6 ms·

> But do Synergy and Barrier Just Work? It has to Just Work, otherwise it's a defective product. I don't own any apple products so correct me if I'm wrong, but

> But do Synergy and Barrier Just Work? It has to Just Work, otherwise it's a defective product. I don't own any apple products so correct me if I'm wrong, but if there was a way to make a program to "just work" will Apple allow it? From what I've heard devs complain apple's walled garden is pretty restrictive when it comes to things you can and cannot do especially when mobile devices are involved.

xvector 5y ago
Do you really trust the average individual to install apps that with zero configuration can read your screen from any of your devices? This walled garden is 100% a feature.
ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
I’m an Apple developer, and own lots of Apple products. Apple gear and software always has a low-level advantage, as they own the SDK, but I haven’t seen them actually use this to deliberately disadvantage competitors (unlike some other companies that I won’t mention). That said, I have seen them “Sherlock” developers, though; where they implement integrated versions of products made by independent devs. This has been fairly controversial, as they have not always paid/given credit to the developers they plowed under. That sucks, because it would, literally, cost them nothing to simply mention the product that inspired their work. I suspect that’s because lawyers. I tend to like Apple for the same reason that other developers hate them. That “walled garden” is a big fat PItA, but it is also the reason for an enormous, lucrative, market. We need to learn to take the bad with the good, if we want to be happy.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  > Apple gear and software always has a low-level advantage, as they own the SDK, but I haven’t seen them actually use this to deliberately disadvantage competitors (unlike some other companies that I won’t mention). Try to write code for macOS that can stream data from disk as fast as Logic Pro. Maybe there's really no magic, and I'm just an idiot, but I certainly couldn't do it.
  - ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
    I’m not exactly sure what that has to do with disputing the quoted sentence. It’s actually what I was talking about. Everybody knows that Apple has "internal APIs," giving them access that non-Apple software does not have. This does make it difficult for independent developers to offer competing functionality (this has happened with me), but I have not felt that Apple has deliberately targeted competition. It's just that they have the ability to deliver something that serves the user, and their internal access gives them an advantage. As an independent developer, I can certainly understand why I would not be allowed to access some of these private APIs, and I don't feel that it is because Apple is afraid of any competition from li'l ol' me. I have always assumed that it's because access at that level may bypass some security methods.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      You have just described "deliberately disadvantaging" the competition, which was what you said you did not believe Apple had done.
      - fennecfoxen 5y ago
        The approach he described is consistent with non-malicious failure to turn a new API into something robust, reliable, external, and well documented. If you’ve got a hot new way to move bytes the long term stability of the API is a real concern. You break things if you change it.
      - ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
        No. "Deliberately disadvantaging" is doing something like adding code to slow down disk write operations used by a direct competitor. Listen, I'm not gonna play this game. I said my piece, you said yours, we're done.

xvector 5y ago

Do you really trust the average individual to install apps that with zero configuration can read your screen from any of your devices? This walled garden is 100% a feature.

ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago

I’m an Apple developer, and own lots of Apple products. Apple gear and software always has a low-level advantage, as they own the SDK, but I haven’t seen them actually use this to deliberately disadvantage competitors (unlike some other companies that I won’t mention). That said, I have seen them “Sherlock” developers, though; where they implement integrated versions of products made by independent devs. This has been fairly controversial, as they have not always paid/given credit to the developers they plowed under. That sucks, because it would, literally, cost them nothing to simply mention the product that inspired their work. I suspect that’s because lawyers. I tend to like Apple for the same reason that other developers hate them. That “walled garden” is a big fat PItA, but it is also the reason for an enormous, lucrative, market. We need to learn to take the bad with the good, if we want to be happy.

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
> Apple gear and software always has a low-level advantage, as they own the SDK, but I haven’t seen them actually use this to deliberately disadvantage competitors (unlike some other companies that I won’t mention). Try to write code for macOS that can stream data from disk as fast as Logic Pro. Maybe there's really no magic, and I'm just an idiot, but I certainly couldn't do it.
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
  I’m not exactly sure what that has to do with disputing the quoted sentence. It’s actually what I was talking about. Everybody knows that Apple has "internal APIs," giving them access that non-Apple software does not have. This does make it difficult for independent developers to offer competing functionality (this has happened with me), but I have not felt that Apple has deliberately targeted competition. It's just that they have the ability to deliver something that serves the user, and their internal access gives them an advantage. As an independent developer, I can certainly understand why I would not be allowed to access some of these private APIs, and I don't feel that it is because Apple is afraid of any competition from li'l ol' me. I have always assumed that it's because access at that level may bypass some security methods.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    You have just described "deliberately disadvantaging" the competition, which was what you said you did not believe Apple had done.
    - fennecfoxen 5y ago
      The approach he described is consistent with non-malicious failure to turn a new API into something robust, reliable, external, and well documented. If you’ve got a hot new way to move bytes the long term stability of the API is a real concern. You break things if you change it.
    - ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
      No. "Deliberately disadvantaging" is doing something like adding code to slow down disk write operations used by a direct competitor. Listen, I'm not gonna play this game. I said my piece, you said yours, we're done.