[1] Apple has been advising people to move to Cocoa since 2001.
[2] How many other developers other than Adobe did cancelling Carbon64 affect?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Responds to Apple's Anti-Flash Stance With Comments on Openness, Ad Campaign
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
[1] Apple has been advising people to move to Cocoa since 2001.
[2] How many other developers other than Adobe did cancelling Carbon64 affect?
"What we want for our customers is open...."
...blah, blah, blah. What you, and Apple, and every other company wants is to cut throats, take no prisoners, and sit in board rooms laughing about your profit margins. Give me a break.
Adobe, here's what we know. You make a product that falls short, and someone has called you on it. (Apple had the Newton, and the Cube). Get over it. Fix it, or get out of the way. Apple is doing what you would do. Stop with the crocodile tears, already, my crackers are damp.
...blah, blah, blah. What you, and Apple, and every other company wants is to cut throats, take no prisoners, and sit in board rooms laughing about your profit margins. Give me a break.
Adobe, here's what we know. You make a product that falls short, and someone has called you on it. (Apple had the Newton, and the Cube). Get over it. Fix it, or get out of the way. Apple is doing what you would do. Stop with the crocodile tears, already, my crackers are damp.
Oh please, the tools aren't what make inconsistent or bad apps. It's the developpers. You know the saying, guns don't kill people, I do.
I can make as much crap using Xcode and the SDK that I can with Flash. I can make some pretty cool stuff with Flash, just as much as I can with the SDK.
There's already an approval process. They even approved Flash apps when the CS5 compiler was in Beta.
The only consistency problem with Apple is their app approval process.
Apple should practice what it preaches then. Most of their professional software line-up is still Carbon and 32 bit.
So I'd guess for #2, Apple was affected. Now they have to rewrite their software to make it 64 bit.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I would fall of my chair laughing if Microsoft's SilverLight made it onto the new iPhone OS. IMHO Sliverlight runs very well on my Macs.
That (Silverlight) in my opinion has a lot more to do with Micorsoft's recent comments about embracing HTML5, etc than simply following the leader (Apple). Silverlight is Microsofts answer to Flash, much like IE was their answer to Netscape. They want Flash to die in hopes that Silverlight can take over, not because they are bowing to Apple's greatness for embracing the future. Of course, the crowd in that thread only saw it as "Apple is right- even MS thinks so" A lot of the comments also took it as MS choosing HTML5 instead of Flash, when, in fact, MS was simply saying they would support HTML5, etc in addition to Flash.
Oh please, what?
And you nailed it. Developers make bad Apps. Hence, Apple not wanting bad developers that can't use their native SDK. If Apple were to change something down the road, they only have the SDK to think about, not some crappy middleware and middleware developers.
Again, oh please.
You're arguing that the SDK is a filter. It's not. App templates are all over the place, copy pasting tutorials, you can have an app ready for approval in less than an hour with a little Googling. It'll be pure crap (read, a flashlight app and/or a picture slideshow and/or a glowstick).
The App Approval process is there to filter out the garbage. Limiting tools the dev can use does not limit the crap. It however limits your dev pool. There are plenty of talented Flash devs that will not touch Xcode since they don't have access to a Mac.
If you've ever spent more than 2 minutes on newgrounds, you know there's a lot of great Flash stuff out there.
Again, oh please, what?
All I hear is flash developers moaning that they will soon be obsolete. Sucks for you. If you're not going to touch XCode, then you don't get to make an App. Don't like it? Don't develop for iDevices. I'm sure the App store will miss your flashlights and glowsticks.
There is a lot of great Flash stuff out there, so what? There's also a lot of great Linux stuff out there, and Java stuff out there...should Apple support it all at the expense of their platform?
I love Flash, I've already ordered CS5. But I'm not going to sit here and bitch and moan that I can't use what I want when I want to on someone else's platform. That is just nonsensical.
Luckily, Android will be there for all those crappy developers and all the crappy frameworks, middleware, and esoteric languages such as Java and C#.
When Apple has scared away MonoTouch, Unity etc., there will be another home for the talentless hacks who created those abominations.
Obj-C and Native APIs aren't some sort of barrier separating the bad developers from the good. Obj-C isn't hard. It's just old and really ugly
Doesn't Adobe having better things to spend there money on?
We have choice:
love flash? dont buy an Iphone.
don't know/care what flash is, keep the Iphone.
stupid Adobe
We have choice:
love flash? dont buy an Iphone.
don't know/care what flash is, keep the Iphone.
stupid Adobe
Shows how much you know. All the new features in FCS and logic studio are in Cocoa and Apple is showing signs that they are moving osx over to cocoa.
Obj-C and Native APIs aren't some sort of barrier separating the bad developers from the good. Obj-C isn't hard. It's just old and really ugly
Message parsing is no uglier or as obscure as . syntax.
C is older and uglier, should we stop using that?
Wait what ? You're totally misrepresenting what I said. Your premise is flawed and you're arguing in bad faith.
People use Xcode to write the glowsticks and flashlights. Flash won't suddenly make this possible, it already is. The App store is a mess of crap RIGHT NOW.
And I'm a Obj-C and C hobbyist. I use Xcode right now to write a few Mac apps. The last Flash stuff I ever did (which was 1 short movie) was using Macromedia Flash MX. Yes, that old.
They are just now moving OS X to Cocoa. When was the Finder ported ? (10.6). When was iTunes ported ? (9.0). Those are flagship software.
What about the core of Logic and Final Cut ? Still Carbon.
They've had 10 years to port this stuff. They even had a hands up on everyone else since they wrote the OS. Somehow, I fail to see how this makes Adobe lazy if Apple won't even eat their own dogfood.
Luckily, Android will be there for all those crappy developers and all the crappy frameworks, middleware, and esoteric languages such as Java and C#.
When Apple has scared away MonoTouch, Unity etc., there will be another home for the talentless hacks who created those abominations.
Obj-C and Native APIs aren't some sort of barrier separating the bad developers from the good. Obj-C isn't hard. It's just old and really ugly
Go for it. Android is a great platform, and now it is ahead in mobile market share, no?
The term is message passing and it has nothing to do with the syntax. Dot syntax does not imply that message passing isn't used. In fact, Obj-C itself uses dot syntax as syntactic sugar in some places.
Anyway, I was only having a bit of fun. I'm not saying it is useless. Just old and really really ugly
But Apple is eating their own dog food! They are porting their Apps to Cocoa.
Adobe doesn't have an operating system to develop.
Heh.
It seems to me that Adobe wouldn't respond to Apple with just an ad campaign if they had an effective technical solution. They'd roll out an efffective Flash for mobile devices and not bother with the print war.
The term is message passing and it has nothing to do with the syntax. Dot syntax does not imply that message passing isn't used. In fact, Obj-C itself uses dot syntax as syntactic sugar in some places.
Anyway, I was only having a bit of fun. I'm not saying it is useless. Just old and really really ugly
[circle radius]
circle.radius
Hardly sugar. But thats not I was talking about. I was talking about how methods are applied, and how it can get really really obscure.
Like setting the origin and raidus of a circle.
It might be in XYZ language
circle.set(0, 0, 1);
While ObjC could be
[circle setOriginx: 0 y:0 withRadius:1];
Dont like the verbose method?
[circle set:0 :0 :1];
Passing/Parsing, they can mean the same thing. Calling a language ugly is very immature. Its just a different Syntax. If you want ugly code, why don't you look at code generated by middleware. Now that is ugly!
Take it up with Apple:
"The dot syntax is purely “syntactic sugar”—it is transformed by the compiler into invocation of accessor methods (so you are not actually accessing an instance variable directly)."
http://developer.apple.com/iphone/l...html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30001163-CH11-SW17
...and in Ruby it could be
Code:
Circle.new(:origin_x => 0, :origin_y => 0, :radius => 1);What's your point (pun intended)?
No.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean but I would encourage you not to use message parsing and message passing interchangeably.
Message parsing implies that a message is being analyzed, tokenized etc.
Message passing is one of the ways one can use to allow objects to communicate.
Are we off-topic yet?
You really think the guy who writes the kernel also does Logic Studio in his spare time ?
Adobe has ported their apps to Cocoa, CS5 shipped last month.
Flash has always been bloatware, and it just got more bloated ever since it was released, it isn't all of a sudden people hate flash, people have always seen how horrible flash is but they dealt with what they had since their was no alternative, but now there are alternatives being made that are 50x better than flash.
This reminds me a lot about the directx vs opengl wars, but at least directx isn't too evil and manages to improve over time compared to flash.
This reminds me a lot about the directx vs opengl wars, but at least directx isn't too evil and manages to improve over time compared to flash.