS does the same thing because there will always be 10% of them experts, but most will be newbies sent by a company. So if they get all tricky with the code, half the group will be lost and the instructor will spend hours explaining things that are fundamental at best.
Apple is cheap. Programming is much simpler, less compiler headaches. It's just a better experience all round. Although I would kill to be able to write iPhone apps in .net's IDE.
Basically this rant doesn't make any sense. Other than google, no one gets to program for free.
Quote:Original post by nick5454 MSDN subscription to MS is a Minimum of 2k per year.
Wait, what?
XNA Creators Club is $99. MSDN membership ISNT required for software develop. VS Express is free. VS Express, as used by XNA, is free.
You can also get MSDN membership for much less than 2k/year, I had once which set me back around £800 for a year (and that gave me access to all the OSes (and mulitple keys) and upto professional versions of the various Visual Studio versions).
So, yeah, you might want to check your facts there.
Quote:
Programming is much simpler, less compiler headaches. It's just a better experience all round.
At the cost of freedoms like publishing an application without council approval, or publishing data where you please or how you please. We heard a story in class of a person getting their app denied because of button placement.
I agree completely with what the OP is saying, especially considering Apple. I look at it this way, if I want to make an app for a Windows OS, or Linux, I dont have to pay a cent, if I want to learn Python, c++, java, its all free my only limits are my brains & effort.
With apple it is trying to turn the free market that is software development - where developers decide which are the "best" & most suitable langauages, platforms etc to create an App with 'x' requirements - into some sort of "state run dictatoriship" but in this case "company run dictatorship", if developers cant decide what format to do something in (refering to Apples non support for Flash) or the market auotmatically shuts out some developers(because of the need for a "licence" pfiff) then the standard & development of software on their platform will suffer & we will have applications made with the main objective being an aim for compatibility with an I-whaterva than an application where the main focus is solving the problem is was designed to do, efficient data handling, or anything avante-garde.
Its like they are capping the potential of software developers with their "rules" which are just aimed at increasing market dominance. Google can achieve market dominance through much more sophisticated methods & actually doing the opposite of "tieing the hands of developers". And the result is many software developments that may not be as economically successful as Apple's but are far more useful, evolutionary & avante-garde, ie, Google maps, word suggest, chrome, etc.
