4 ms·
>1. Adobe isn't completely innocent. Who cares about a company being "innocent" ? What does that even mean ? >(their Creative Suite costs as much as a MacBook
by Raphael_Amiard 17y ago
>1. Adobe isn't completely innocent.
Who cares about a company being "innocent" ? What does that even mean ?
>(their Creative Suite costs as much as a MacBook Pro)
Do you have a serious study saying that Creative Suite is overpriced ? Because it doesn't look that way to me. And what does that even have to do with anything ?
>I'm sure they don't want to deal with developers using up their support time over things that are the fault of Adobe's Flash SDK or Novell's C# one.
So they could have added a clause to the dev agreement saying they won't support the dev choosing to go with other SDK's or languages. That would have been a TOTALLY different story no ?
> 3. It's also in Apple's interest to [...]
Of course it's in Apple's interest. The way they're ready to alienate a non negligible part of their partner's base (because that's what devs should be, partners) for their short term interrest is kind of scary though. I even really doubt it's a clever strategy if you consider Apple's interest alone.
>Do I like Apple's stance? No. As a user and a developer, it's bad for me. However, Apple's the market leader and getting people to use their API gives them control
However what ? You know the problem isn't even the fact that the platform is closed to others languages. If it has been like that from the beginning of the IPhone/Ipad, it wouldn't be the same problem at all. The real problem in this story is that Apple is ready to screw other peoples businesses. It reminds me of the Playstation3/Linux story, in some ways. People have invested time and money in this platform, and yet Apple decides to change the terms of the game and screw them over completely. The fact that they have the right to do it doesn't make it right. It's immoral and wrong.
> Adobe isn't known for being open. Given the chance, Adobe seems to wall itself off as much as Apple.
Examples please. I may have forgotten some things, but on the top of my mind, i can't find anything even remotely similar to this.
- 0x44 17y agoPeople have invested time and money in this platform, and yet Apple decides to change the terms of the game and screw them over completely. Investing in a platform does not guarantee you'll profit from your investment, nor does it oblige the provider to continue providing you the means to recoup your investment.
- Raphael_Amiard 17y agoThe fact that they have the right to do it doesn't make it right. What in this sentence do you not understand ? Also, Apple relies on developers to make some of their profit. Even if it's a relatively small profit, screwing theirs openly doesn't look like a very clever business practice to me.
- stcredzero 17y agoIs it "wrong" or is it just obnoxious and bad business? Did Apple make some sort of promise not to pull this sort of nonsense? Such promises do exist, BTW. They are called Open Source licenses. (Not an Open Source zealot by any means!) Lesson learned, time to move on. Make a note that Apple is capable of this. Protect yourself with platform diversification or with platform on a FOSS license. Move on and make something of value.
- wrath 17y agoClearly you've never spent a lot of your hard earned money and time on something just to have it squashed by some big company :) Believe me it's not fun feeling...