5 ms·

No one DECIDES who can develop on windows mobile. which might have something to do with why it's an ugly, unpleasant mess. great technical products are not pr

No one DECIDES who can develop on windows mobile. which might have something to do with why it's an ugly, unpleasant mess. great technical products are not produced via democracy. they're almost always the vision of just a few people. Meanwhile 4000 devs are going to make ALL the applications that the masses could ever want on an iPhone. that's patently absurd. apple randomly picked 4000 iphone devs to let into the beta program. that's all. they will let in more later, once they've gotten feedback from the first crop, and understand better how the process will work. I'm frustrated that I can't get some of my linux apps to work in OS X. the linux community is not exactly known for making user-friendly apps. it's only natural that there would be a disconnect between their apps and macosx. heck, i could spend all day addressing the misconceptions and downright falsehoods in this comment, but it sounds like you've already made up your mind.

stevecooperorg 18y ago
great technical products are [...] almost always the vision of just a few people. Platforms, yes -- consistency goes a long way there, and a few coherent voices can build something where all the pieces work well together. Applications? 'the talented few' still need access to the platform. The question is, is there a way for a few, talented people to develop and deploy the killer iPhone app? That's not a rhetorical question -- is there such a route?
- allenbrunson 18y ago
  i believe that there very much is. the iphone sdk is really, really good. you can get up to speed quickly. it's a shame that apple is not giving out many of the developer keys yet. but if you're serious about this, that shouldn't be much of an impediment. you can still develop for the iphone simulator. and if you really, really need to see your app on a real iphone, you can jailbreak your phone. it's not what apple wants you to do, of course, but i really doubt they're going to disqualify developers who use that method for testing.
jmatt 18y ago
heck, i could spend all day addressing the misconceptions and downright falsehoods in this comment, but it sounds like you've already made up your mind. I'll listen if you'd like to continue to comment. great technical products are not produced via democracy. they're almost always the vision of just a few people. This clearly puts you in the cathedral category from The Cathedral & the Bazaar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar). I think both approaches have their merits and operating systems should make room for both. Though, there are good arguments for both sides I tend to like enough openness for both approaches to compete. that's patently absurd. apple randomly picked 4000 iphone devs to let into the beta program. that's all. they will let in more later, once they've gotten feedback from the first crop, and understand better how the process will work. I could understand this for a few months following the launch of the beta. But at this point open it up, what are they worried about? I'd just like to be able to put my own apps on my own iPhone for starters. I don't see how that will hurt Apple's app store launch. I understand why they are doing it, I just don't agree. I'm happy Apple is at least based on FreeBSD. If Apple is going to use Unix as a selling point then they open themselves up to some expectations from the Linux / BSD crowd. I've found ways around any problems, new apps, different work processes. But, that doesn't mean I wasn't frustrated.
- allenbrunson 18y ago
  i agree that it is unfortunate that you can't install your own apps on your own iphone without a key from apple, access to which they are zealously guarding. i'd love to be able to do just that. my guess is that it's because this is somewhat tricky. the natural state of data is that it's easily copied. apple is creating artificial impediments to that natural state, in order to keep the iphone experience pristine and friendly for non-techy-types. they don't want to release something that's half-baked, then have to take it back. that would get everyone enraged. also, apple does have an unfortunate tendency towards absolute secrecy. it's better than the endless vaporware announcements that most other companies seem to revel in, but i think they go too far sometimes. apple's not perfect, but they do a better job than any other tech company i can think of, in my opinion.

stevecooperorg 18y ago

great technical products are [...] almost always the vision of just a few people. Platforms, yes -- consistency goes a long way there, and a few coherent voices can build something where all the pieces work well together. Applications? 'the talented few' still need access to the platform. The question is, is there a way for a few, talented people to develop and deploy the killer iPhone app? That's not a rhetorical question -- is there such a route?

allenbrunson 18y ago
i believe that there very much is. the iphone sdk is really, really good. you can get up to speed quickly. it's a shame that apple is not giving out many of the developer keys yet. but if you're serious about this, that shouldn't be much of an impediment. you can still develop for the iphone simulator. and if you really, really need to see your app on a real iphone, you can jailbreak your phone. it's not what apple wants you to do, of course, but i really doubt they're going to disqualify developers who use that method for testing.

jmatt 18y ago

heck, i could spend all day addressing the misconceptions and downright falsehoods in this comment, but it sounds like you've already made up your mind. I'll listen if you'd like to continue to comment. great technical products are not produced via democracy. they're almost always the vision of just a few people. This clearly puts you in the cathedral category from The Cathedral & the Bazaar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar). I think both approaches have their merits and operating systems should make room for both. Though, there are good arguments for both sides I tend to like enough openness for both approaches to compete. that's patently absurd. apple randomly picked 4000 iphone devs to let into the beta program. that's all. they will let in more later, once they've gotten feedback from the first crop, and understand better how the process will work. I could understand this for a few months following the launch of the beta. But at this point open it up, what are they worried about? I'd just like to be able to put my own apps on my own iPhone for starters. I don't see how that will hurt Apple's app store launch. I understand why they are doing it, I just don't agree. I'm happy Apple is at least based on FreeBSD. If Apple is going to use Unix as a selling point then they open themselves up to some expectations from the Linux / BSD crowd. I've found ways around any problems, new apps, different work processes. But, that doesn't mean I wasn't frustrated.

allenbrunson 18y ago
i agree that it is unfortunate that you can't install your own apps on your own iphone without a key from apple, access to which they are zealously guarding. i'd love to be able to do just that. my guess is that it's because this is somewhat tricky. the natural state of data is that it's easily copied. apple is creating artificial impediments to that natural state, in order to keep the iphone experience pristine and friendly for non-techy-types. they don't want to release something that's half-baked, then have to take it back. that would get everyone enraged. also, apple does have an unfortunate tendency towards absolute secrecy. it's better than the endless vaporware announcements that most other companies seem to revel in, but i think they go too far sometimes. apple's not perfect, but they do a better job than any other tech company i can think of, in my opinion.