Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Can you point me to any smartphone or mobile device on sale today on which I can run Flash - not Flash Lite, but full Flash?

most Android phones can run flash 10.1...

Beta. Let's not try to get slick here; there is currently no shipping device for which a release version of full Flash exists. Period.

Quote: ...but I meant more about how they won't let Flash compile to iPhone runnable apps.

On the one hand I sympathize with your view that openness and freedom are important attributes of a platform. On the other hand it's Adobe, and the vast majority of the software they put out is demonstrably awful. Their user interfaces are consistently wrong, even on the rare occasions they try to mimic native look and feel, and their Macromedia-purchased products still aren't well integrated in Creative Suite. I can't say that Flash CS5's "banishment" here caused me any sorrow.

Quote: Original post by Andrew Russell
Also: since when is it "ok" for Apple to push out an update that actively seeks to remove (access to, on a technical level) other software? Software that I installed on my device, without going through their App Store?

What's this about? Hadn't heard anything of the sort. Or are you referring to Apple's iOS updates overwriting applications installed via jailbreak?

I'm confused.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Or are you referring to Apple's iOS updates overwriting applications installed via jailbreak?

Yes (note how I mention not going through the App Store, and Cydia). The fact that there is a "jail" to "break" in the first place also concerns me.

(Edit: But I'll make a note of that in my post, just to be clear to everyone.)

[Edited by - Andrew Russell on June 23, 2010 2:19:39 AM]

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi

Quote: Original post by Valderman
I also don't see how forcing developers to use outdated tools...

Apple's tools aren't outdated. Instruments is excellent, unparalleled on any platform. Even being based on DTrace, it goes well beyond its progenitor. LLVM and LLVD are excellent technologies (and open source, natch); LLVM provides an up to 60% (but generally around 20%) runtime performance boost for the same source code vs GCC.

Objective-C 2.0 has a very comprehensive and competitive feature list compared with the other smartphone platform options (Java, C#). I find it to be a very reasonable balance between feature-richness and control without sacrificing performance, unfamiliar syntax (for most programmers) notwithstanding. (And, really, shouldn't we be over syntactic nits by now?)

Yeah, calling ObjC 2.0 outdated was probably a bit of an overstatement. Still, there are quite a few languages that offer a lot of functionality it doesn't have. (And I'm not quite sure what they were thinking when they decided to combine timesink typing with timebomb typing.)

Quote:

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care
Flash

Can you point me to any smartphone or mobile device on sale today on which I can run Flash - not Flash Lite, but full Flash?

Nokia N900 does. Unfortunately it's only Flash 9 though.

Quote:

Quote: Original post by Valderman
Do developers really automagically write better programs with better UIs if restricted to C/C++/ObjC? How would Python, Lisp, Haskell, Ruby, Java, etc. lead to worse programs? Apple could ensure the same level of quality by specifying an ABI and banning anyone who strays from it (by using private iOS APIs for example) but they don't.

Actually, Apple is moving toward this.

Not according to that article, they don't. That change basically says "it's OK to use config files if you ask us nicely and they're not too powerful" which is marginally better than the old situation yet nowhere near maintaining an ABI and letting developers use whatever tools they want.

Quote: On the one hand I sympathize with your view that openness and freedom are important attributes of a platform. On the other hand it's Adobe, and the vast majority of the software they put out is demonstrably awful. Their user interfaces are consistently wrong, even on the rare occasions they try to mimic native look and feel, and their Macromedia-purchased products still aren't well integrated in Creative Suite. I can't say that Flash CS5's "banishment" here caused me any sorrow.

I don't think anyone misses Flash, which seriously ought to die ASAP; it's the huge collateral damage that matters.

Quote: Original post by Andrew Russell

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Or are you referring to Apple's iOS updates overwriting applications installed via jailbreak?

Yes (note how I mention not going through the App Store, and Cydia). The fact that there is a "jail" to "break" in the first place also concerns me.

I don't know of any smartphone vendor (including all Android handset manufacturers except the Google Dev Phone and Nexus One) that allow users to install arbitrary firmware on their devices while still guaranteeing interoperability with network services. At best this isn't an Apple-specific concern.

Quote: Original post by Valderman
[T]here are quite a few languages that offer a lot of functionality [Objective-C 2.0] doesn't have.

This will always be true of every language.

Quote: Original post by Valderman
Nokia N900 [runs Flash]. Unfortunately it's only Flash 9 though.

I'll admit to not knowing that. A little Googling reveals there's also Flash 9 on the HTC Hero. Cool.

Quote: Original post by Valderman
Not according to that article, they don't. That change basically says "it's OK to use config files if you ask us nicely and they're not too powerful" which is marginally better than the old situation yet nowhere near maintaining an ABI and letting developers use whatever tools they want.

Yeah, I don't see Apple allowing the "open ABI" approach until after marketshare levels have settled in the smartphone segment.

Quote: Original post by Valderman
...it's the huge collateral damage that matters.

Certainly.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Beta. Let's not try to get slick here; there is currently no shipping device for which a release version of full Flash exists. Period.

Flash 10.1 will be available for all Android 2.2 phones. Including the already released Evo and Nexus One. Being in beta is a lot better than never having the possibility at all.

Quote: On the one hand I sympathize with your view that openness and freedom are important attributes of a platform. On the other hand it's Adobe, and the vast majority of the software they put out is demonstrably awful. Their user interfaces are consistently wrong, even on the rare occasions they try to mimic native look and feel, and their Macromedia-purchased products still aren't well integrated in Creative Suite. I can't say that Flash CS5's "banishment" here caused me any sorrow.

Then what about Unity or any other things that could cross compile now disallowed languages to iPhone code?

Bad developers will make bad software regardless of how bad their IDEs are. Just because you don't like an IDE doesn't mean it's ok to disallow development with it. I don't like prostitutes. Is it ok to support the murder of prostitutes?

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care
Flash 10.1 will be available for all Android 2.2 phones.

I'll believe it when I see it. Adobe's been claiming full Flash on various devices, including iPhone, "any day now" for three years. Even the Flash that exists on N900 and HTC Hero has some limitations particularly as regards video codecs; it's no 100% solution.

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care
Then what about Unity or any other things that could cross compile now disallowed languages to iPhone code?

As Valderman pointed out, they're unfortunate collateral damage. It sucks for them, but that's what happens when your core business is predicated on someone else's platform - exactly what Apple doesn't want to happen to itself, right? Apple's anxiety, it appears, is ceding control of the developmental progress of the platform to a middleware vendor with a very different set of goals. It's being overbearing in defending its position, but it is - so far, at least - acting within its legal rights.

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care
I don't like prostitutes. Is it ok to support the murder of prostitutes?

Please don't use stupid analogies. It's beneath you.

Quote: Original post by way2lazy2care
Bad developers will make bad software regardless of how bad their IDEs are. Just because you don't like an IDE doesn't mean it's ok to disallow development with it. I don't like prostitutes. Is it ok to support the murder of prostitutes?

Yeah, 'cos that's obviously exactly the same thing. [rolleyes]

I think the majority are missing the point. Yeah, it's annoying from a development standpoint that you can't use whatever tool you like. Thing is, Joe Public does not care about any of this. They use (and will continue to use) the iPhone, because it's simply a vastly more pleasant experience than almost any other smartphone out there. Is it perfect? Not by a long shot. But the fact is that it's good enough for most people and less hassle.

Android faces the same problem as Linux. It can't be "just as good" as the iPhone. It has to have a glaringly obvious benefit to motivate users (not developers, whose opinion is irrelevant) to switch. Flash, frankly, doesn't cut it. I very rarely miss flash on the iPhone and if I come across the occasional site that requires it, it's probably something I'd be better accessing from a desktop anyway.

I don't know. Controlling the tools the developers use to build their applications seems a bit arbitrary. It only clearly effects the developer, not the user, nor Apple for that matter. If people find it easier to develop on flash than Xcode, well bully for them. You can make millions of arguments against it but flash remains an important development platform, especially for game developers, and a cross compiler wouldn't require a vm to be installed on the device -- right?.

From a superficial perspective, it would be just like an objective c app, why does Apple care how it was built?

[Edited by - WazzatMan on June 23, 2010 4:29:55 PM]

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
I'll believe it when I see it. Adobe's been claiming full Flash on various devices, including iPhone, "any day now" for three years. Even the Flash that exists on N900 and HTC Hero has some limitations particularly as regards video codecs; it's no 100% solution.

in the sidebar there's other stuff from non-adobe, as I'm sure you'll point out that it's an adobe demo.

Quote: As Valderman pointed out, they're unfortunate collateral damage. It sucks for them, but that's what happens when your core business is predicated on someone else's platform - exactly what Apple doesn't want to happen to itself, right? Apple's anxiety, it appears, is ceding control of the developmental progress of the platform to a middleware vendor with a very different set of goals. It's being overbearing in defending its position, but it is - so far, at least - acting within its legal rights.

The legality is questionable at best, and we may not know decisively till there is a lawsuit. There's a lot of really good discussion about the legality in the thread about their new terms.

Quote: Original Post by ChaosEngine
Yeah, it's annoying from a development standpoint that you can't use whatever tool you like. Thing is, Joe Public does not care about any of this. They use (and will continue to use) the iPhone, because it's simply a vastly more pleasant experience than almost any other smartphone out there.

Joe Public will care when developers stop developing for the Iphone now that there's a serious competitor in Android devices and maybe Windows Phone 7 that aren't nearly as bad to developers. I'd also like to say that Android phones are at least as pleasant to use as the Iphone.

Quote: Thing is, Joe Public does not care about any of this.

No, but he will care about his applications being buggier and more expensive than necessary. Or, well, he would if he could make the comparison, which he can't since the alternative will never be available on the iPhone.

Either way, since the user doesn't care about how his application was written, you can't exactly claim that these arbitrary restrictions benefit users. On the contrary, the way they hamper cross platform development, and development in general, I'd argue they're actually harmful in the long run.

Quote: Android faces the same problem as Linux. It can't be "just as good" as the iPhone. It has to have a glaringly obvious benefit to motivate users (not developers, whose opinion is irrelevant) to switch.

More device variety, lower price for pretty much all devices, works as a normal USB mass storage device, has expandable storage, multitasking (no, iOS 4 doesn't have multitasking) and better codec support? I've heard all of those from perfectly normal, non-tech savvy users of both Android and iDevices. Especially the lack of multitasking and a physical keyboard, are deal breakers for me (though I'm definitely not the intended iMarket.)

Various gadget sites also seem quite lyrical over how Android 2.2 handles syncing and other similar stuff. (I don't know anything about it, but Gizmodo seems to.) Saying that Android faces the same problem as Linux is misguided. It was two years late to the party, yet has already overtaken Apple's market share; I don't quite see the problem it's supposed to face.

Quote: They use (and will continue to use) the iPhone, because it's simply a vastly more pleasant experience than almost any other smartphone out there.

I don't get this. From what I've seen of the iPhone, it's a horrible user experience. No multitasking, poor web browser, a tiny, low-res screen (doesn't apply to the 4G) and completely impossible to type on. What does the iPhone have that others don't?

Quote: I very rarely miss flash on the iPhone and if I come across the occasional site that requires it, it's probably something I'd be better accessing from a desktop anyway.

If you ever think this while using a smartphone, then I dare say the device has completely failed its purpose. But then again, the iPhone seems to be so bad at web browsing, one of its primary purposes, that everyone and their grandmother needs to provide an iPhone application version of their site in order to make it accessible to iPhone users.

How is that a vastly more pleasant experience than any competing device?