4 ms·

The author seems to neglect the legitimate practical problems of Adobe gaining market power on the iPhone platform. If Adobe creates a translation layer from f

by Empact 16y ago

The author seems to neglect the legitimate practical problems of Adobe gaining market power on the iPhone platform. If Adobe creates a translation layer from flash to cocoa, and developers use it en masse, then an issue within the translation layer becomes far more problematic: instead of rejecting the developer who wrote the bad code, they have to reject a whole host of apps from innocent developers who used an off-the-shelf third-party framework. As the number of these apps increases, the pressure grows on Apple to work around the problem rather than simply force Adobe to behavior properly. Over time these workarounds corrupt the system they're building and set them down the path of Microsoft. Not that this is an insurmountable concern, but there are practical matters beyond app quality or lock-in.

GrandMasterBirt 16y ago
I must disagree. Microsoft did not fail in the same way RIM did not fail because of 3rd party developers. I will use RIM as an example. RIM just now is coming out with a platform to bring blackberry out of the stone-age. Was it the app developers' fault for not writing wonderful BB apps? Or is the platform so shitty nobody wants a BB unless their job gives it to them? We got WebOS, Symbian, Android, Windows 7 they are all coming out as a competitor to iPhone OS and BlackBerry 2.0. RIM is now finally listening to what their clients want because their business is being stolen from right under their feet, and they just realized that. Had they had the attitude of "lets fix the problems our users are complaining about" 3 years ago, the state of everything would be different. Now http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/29/rim_blackberry_os_6 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/29/rim_blackberry_os_6 at the quote in there. Apple is playing catchup slowly to RIM, but that does not matter. Apple has the momentum and is building it, once they implement enough to make enterprises be able to use iphone instead of BB boom rim loses everything, because go up to someone and ask "free blackberry curve, or free iphone (plans included)?" guess the answer. The point is the same with MS. Until Apple started kicking them in the shin, Windows XP (a piece of shit) was the pinnacle of technology. We see XP NOW as shit, but back in the day I was thinking "wow crashing XP is 100x as hard as BSODing in windows 98, windows xp is awesome!" Remember Windows ME (the unwanted child)? So Adobe building the "lowest common dinominator" technology for cross platform is BS as well. "features x,y,z are for iphone only until android implements it" which means: a) android better start implementing, b) developers have MOST of their work cut out for them when porting. Maybe take a few different directions when porting to android. It's not like I ever expect to write an iphone app and with no work/testing just port it to android and vuala. And maybe for a developer it means no android app until the feature is implemented. And thus back to (a) which is android now has an incentive for implementing features.

by Empact 16y ago

GrandMasterBirt 16y ago

I must disagree. Microsoft did not fail in the same way RIM did not fail because of 3rd party developers. I will use RIM as an example. RIM just now is coming out with a platform to bring blackberry out of the stone-age. Was it the app developers' fault for not writing wonderful BB apps? Or is the platform so shitty nobody wants a BB unless their job gives it to them? We got WebOS, Symbian, Android, Windows 7 they are all coming out as a competitor to iPhone OS and BlackBerry 2.0. RIM is now finally listening to what their clients want because their business is being stolen from right under their feet, and they just realized that. Had they had the attitude of "lets fix the problems our users are complaining about" 3 years ago, the state of everything would be different. Now http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/29/rim_blackberry_os_6 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/29/rim_blackberry_os_6 at the quote in there. Apple is playing catchup slowly to RIM, but that does not matter. Apple has the momentum and is building it, once they implement enough to make enterprises be able to use iphone instead of BB boom rim loses everything, because go up to someone and ask "free blackberry curve, or free iphone (plans included)?" guess the answer. The point is the same with MS. Until Apple started kicking them in the shin, Windows XP (a piece of shit) was the pinnacle of technology. We see XP NOW as shit, but back in the day I was thinking "wow crashing XP is 100x as hard as BSODing in windows 98, windows xp is awesome!" Remember Windows ME (the unwanted child)? So Adobe building the "lowest common dinominator" technology for cross platform is BS as well. "features x,y,z are for iphone only until android implements it" which means: a) android better start implementing, b) developers have MOST of their work cut out for them when porting. Maybe take a few different directions when porting to android. It's not like I ever expect to write an iphone app and with no work/testing just port it to android and vuala. And maybe for a developer it means no android app until the feature is implemented. And thus back to (a) which is android now has an incentive for implementing features.