3 ms·

Yea, you're totally right, apple was well within their rights to tell me to take the code down, I know that. But I would definitely say that the comparison wit

Yea, you're totally right, apple was well within their rights to tell me to take the code down, I know that. But I would definitely say that the comparison with plurk is inaccurate because in their case Microsoft grabbed their code and re-used it in their own website not only for their own gain, but even to compete against plurk. I would say that what I, and others, did was more like someone going to a website, hitting view-source, and saying "hmm this is interesting, there is something to be learned here" and then putting the interesting code snippets up on their blog. especially when the first line of my readme said "this is just for learning's sake, dont use this on your real website." At any rate, I for sure agree that apple is not being a bully, unjust, or outside of their rights to tell me to take it down. But it does kind of suggest that apple is going out of their way to impede the quality of web-apps on the iphone rather than try to help it along. Apple if your listening, why not just open source PastryKit?

padmanabhan01 17y ago
//But it does kind of suggest that apple is going out of their way to impede the quality of web-apps on the iphone rather than try to help it along I guess Apple has an incentive in doing so. Improving web apps improves it for all phones. They lose their comparative advantage in doing so.
- blueben 17y ago
  Don't let the iPhone fans hear you say that. Apple's competitive advantage is the UI handed down from Olympus! The sleek hardware! The brand! The integration with iTunes! How could you possibly imply that their advantage is actually just the fact that they're a closed platform that Apple exercises total control over? Blasphemy!
- ynniv 17y ago
  <Sarcasm> Its not like they contribute to the development of open web standards or browser libraries. </Sarcasm> When Apple is scared of web applications, they'll stop improving WebKit.
  - jbellis 17y ago
    > When Apple is scared of web applications, they'll stop improving WebKit. And WebObjects. Oh, wait... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects#2009:_No_longer_supported http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects#2009:_No_longer_supp...
ynniv 17y ago
> Apple if your listening, why not just open source PastryKit? Why? If you care to learn the lessons of PastryKit, you can view the original source. Its not in Apple's best interest to support yet another web framework thats kind of Cocoa-like. Both SproutCore.com and Cappuccino.org provide web application frameworks that are more complete, better documented, and actually maintained.
scott_s 17y ago
But it does kind of suggest that apple is going out of their way to impede the quality of web-apps on the iphone rather than try to help it along. It does not. You're projecting motive onto an action when you have only seen the action itself, not the deliberations that lead to the action.
Skeuomorph 17y ago
> the interesting code snippets Copyright allows snippets of works for discussion under concept of fair use. It doesn't allow wholesale republishing into a distribution channel of the complete original work -- even if your first line does say "just for learning". See "Fair Use" test #3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
tolenka 17y ago
I would say that what I, and others, did was more like someone going to a website, hitting view-source, and saying "hmm this is interesting, there is something to be learned here" and then putting the interesting code snippets up on their blog. especially when the first line of my readme said "this is just for learning's sake, dont use this on your real website." You reproduced the code wholesale -- that was infringement, not fair use. Apple if your listening, why not just open source PastryKit? They don't want to -- that's their prerogative. I find your sense of entitlement baffling.
zb 17y ago
> Apple if your [sic] listening, why not just open source PastryKit? Perhaps they already intend to, but they don't want half the world using some half-baked prerelease version and then asking them for support? I have no idea if that's the case, but it's at least as plausible as your theory that they're terrified of web apps competing with native apps. And it's supported by exactly the same amount of evidence, which is to say none.

padmanabhan01 17y ago

//But it does kind of suggest that apple is going out of their way to impede the quality of web-apps on the iphone rather than try to help it along I guess Apple has an incentive in doing so. Improving web apps improves it for all phones. They lose their comparative advantage in doing so.

blueben 17y ago
Don't let the iPhone fans hear you say that. Apple's competitive advantage is the UI handed down from Olympus! The sleek hardware! The brand! The integration with iTunes! How could you possibly imply that their advantage is actually just the fact that they're a closed platform that Apple exercises total control over? Blasphemy!
ynniv 17y ago
<Sarcasm> Its not like they contribute to the development of open web standards or browser libraries. </Sarcasm> When Apple is scared of web applications, they'll stop improving WebKit.
- jbellis 17y ago
  > When Apple is scared of web applications, they'll stop improving WebKit. And WebObjects. Oh, wait... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects#2009:_No_longer_supported http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects#2009:_No_longer_supp...

ynniv 17y ago

> Apple if your listening, why not just open source PastryKit? Why? If you care to learn the lessons of PastryKit, you can view the original source. Its not in Apple's best interest to support yet another web framework thats kind of Cocoa-like. Both SproutCore.com and Cappuccino.org provide web application frameworks that are more complete, better documented, and actually maintained.

scott_s 17y ago

But it does kind of suggest that apple is going out of their way to impede the quality of web-apps on the iphone rather than try to help it along. It does not. You're projecting motive onto an action when you have only seen the action itself, not the deliberations that lead to the action.

Skeuomorph 17y ago

> the interesting code snippets Copyright allows snippets of works for discussion under concept of fair use. It doesn't allow wholesale republishing into a distribution channel of the complete original work -- even if your first line does say "just for learning". See "Fair Use" test #3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

tolenka 17y ago

I would say that what I, and others, did was more like someone going to a website, hitting view-source, and saying "hmm this is interesting, there is something to be learned here" and then putting the interesting code snippets up on their blog. especially when the first line of my readme said "this is just for learning's sake, dont use this on your real website." You reproduced the code wholesale -- that was infringement, not fair use. Apple if your listening, why not just open source PastryKit? They don't want to -- that's their prerogative. I find your sense of entitlement baffling.

zb 17y ago

> Apple if your [sic] listening, why not just open source PastryKit? Perhaps they already intend to, but they don't want half the world using some half-baked prerelease version and then asking them for support? I have no idea if that's the case, but it's at least as plausible as your theory that they're terrified of web apps competing with native apps. And it's supported by exactly the same amount of evidence, which is to say none.