12 ms·
> I can understand why they want to do this I can't. Except as a land- and power grab in the "all your toil are belong to us" category. I can understand that
by j-g-faustus 17y ago
> I can understand why they want to do this
I can't. Except as a land- and power grab in the "all your toil are belong to us" category.
I can understand that Apple attempts a strategic move to avoid becoming just another platform for Flash.
I can understand that Apple may want to cut down on the number of submissions, and are assuming that those that go to the trouble of learning Objective-C/C/C++ are the "real professionals", as opposed to those who once spent a weekend learning Flash.
I can understand that Apple wants a minimum quality to their apps and are not happy when the exact same code is cross-compiled to a dozen devices: The code would probably be developed to the smallest common multiple, would look and feel bad and would not play to the iPhone's strength. In short, it would make the iPhone look bad, and users would blame the iPhone and Apple.
I can understand that Apple doesn't want a 10kB app to ship with a 1 GB translation library. (From comments I've seen elsewhere, it appears that this is how the Adobe tool does it.)
Maybe I can even understand that they might want to strengthen their nuclear law arsenal with a poison pill in case someone falls out of favor.
But: Which tools I use and how I use them is not Apple's f...ing business - I don't work for Apple, I'm an independent developer.
From my point of view, Apple has every right to be as anal retentive as they wish regarding what they accept - it is their store and their party.
But Apple has no right to any opinion whatsoever regarding how I create those deliverables - that is my business, and remains so until I submit it.
Whatever Apple is trying to achieve here, outlawing pretty much anything a developer can do to increase productivity is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I can't see this as anything else than a pure power trip ("see how we can make them jump") and a big F... Y.. from Apple to their developers.
Now whether Apple actually intended it to come across that way is another discussion.
But we have no way of knowing either way unless Apple deigns to clarify. And Apple is hardly known for being talkative on controversial issues...
[update: minor spelling, phrasing]
- commieneko 17y agoYou seem to understand _many_ reasons why Apple would want to do this. Apple has every right to sell its stuff with whatever kind of license they want. Just as you (and I) have every right not to develop for them. The thing is that, for now, Apple is selling something that _many_ people want to buy, and that _many_ people want to develop for. So they have the upper hand. Nothing illegal or crazy about it. Now certainly things can change in the future and they _might_ become more accommodating. Complaining about probably helps a little. Not developing for it helps more. Not buying the hard helps a lot, but the developer community is _much_ smaller than the consumer community...
- Lazlo_Nibble 17y ago> But Apple has no right to any opinion whatsoever regarding how I create those deliverables - that is my business, and remains so until I submit it. So, companies in the 1980s had no right to any opinion whatsoever regarding whether or not the products they sold benefited the apartheid regime in South Africa? Amazon has no right to any opinion whatsoever regarding whether or not the books they sell are printed on paper made from trees harvested from virgin rainforest? Target has no right to any opinion whatsoever regarding whether or not the clothes they sell were produced in sweatshops? There are a lot of arguments that can be made against this new rule, but the argument that Apple doesn't have the right to impose the rule in the first place is utter and complete nonsense.