4 ms·
That's a good analogy. Seems useful for explaining the developer moral outrage to non-developers.
by zacharypinter 17y ago
That's a good analogy. Seems useful for explaining the developer moral outrage to non-developers.
- nkassis 17y agoit won't beat the "OOOOOH SO SHINY" effect.
- api 17y agoI will keep repeating this until people get it: User interfaces matter! A lot!
- lr 17y agoThis is a horrible analogy. When you produce music it doesn't have to hook into an external API. Can badly produced music crash a device (aside from the user's ears)? No.
- wvenable 17y agoNo, it is a great analogy. Think of it this way, the record labels do what Apple does with it's review process -- ensure that 'quality' music is produced and distributed to listeners. But record labels do not limit what instruments can be used to produce that music. If Apple allows C, and they do, the choice of tool doesn't affect whether or not the device will crash.
- Terretta 17y agoA better analogy, since even non-musicians can hear the difference, would be Apple banning from iTunes any General Midi 1.0 song covers recorded using Sound Blaster cards with FM/OPL-3 chips, but still allowing music from Kraftwerk to Imogen Heap. Apps--or music--made with limited construction kits tend towards sameness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablum (In that sense, both Ableton and GarageBand could be considered construction kits, so perhaps a better analogy would be if iTunes banned sequenced music, only allowing music musicians personally play?)
- barrkel 17y agoWhy not judge the applications on the difference (i.e. the end result), then, rather than the mechanism? We're not just talking about Adobe Flash for iPhone here. We're talking about ruling out any innovation in targeting the platform, even innovation specifically targeted at the iPhone and with no limitations or sameness involved.