4 ms·

But now even those have vanished as Apple decided they were using a "private framework", and has pulled them off the shelves without explanation o

by edd 17y ago

But now even those have vanished as Apple decided they were using a "private framework", and has pulled them off the shelves without explanation or apology. Apple does not like you messing around with the private frameworks. If this is the reason, these developers should have seen this coming.

cakeface 17y ago
I'm not exactly sure what a private framework means. Is this like a shared library that they are all using? What is the problem with doing that from Apple's point of view?
- modoc 17y ago
  It's a non-documented/non-public API. Typically these APIs are either likely to change without warning, haven't been fully tested for 3rd party app use, or can cause issues (battery life, interference with other core iPhone features, etc...). Whether it's the iPhone SDK, or your favorite web app dev framework, using non-public APIs is generally a bad idea.
  - JoeAltmaier 17y ago
    Why not let the market decide? This autocratic policy of actually killing apps is bound to generate speculation, mostly unfavorable. What possible benefit outweighs that?
    - Groxx 17y ago
      QOS (Quality Of Service). Apple thrives on providing a high-quality service. It's nearly their entire business. Using private frameworks / unpublished / not-locked-down APIs is a ticking time-bomb from a stability standpoint. What if it changes?
    - KirinDave 17y ago
      > Why not let the market decide? Apple never lets the market decide. It hasn't since Steve Jobs came back from NeXT. "The market" is incredibly bad at spurring the kind of innovation Apple wants on its own. Because "the market" is largely composed of people who have no fucking clue what they actually want from technology. They couldn't tell you what they really want unless you trained them. Even then, they might not be able to. "The market deciding" is what we've had pre-iPhone with the incredibly conservative and stunted market behind smartphones. Everyone—and I mean everyone in the mobile space—had the technology to create the iPhone. No one did. Why? Because the HTC Crapfest and the Blackberry Eyebleacher sold plenty well. Because instead of taking bold risks and trying for real innovation, companies like Palm and RIM crawled forward with a constant eye towards this quarter's revenue. It's a malaise that has infected so much of the world's business. Apple's approach is frustrating and inconsistent, which is repugnant to the News.Y crowd (myself included). But it's allowed them to continue to shape the AppStore into something they want and something that moves product. It's the foundation for future products as well. So don't ask, "Why not let the market decide," because we all already know the answer. What Apple is doing may be a slipperly slope, it may be doomed to fail long–term and it may be infuriating and alienating to its developer base. But undeniably it's a business strategy that is at the heart of the ascendancy of their products onto a worldwide market.
  - larsberg 17y ago
    I agree that it's probably a bad idea. However, coming from Windows, you don't really think twice about it. MSFT has a long history of continuing to support all APIs, no matter how you get to them, and not really caring what you do with them. Heck, I remember arguments on the .NET framework team when 1.1 was shipping about how to handle third-party applications that had used Reflection to access private members of class instances and whether the data could be changed. In several cases, it was going to break a few widely-used or mission-critical apps. I personally didn't even think twice and just went ahead and used private APIs, especially since they were literally direct copies of entry points available on OS X, just missing headers & an import lib.
- gte910h 17y ago
  Apple has documented certain APIs. Others they have not documented. They call all class interfaces and view hierarchies "private apis" and forbid access to those APIs by developers. If you use them and apple figures it out, no app store for you. There is really little difference between the private and public APIs other than the fact Apple has or hasn't blessed them for use.

by edd 17y ago

cakeface 17y ago

I'm not exactly sure what a private framework means. Is this like a shared library that they are all using? What is the problem with doing that from Apple's point of view?

modoc 17y ago
It's a non-documented/non-public API. Typically these APIs are either likely to change without warning, haven't been fully tested for 3rd party app use, or can cause issues (battery life, interference with other core iPhone features, etc...). Whether it's the iPhone SDK, or your favorite web app dev framework, using non-public APIs is generally a bad idea.
- JoeAltmaier 17y ago
  Why not let the market decide? This autocratic policy of actually killing apps is bound to generate speculation, mostly unfavorable. What possible benefit outweighs that?
  - Groxx 17y ago
    QOS (Quality Of Service). Apple thrives on providing a high-quality service. It's nearly their entire business. Using private frameworks / unpublished / not-locked-down APIs is a ticking time-bomb from a stability standpoint. What if it changes?
  - KirinDave 17y ago
    > Why not let the market decide? Apple never lets the market decide. It hasn't since Steve Jobs came back from NeXT. "The market" is incredibly bad at spurring the kind of innovation Apple wants on its own. Because "the market" is largely composed of people who have no fucking clue what they actually want from technology. They couldn't tell you what they really want unless you trained them. Even then, they might not be able to. "The market deciding" is what we've had pre-iPhone with the incredibly conservative and stunted market behind smartphones. Everyone—and I mean everyone in the mobile space—had the technology to create the iPhone. No one did. Why? Because the HTC Crapfest and the Blackberry Eyebleacher sold plenty well. Because instead of taking bold risks and trying for real innovation, companies like Palm and RIM crawled forward with a constant eye towards this quarter's revenue. It's a malaise that has infected so much of the world's business. Apple's approach is frustrating and inconsistent, which is repugnant to the News.Y crowd (myself included). But it's allowed them to continue to shape the AppStore into something they want and something that moves product. It's the foundation for future products as well. So don't ask, "Why not let the market decide," because we all already know the answer. What Apple is doing may be a slipperly slope, it may be doomed to fail long–term and it may be infuriating and alienating to its developer base. But undeniably it's a business strategy that is at the heart of the ascendancy of their products onto a worldwide market.
- larsberg 17y ago
  I agree that it's probably a bad idea. However, coming from Windows, you don't really think twice about it. MSFT has a long history of continuing to support all APIs, no matter how you get to them, and not really caring what you do with them. Heck, I remember arguments on the .NET framework team when 1.1 was shipping about how to handle third-party applications that had used Reflection to access private members of class instances and whether the data could be changed. In several cases, it was going to break a few widely-used or mission-critical apps. I personally didn't even think twice and just went ahead and used private APIs, especially since they were literally direct copies of entry points available on OS X, just missing headers & an import lib.
gte910h 17y ago
Apple has documented certain APIs. Others they have not documented. They call all class interfaces and view hierarchies "private apis" and forbid access to those APIs by developers. If you use them and apple figures it out, no app store for you. There is really little difference between the private and public APIs other than the fact Apple has or hasn't blessed them for use.