8 ms·

Flash is closed, Apple is open. Huh? I can build a flash app entirely for free, legally, with zero restrictions, forever, on the tools I used to write it, or

Flash is closed, Apple is open. Huh? I can build a flash app entirely for free, legally, with zero restrictions, forever, on the tools I used to write it, or where I can deploy it to. Adobe has bent over backwards to make players (also free) backwards compatible. That's pretty open. I must pay to build an iphone app, which I can only do on a computer owned by the same company, running an OS owned by the same company. This app only runs on hardware made by said company, and only run on an OS by said company. I am restricted in how I can build this, and must live by the whims of an opaque editorial process. In terms of openness, this makes Bill Gates look like RMS.

tptacek 17y ago
Apple makes Bill Gates look like Richard Stallman? Let me ask you something. How many of Microsoft's competitors are building products that compete directly with Microsoft core offerings using the source code to Internet Explorer?
- efsavage 17y ago
  How many of Microsoft's OSes have specifically forbidden that you install another web browser?
  - tptacek 17y ago
    That depends on who "you" means. If by you, you mean "me"? None of them. If by "you", you mean "Dell"? Very different story. Your comparison is, to this reader, simply hyperbolic.
  - dmnd 17y ago
    Did I miss Apple removing Opera from the App Store?
    - wvenable 17y ago
      That's Opera Mini -- most other mobile platforms have the full Opera Mobile browser available (or soon). That browser is explicitly against the rules of the app store (as it runs interpreted code downloaded off the Internet). [Edit: What's with the down votes -- this is factual information]
- anatoly 17y ago
  None, because the source code to Internet Explorer isn't based on an LGPL library and so can be kept proprietary. Now, how many Microsoft OSes refuse to run in a virtualization environment on non-approved hardware? How many treat such execution as a license violation?
  - tptacek 17y ago
    So your argument appears to be that Apple, having chosen to build the most popular (by vendor support) browser library on the market on a GPL codebase, is less open than Microsoft.
    - anatoly 17y ago
      No, my argument is that your argument is misleading because it ignores the fact that Apple doesn't have a choice in keeping Webkit open. It's possible that they would want to and possible they would not want to, if they had a choice. When they originally chose KHTML to base Webkit on, in 2002, years before the first iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone OS, etc., their attitute towards being open may have been different than it is now. No one is saying Apple were less open than Microsoft in 2002; people are saying it's less open than Microsoft now, and you counteract with ignorant, invalid arguments while ignoring the evidence you're presented with. You're behaving like a troll.
      - tptacek 17y ago
        Apple has been a (or, THE) driving force behind Webkit for some time now. They weren't forced to start with LGPL code. They did because they were comfortable working under the GPL. I object to the subtext here, of "Apple only does open source when they're dragged into it". No, in fact, Apple has been a vocal and active open source contributor for many years now, to a far far greater extent than Microsoft. I started with WebKit because I think it's especially relevant to this conversation. WebKit is an important gift to all of Apple's mobile competitors. But move on from WebKit and there's still: * LLVM/Clang * OpenCL * Grand Central Dispatch * Darwin * Quicktime Streaming etc etc etc. Name one bona fide open source project that Microsoft runs that any of its competitors in any market have been able to use. I'm sure there's at least one. Maybe if we go project-vs.-project, Microsoft will even come out ahead. I really doubt it, though. So for now, just one.
zefhous 17y ago
Can you really build flash apps for free? Honest question — I thought you needed to have Flash. If you do need Flash, you have things backwards. For one, he's talking about web apps, not iPhone OS apps. Web apps are entirely open and Apple is huge on pushing what you can do with the web. Also, building iPhone OS apps is absolutely free. The entire SDK and documentation is free of charge, you just need a Mac to develop on. You need a $100 membership to sell iPhone apps, which is very different from needing it to try out development. Flash on the other hand, costs $700. Flash is entirely closed. Apple is mostly closed and is totally up front about it, but they completely support open web standards.
- efsavage 17y ago
  http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK;jsessionid=B9ED21964C23482B537C03B5E835AF3E http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK;js... http://www.libming.org/ http://www.libming.org/ http://www.swftools.org/ http://www.swftools.org/
- Sindisil 17y ago
  Yes you can. The compiler is free and open (http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK). That, an editor, and Bob's your uncle. On Windows, there's also a nice open source IDE (http://flashdevelop.org http://flashdevelop.org). The one thing that's not open source is the player, and that is free.
  - megablast 17y ago
    You realise that Adobe lets you make any components you want EXCEPT FOR THE PLAYER? Why, because they want to retain control of it. I mean, they publish the spec, people have made players before, and they have been told by Adobe to stop. Sounds familiar.
    - stuntmouse 17y ago
      It'd be interesting to pressure Adobe on this point right now, given the context.

tptacek 17y ago

Apple makes Bill Gates look like Richard Stallman? Let me ask you something. How many of Microsoft's competitors are building products that compete directly with Microsoft core offerings using the source code to Internet Explorer?

efsavage 17y ago
How many of Microsoft's OSes have specifically forbidden that you install another web browser?
- tptacek 17y ago
  That depends on who "you" means. If by you, you mean "me"? None of them. If by "you", you mean "Dell"? Very different story. Your comparison is, to this reader, simply hyperbolic.
- dmnd 17y ago
  Did I miss Apple removing Opera from the App Store?
  - wvenable 17y ago
    That's Opera Mini -- most other mobile platforms have the full Opera Mobile browser available (or soon). That browser is explicitly against the rules of the app store (as it runs interpreted code downloaded off the Internet). [Edit: What's with the down votes -- this is factual information]
anatoly 17y ago
None, because the source code to Internet Explorer isn't based on an LGPL library and so can be kept proprietary. Now, how many Microsoft OSes refuse to run in a virtualization environment on non-approved hardware? How many treat such execution as a license violation?
- tptacek 17y ago
  So your argument appears to be that Apple, having chosen to build the most popular (by vendor support) browser library on the market on a GPL codebase, is less open than Microsoft.
  - anatoly 17y ago
    No, my argument is that your argument is misleading because it ignores the fact that Apple doesn't have a choice in keeping Webkit open. It's possible that they would want to and possible they would not want to, if they had a choice. When they originally chose KHTML to base Webkit on, in 2002, years before the first iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone OS, etc., their attitute towards being open may have been different than it is now. No one is saying Apple were less open than Microsoft in 2002; people are saying it's less open than Microsoft now, and you counteract with ignorant, invalid arguments while ignoring the evidence you're presented with. You're behaving like a troll.
    - tptacek 17y ago
      Apple has been a (or, THE) driving force behind Webkit for some time now. They weren't forced to start with LGPL code. They did because they were comfortable working under the GPL. I object to the subtext here, of "Apple only does open source when they're dragged into it". No, in fact, Apple has been a vocal and active open source contributor for many years now, to a far far greater extent than Microsoft. I started with WebKit because I think it's especially relevant to this conversation. WebKit is an important gift to all of Apple's mobile competitors. But move on from WebKit and there's still: * LLVM/Clang * OpenCL * Grand Central Dispatch * Darwin * Quicktime Streaming etc etc etc. Name one bona fide open source project that Microsoft runs that any of its competitors in any market have been able to use. I'm sure there's at least one. Maybe if we go project-vs.-project, Microsoft will even come out ahead. I really doubt it, though. So for now, just one.

zefhous 17y ago

Can you really build flash apps for free? Honest question — I thought you needed to have Flash. If you do need Flash, you have things backwards. For one, he's talking about web apps, not iPhone OS apps. Web apps are entirely open and Apple is huge on pushing what you can do with the web. Also, building iPhone OS apps is absolutely free. The entire SDK and documentation is free of charge, you just need a Mac to develop on. You need a $100 membership to sell iPhone apps, which is very different from needing it to try out development. Flash on the other hand, costs $700. Flash is entirely closed. Apple is mostly closed and is totally up front about it, but they completely support open web standards.

efsavage 17y ago
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK;jsessionid=B9ED21964C23482B537C03B5E835AF3E http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK;js... http://www.libming.org/ http://www.libming.org/ http://www.swftools.org/ http://www.swftools.org/
Sindisil 17y ago
Yes you can. The compiler is free and open (http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK). That, an editor, and Bob's your uncle. On Windows, there's also a nice open source IDE (http://flashdevelop.org http://flashdevelop.org). The one thing that's not open source is the player, and that is free.
- megablast 17y ago
  You realise that Adobe lets you make any components you want EXCEPT FOR THE PLAYER? Why, because they want to retain control of it. I mean, they publish the spec, people have made players before, and they have been told by Adobe to stop. Sounds familiar.
  - stuntmouse 17y ago
    It'd be interesting to pressure Adobe on this point right now, given the context.