4 ms·
At first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1, but now that I think of it, you're allowed to use Objective-C, C or C++. Visual Studio already has a C/C++ c
by statictype 16y ago
At first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1, but now that I think of it, you're allowed to use Objective-C, C or C++. Visual Studio already has a C/C++ compiler so they don't even need to introduce a new language into the mix.
And since it looks like Apple is betting the company on the iPhone/iPad (as opposed to Mac OS X) there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps.
You would still need the $99 Developer License to load apps onto the device. And Apple gives Xcode away for free so they're not losing money on allowing competing development tools.
I still don't think this announcement is going to happen, but it's not the most outrageous thing that could happen.
If anything its more likely that Microsoft would reject such an idea than Apple.
- rbanffy 16y ago> there's no real downside to letting developers on non-OSX platforms build iPhone apps. To fully enjoy network effects you need to control the whole stack. This is the problem with this rumor: Jobs may be anything but he's not suicidal. Allowing iTunes to run on Windows helped increase sales of iPods and music and preventing those who already had PCs running Windows to considering the competition. Allowing VS2010 to target iPhone/iPod/iPad would increase the number of developers who could develop for the platform, something that I don't think Apple really needs. If nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it.
- stcredzero 16y agoIf nothing else, Apple could raise the bar on apps a bit. This would only lower it. On the contrary, if Apple had more apps to choose from, then it could afford to be more selective. The only thing is that they're already in a position to be more selective, and they're clearly not! (Perhaps too much work.)
- rbanffy 16y agoYou haven't seen many WinMo apps lately, have you?
- stcredzero 16y agoTo borrow a phrase from the Borg: WinMo is irrelevant.
- rbanffy 16y agoThat's the point. Apple doesn't need WinMo developers porting their apps to iPhone because a) they are terrible, b) there are not many of them and c) the important/interesting ones are already ported
- stcredzero 16y agoWho said anything about WinMo apps? Mindshare is the valuable thing!
- alextgordon 16y agoAt first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1, but now that I think of it, you're allowed to use Objective-C, C or C++. Visual Studio already has a C/C++ compiler so they don't even need to introduce a new language into the mix. Section 3.3.1 also disallows using "compatibility layers" to access documented APIs. Since the Cocoa APIs are Objective-C, you wouldn't be able to write an app using only C++ without violating it (except perhaps in the case of an OpenGL game).
- alextgordon 16y agoI'm a little puzzled why this is being downvoted. If I've made an error, could you please point it out?
- randombit 16y ago> At first blush, I dismissed it for violating 3.3.1 Even if it it did violate the clause: Apple changed it once, they can change it again...