13 ms·

I've been recommending Android for a while, and here is another concrete reason why. Every time one of these stories appears I write the following: I develop fo

• brodney 14y ago
  Assuming you still develop for iOS, what is your setup for developing while using linux?
  • tvon 14y ago
    You can get OSX up and running in VirtualBox/Vagrant. Not that I'd want to do actual development that way, but we do it for iOS CI.
    • mdmarra 14y ago
      Which is a violation of the OS X EULA. install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software, for purposes of: (a) software development; (b) testing during software development; (c) using OS X Server; or (d) personal, non-commercial use. http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/OSX1082.pdf http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/OSX1082.pdf B.2.iii
      • brodney 14y ago
        The way that reads it seems valid to create a virtual instance of osx for development.
        • tesmar2 14y ago
          As long as you are already on Apple hardware running Apple software
        • mdmarra 14y ago
          Only if you're running it on top of OS X using something like VMware Fusion.
      • w1ntermute 14y ago
        When was the last time a developer got sued for violating the OS X EULA? Start worrying about real world problems for a change.
        • eridius 14y ago
          Oh, so just because you don't get sued for it means you should go ahead and do something illegal?
          • krichman 14y ago
            I don't know if breaking a contract or EULA is strictly illegal.
          • beedogs 14y ago
            [citation needed] that breaking a EULA is illegal.
        • mdmarra 14y ago
          Just so I'm clear, where is the list of which ToS and EULAs are OK to break and which ones aren't? AppGratis seems to have gotten boned for violating one, yet you're advocating people break another in the same thread? Sure, the odds of Apple coming after you are low. But that doesn't mean that it's any less of a violation of the license agreement that you agree to when installing the software. AppGratis also thought they were in the clear with their ToS issue.
          • CamperBob2 14y ago
            Here are the ones that it's not OK to break: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text Here are the ones that it is OK to break: (Most of the rest)
          • w1ntermute 14y ago
            Isn't it obvious? It's OK to violate the EULA if there's no chance of them catching you, and if other people haven't been caught before. No end user has ever been caught or sued by Apple for running OS X in a VM, because that's not easily detectable and Apple doesn't care about it. But stories of App Store EULA violation nightmares are a dime a dozen. TL;DR use your common sense
      • myko 14y ago
        Would this hold up in court? It seems laughable upon reading it.
        • mdmarra 14y ago
          Depends on your locality. In some countries/states/cities, EULAs are utterly unenforceable. In others, they might have a legitimate case.
        • dsl 14y ago
          "You can only run our software on our hardware" has already held up in courts. It's been a few years, but I think it was Allen Bradley or Siemens.
      • guelo 14y ago
        I can legally run Windows on my Mac or Linux boxes but I can't run OS X anywhere besides an official Mac. To which I say, get bent Apple, I have work to do. BTW, I'm sure all Apple Boot Camp and Parallels users pay the $250 Microsoft license, NOT.
      • pi18n 14y ago
        If I didn't have an Apple computer and sorely needed one I would probably use http://www.macincloud.com/ http://www.macincloud.com/ or get a Mac Mini.
  • pi18n 14y ago
    I have an OS X machine. Otherwise I would jailbreak the device for developing and buy a Mac Mini or something if it turns out I need OS X to do codesigning when I submit it. If anyone develops for iPhone without Xcode I'd love to hear it. I'd switch in a second if something could provide even half the functionality as long as it had half the usability issues.
• pinaceae 14y ago
  i am sorry, but this is the largest density of drivel in a while posted here. android, linux, suing samsung, lack of innovation - it's like reading an Engadget comment. apple's business model around the app store is to protect users from CRAP. malware, viruses, etc. it acts like a spam filter of sorts. just like any spam filter there are false positives, some things get through, etc. but this concrete case? good riddance. and watch how google will tighten the screws in their play store due to facebook, malware, etc. they run ads for nexus without mentioning android. they run ads for chrome.
  • untog 14y ago
    apple's business model around the app store is to protect users from CRAP Apple's business model around the App Store involves protecting users from crap, but it also has healthy doses of limiting competition and establishing first-party app dominance.
    • wmeredith 14y ago
      Apple has always put their priorities in this order aroun iOS: Apple > users > developers. As of now, it's working out quite well.
      • thefreeman 14y ago
        Uhh, have you been watching their stock at all for the past 6 months?
        • kybernetyk 14y ago
          Have you been watching their revenues and profits for the past years? The stock market is irrational and driven by fear and greed. While revenues and profits are objective performance indicators.
  • zem 14y ago
    that's all well and good from a user perspective. as a developer, why on earth would you trust apple to determine whether or not your app is crap?
• rimantas 14y ago
  > are aimed directly at people who don't know how to use > computers What does it even mean? iPhone and OS X are aimed at people who want to use their computers, instead of getting CS degree. I've heard that majority of cars in US are with automatic transmissions and few people know how to drive "stick". Are there voices suggesting that auto manufacturers are aiming their products at people who don't know how to drive a car?
  • k3n 14y ago
    For the most part, yes, though it depends on your definition of "drive". If you base your definition of "drive" as "being able to do the most basic of tasks", then sure, most everyone can drive a car. However, if you're an auto enthusiast, then to you being able to "drive" takes on a whole new definition; can you J-turn? How about drift? Can you jumpstart a car with a dead battery by push-starting? Can you correct your trajectory after losing control? To the hardcore drivers, these are the types of skills that will prove whether or not you can really "drive".
    • jdechko 14y ago
      Just as with computers, I'd wager most people don't give a crap. Most people use cars to get from one place to another. Hauling groceries, kids & whatever else. Most people use computers to check email, Facebook, pay bills, write letters and play a couple of casual games. In both cases, there are users and there are enthusiasts.
      • belorn 14y ago
        Sure, most people don't care about what the car can or can't do most of the time. Many new cars do not allow unlicensed people to repair the car. You need a signed key to do changes to the car, repair it, or adjust the engine. In the end, most people will get the normal use out of their car. It might be a bit more expensive and inconvenient, but in the end it will be just enthusiasts that actually care about being able to install custom parts on the car, or adjust the engine, or for that matter do repairs themselves.
  • 14y ago
• ricardobeat 14y ago
  You should be aware that a hefty percentage of software developers use OSX, I'd say 70% around here. They are easier to use for everyone, not just "people who don't know computers", and one of the best unix environments for development. They are certainly (specially iOS) not aimed at people who like to spend hours messing with a thousand settings screens, buttons and checkboxes - self-proclaimed "power users".
  • untog 14y ago
    He did say "OSX lately", and I agree. Snow Leopard was probably the best version of OS X, it's just been downhill from there. I don't want/care for things like Launchpad being in my OS.
    • ricardobeat 14y ago
      I liked SL for it's stability and performance, but nothing changed much in my workflow after ML. Sandboxed apps are nice, now I don't have to worry about every download. Launchpad doesn't do anything unless you launch it, and it can be disabled.
    • snowwrestler 14y ago
      I don't understand why people complain about Launchpad. It's no dumber than Front Row, which shipped on Snow Leopard and several versions prior, and like Front Row, it's totally hidden unless you choose to invoke it.
    • chipotle_coyote 14y ago
      Why does this actually matter? This is an honest question. I don't use Launchpad, but its presence on the system doesn't affect me any more than the presence of Photo Booth does. I've been using OS X since version 10.2, I think (maybe even 10.1, looking at the timeline), and came to it in large part because it married things I liked about the Mac--but never quite enough to justify buying one--with the things I liked about FreeBSD and, to some degree, BeOS. And with every iteration of the OS it got easier for everybody to use. But it's also gotten better for power users to use. Automator keeps seeing improvements. AppleScript, for both better and worse, doesn't seem to be going away. The Terminal app has gotten improvements with every release. And Mission Control -- whether you personally like it or not -- represents the latest in what's very clearly a quixotic quest on Apple's part to get everyone in the world to love virtual desktops. Mission Control may not be nerdy enough for you personally, but its very existence is pretty nerdy. (And I actually think power users should give it a chance; it's certainly not like anybody else's virtual desktop management system, but once I got used to it I found it struck a really nice balance between power and usability.) Certainly, OS X is getting better at catering to neophytes and is bringing over ideas from iOS. But I don't see anything substantial that they're taking away from OS X in the process, and that should really be what concerns us, shouldn't it? If you start hearing credible rumors that they're taking away your shell prompt, then the sky may really be falling. But as long as you can still do everything you could before, complaining about the fact that you can also do swipey stuff on your trackpad and pull up a big iPhone grid of applications seems just a little silly.