7 ms·

This is where he loses me: "Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the

by Qz 17y ago

This is where he loses me: "Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open." Adobe can just as easily say: "Though Flash products are proprietary, we strongly believe that standards pertaining to what software is allowed to run on your computer should be open." It's doublespeak either way, and it's crazy to think that either of those two viewpoints is good for the industry. edit: Also: "If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?" Flash can handle touch events just fine. Rewriting all that flash code in H/C/J is a monumental task compared to just updating a few flash events. Basically, this is a lot of corporate spin and not a lot of sound arguments.

rimantas 17y ago
I guess by "standards pertaining to the web" Apple means HTML, Javascript (ECMAScript to be precise) and CSS. What do you mean by "standards pertaining to what software is allowed to run on your computer"?
- Qz 17y ago
  Less of an explicit standard and more the previous consensus that the company that sells you your computer shouldn't retain control over what kind of legitimate software you can run on it after it's in your possession, based on some self-aggrandizing notion that they know what's best for you better than you do.
  - bobdole2695 17y ago
    Uh? Have you met users before?
    - Qz 17y ago
      That's exactly the mentality that keeps 'users' stupid. Apple is basically saying: "users are stupid, let's protect them from thinking." Imagine if we said that about our kids: "Our kids don't know how to handle the real world. Let's protect them from having to deal with it." (never mind that most parents do in fact go through this phase). The reality is that users are just kids who haven't learned how to use computers. Two factors make this hard: most computer software is generally poorly designed (speaking in terms of the number of poorly designed products vs the number of well-designed products), and most software is not designed to teach users how to use it. Apple is busy buying fish for starving people. The company that teaches users how to fish is the company that will win big.
      - rimantas 17y ago
        That's not about keeping users stupid, it's about not making them worry about stuff they should not worry about. The user may be the world's best neurosurgeon, does that mean that they have to learn about filesystems? most computer software is generally poorly designed You are right about this one. But the thing is that Apple does exactly that: offering well designed software. It's not about buying fish, it's about hiding unneeded complexity. How do you drive the car: press the gas and it goes, press the brakes and it stops. Turn the wheel to the right and it turns to the right. You need zero knowledge about what's going under the hood. Now take the iPad: tap an app and it launches, press the home button and it stops. Swipe to the right, swipe to the left…
        jarek 17y ago
        Turn the wheel and it goes where you want it to. But if you want to go to Google Voice, you'll have to take a long detour few people know of. You see, the road to Google Voice hasn't been optimized for your comfort. Or Apple's profit.
        jarek 17y ago
        Downvotes noted. The truth, it burns.
        Qz 17y ago
        "The user may be the world's best neurosurgeon, does that mean that they have to learn about filesystems?" There's a bit of a divide as to what 'personal' computers are being used for. The original mainstream use was to create/edit files using programs. The modern use is to interact with other people via the internet. So no, the neurosurgeon doesn't have to learn about filesystems because filesystems are mostly becoming irrelevant. I don't think software should be designed to educate people about the trappings of decades of computer cruft. I think software should be designed so that using the software teaches the user how to use the software. Apple's method (re: iPhone/iPad) seems to be to design software that doesn't invite learning, and at the additional cost of limiting functionality.
- DrSprout 17y ago
  Packaging systems and their associated programming languages / APIs. Like Android .apk files, Apple .dmg files, Microsoft's .msi. All open and usable by anyone who wants to build one (though some fees may apply.)
cninja 17y ago
My head started to spin when trying to reconcile points 1 and 5. Point 1 states Adobe Flash has proprietary features and the standardized open feature sets of HTML5, CSS, and JS should be used instead. Point 5 states 3rd party layers limits development to the standardized features and leaves out the proprietary features that makes Apple unique.
- mbreese 17y ago
  They are talking about two different scenarios that aren't really that related. Point 1 is in reference to the lack of Flash within Safari. Point 5 is in reference to banning applications originally written in Flash.
  - smallblacksun 17y ago
    Or, more cynically, Point 1 is in reference to a non-Apple product Point 5 is in reference to an Apple product
    - Qz 17y ago
      Exactly. Apple vs non-Apple (or more generally, things a company controls vs things a company doesn't control) is the only relevant point here. Everything else about open standards and performance woes is just spin.
- danudey 17y ago
  Point 1 is talking about websites / web applications. Point 5 is talking about native apps. Two different domains entirely. With point 1, if developers are going to make a website, and they ditch flash, their work would work everywhere well (iPhone/iPad/iPod, Android, WebOS, Symbian, and Blackberry OS 6, as well as on the desktop). They wouldn't be limited to the platforms Adobe decides to support (or decides to support well). With point 2, if you're going to make a native app for the iPhone, make one for the iPhone. Don't make one with Flash, which may not get around to supporting things like GameCenter, or multitasking, or any of the other hundreds of things Apple adds in new releases. Choosing Flash for either one makes a substandard experience compared to the other options available.
cabalamat 17y ago
> [Jobs:] "we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open." Consider Python. Is it a standard? Yes, because there's an open source reference implementation. Does it pertain to the web? Yes it does, because http clients and servers can be, and often are, written in this language, and its standard library and 3rd-party open source libraries support http and other web protocols such as HTML. So if you're so keen on stand ards Steve, why can't I write web software in Python for the iPhone and iPad? Why are you such a hypocrite? On a wider note: Steve, do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugar-coated digital handcuffs, or do you to change the world for the better?
- prodigal_erik 17y ago
  A reference implementation is a good test suite but a poor substitute for a standard. It's huge and you can't just sit down and read it, you have to simulate it in your head to really understand what it would allow or demand. (This is also an awful problem with the HTML5 spec.)
  - cabalamat 17y ago
    On the contrary, its a written standard that you "have to simulate in your head". If you have an implementation, you can simply run the code and see what it does!
- danudey 17y ago
  Is python really a 'standard'? Python's had trouble lately with non-mainline implementations because the grammar keeps changing. There's no standards document laying out how the language should behave, in the sense of 'Jython is compatible with the Python language 2.5'; rather, third-party implementations duplicate features and functionality from CPython based off the PEP they're defined in. Does it pertain to the web? It doesn't. Python isn't used 'on the web', it's used on the backend to generate web pages, as is C#, Erlang, and pretty much every other language ever. Are you suggesting that Apple should include a Python interpreter in WebKit? It sounds like that's what you're suggesting. The simple answer would be 'because Python is not a language that is used in client-side scripting anywhere on the web'. No other browser supports it, and even if they did it wouldn't be widely used. Your argument seems not only spurious but nonsensical. Python is used to send or receive documents over HTTP, so therefore I should be able to write a web app in Python to run on the iPhone? It doesn't make sense. My home cable internet 'pertains to the web' too, and it uses documented standards like DOCSIS, so why doesn't my iPhone support DOCSIS? It's a ridiculous argument, as is yours.
digitallogic 17y ago
"If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?" If you have to make significant changes to the UI portion of your application, why not thrown the entire thing out and start from scratch with an extremely new (less mature) technology stack that you're probably complete unfamiliar with. I believe Netscape got similar advice in the nineties.

by Qz 17y ago

rimantas 17y ago

I guess by "standards pertaining to the web" Apple means HTML, Javascript (ECMAScript to be precise) and CSS. What do you mean by "standards pertaining to what software is allowed to run on your computer"?

Qz 17y ago
Less of an explicit standard and more the previous consensus that the company that sells you your computer shouldn't retain control over what kind of legitimate software you can run on it after it's in your possession, based on some self-aggrandizing notion that they know what's best for you better than you do.
- bobdole2695 17y ago
  Uh? Have you met users before?
  - Qz 17y ago
    That's exactly the mentality that keeps 'users' stupid. Apple is basically saying: "users are stupid, let's protect them from thinking." Imagine if we said that about our kids: "Our kids don't know how to handle the real world. Let's protect them from having to deal with it." (never mind that most parents do in fact go through this phase). The reality is that users are just kids who haven't learned how to use computers. Two factors make this hard: most computer software is generally poorly designed (speaking in terms of the number of poorly designed products vs the number of well-designed products), and most software is not designed to teach users how to use it. Apple is busy buying fish for starving people. The company that teaches users how to fish is the company that will win big.
    - rimantas 17y ago
      That's not about keeping users stupid, it's about not making them worry about stuff they should not worry about. The user may be the world's best neurosurgeon, does that mean that they have to learn about filesystems? most computer software is generally poorly designed You are right about this one. But the thing is that Apple does exactly that: offering well designed software. It's not about buying fish, it's about hiding unneeded complexity. How do you drive the car: press the gas and it goes, press the brakes and it stops. Turn the wheel to the right and it turns to the right. You need zero knowledge about what's going under the hood. Now take the iPad: tap an app and it launches, press the home button and it stops. Swipe to the right, swipe to the left…
      - jarek 17y ago
        Turn the wheel and it goes where you want it to. But if you want to go to Google Voice, you'll have to take a long detour few people know of. You see, the road to Google Voice hasn't been optimized for your comfort. Or Apple's profit.
        jarek 17y ago
        Downvotes noted. The truth, it burns.
      - Qz 17y ago
        "The user may be the world's best neurosurgeon, does that mean that they have to learn about filesystems?" There's a bit of a divide as to what 'personal' computers are being used for. The original mainstream use was to create/edit files using programs. The modern use is to interact with other people via the internet. So no, the neurosurgeon doesn't have to learn about filesystems because filesystems are mostly becoming irrelevant. I don't think software should be designed to educate people about the trappings of decades of computer cruft. I think software should be designed so that using the software teaches the user how to use the software. Apple's method (re: iPhone/iPad) seems to be to design software that doesn't invite learning, and at the additional cost of limiting functionality.
DrSprout 17y ago
Packaging systems and their associated programming languages / APIs. Like Android .apk files, Apple .dmg files, Microsoft's .msi. All open and usable by anyone who wants to build one (though some fees may apply.)

cninja 17y ago

My head started to spin when trying to reconcile points 1 and 5. Point 1 states Adobe Flash has proprietary features and the standardized open feature sets of HTML5, CSS, and JS should be used instead. Point 5 states 3rd party layers limits development to the standardized features and leaves out the proprietary features that makes Apple unique.

mbreese 17y ago
They are talking about two different scenarios that aren't really that related. Point 1 is in reference to the lack of Flash within Safari. Point 5 is in reference to banning applications originally written in Flash.
- smallblacksun 17y ago
  Or, more cynically, Point 1 is in reference to a non-Apple product Point 5 is in reference to an Apple product
  - Qz 17y ago
    Exactly. Apple vs non-Apple (or more generally, things a company controls vs things a company doesn't control) is the only relevant point here. Everything else about open standards and performance woes is just spin.
danudey 17y ago
Point 1 is talking about websites / web applications. Point 5 is talking about native apps. Two different domains entirely. With point 1, if developers are going to make a website, and they ditch flash, their work would work everywhere well (iPhone/iPad/iPod, Android, WebOS, Symbian, and Blackberry OS 6, as well as on the desktop). They wouldn't be limited to the platforms Adobe decides to support (or decides to support well). With point 2, if you're going to make a native app for the iPhone, make one for the iPhone. Don't make one with Flash, which may not get around to supporting things like GameCenter, or multitasking, or any of the other hundreds of things Apple adds in new releases. Choosing Flash for either one makes a substandard experience compared to the other options available.

cabalamat 17y ago

> [Jobs:] "we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open." Consider Python. Is it a standard? Yes, because there's an open source reference implementation. Does it pertain to the web? Yes it does, because http clients and servers can be, and often are, written in this language, and its standard library and 3rd-party open source libraries support http and other web protocols such as HTML. So if you're so keen on stand ards Steve, why can't I write web software in Python for the iPhone and iPad? Why are you such a hypocrite? On a wider note: Steve, do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugar-coated digital handcuffs, or do you to change the world for the better?

prodigal_erik 17y ago
A reference implementation is a good test suite but a poor substitute for a standard. It's huge and you can't just sit down and read it, you have to simulate it in your head to really understand what it would allow or demand. (This is also an awful problem with the HTML5 spec.)
- cabalamat 17y ago
  On the contrary, its a written standard that you "have to simulate in your head". If you have an implementation, you can simply run the code and see what it does!
danudey 17y ago
Is python really a 'standard'? Python's had trouble lately with non-mainline implementations because the grammar keeps changing. There's no standards document laying out how the language should behave, in the sense of 'Jython is compatible with the Python language 2.5'; rather, third-party implementations duplicate features and functionality from CPython based off the PEP they're defined in. Does it pertain to the web? It doesn't. Python isn't used 'on the web', it's used on the backend to generate web pages, as is C#, Erlang, and pretty much every other language ever. Are you suggesting that Apple should include a Python interpreter in WebKit? It sounds like that's what you're suggesting. The simple answer would be 'because Python is not a language that is used in client-side scripting anywhere on the web'. No other browser supports it, and even if they did it wouldn't be widely used. Your argument seems not only spurious but nonsensical. Python is used to send or receive documents over HTTP, so therefore I should be able to write a web app in Python to run on the iPhone? It doesn't make sense. My home cable internet 'pertains to the web' too, and it uses documented standards like DOCSIS, so why doesn't my iPhone support DOCSIS? It's a ridiculous argument, as is yours.

digitallogic 17y ago

"If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?" If you have to make significant changes to the UI portion of your application, why not thrown the entire thing out and start from scratch with an extremely new (less mature) technology stack that you're probably complete unfamiliar with. I believe Netscape got similar advice in the nineties.