Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Internet is not Steve's store.
The App store is, and if he doesn't want to sell porn he doesn't have to just like Best Buy doesn't even though they sell videos.

You misunderstand, I'm not saying Porn should be in the app store, I'm saying using porn as an excuse for why you can't side-load apps outside of the store is completely irrelevant when your platform is open to the web where half of the webpages in existence are porn. I agree and think Apple can control the App Store however they see fit (much like physical box stores do) but to not allow outside apps because of the potential of porn is not an argument that I think anyone should accept.

I personally believe Apple should allow for the side loading of apps, if only because I fear the potential future of computing where a company tells you what you can and cannot do with your own devices.

Really, at this point I just want some form of respect. If Apple isn't going to allow the side-loading apps, they can at least provide a reason that isn't complete and utter ******** such as "Porn".
 
For a real developer, Objective C in xcode isn't a big deal. The real problem is people who are nothing more than script jockeys using Flash who consider themselves to be programmers. They're too lazy to learn Obj C, so they whine about how unfair the world is.

Oh I gotcha now.
 
Actually, I've read them all, and it's all just bunk. It's bullsh*t, and I'm tired of the Adobe astroturfers clogging up the internet (nice April 2010 account creation date).

sorry about that, but i've been a long time lurker on this site. but this is the first time i've been angry enough to bother signing up.

Apple provides the tools and the API calls to make your apps work. Because Flash is rapidly losing relevance on the internet, Adobe scrambled to try to add some value to it by allowing you to make poorly running iPhone app exports from Flash. Great. The trouble is that Apple really and deeply believes in a certain customer experience and a slowly running battery hogging faked ui-elements app doesn't really fit into that vision.

well, that's one take on it. another take, which is implied true in a SJ email posted a few days ago, is that they want to enhance platform lock-in. cross-platform tools break that premise. worst-case flash apps won't burn any more cpu or battery than a 3d game or anything that does serious maths. it's a decoy statement to try and draw attention away from their true intentions.

i'm not a lawyer, but i've been coding professionally for fifteen years, on everything from industrial grade control systems to the nintendo ds. middleware is USEFUL, sometimes you don't want to reinvent the wheel every time you have a good idea. to me this certainly seems to me to be a total jerk move on apple's part.

So what you have is a bunch of Adobe fantrolls spewing filth on the internet and it's gotten old.

i'm not an adobe fanboy. i own apple products and adobe products, and they've both done stupid/belligerent crap over the years.

this doesn't just stomp on adobe though, there are other tools that get caught up in this (e.g. monotouch).
 
You misunderstand, I'm not saying Porn should be in the app store, I'm saying using porn as an excuse for why you can't side-load apps outside of the store is completely irrelevant when your platform is open to the web where half of the webpages in existence are porn. I agree and think Apple can control the App Store however they see fit (much like physical box stores do) but to not allow outside apps because of the potential of porn is not an argument that I think anyone should accept.

I personally believe Apple should allow for the side loading of apps, if only because I fear the potential future of computing where a company tells you what you can and cannot do with your own devices.

Really, at this point I just want some form of respect. If Apple isn't going to allow the side-loading apps, they can at least provide a reason that isn't complete and utter ******** such as "Porn".

the app store doesn't exist or isn't exclusive to block porn. It is exclusive for security reasons. Because of the app store, there should never, ever be an iPhone OS virus.
 
Jobs has a point...

If you have a car under warranty and you take it to an non authorized mechanic to have it fixed you loose the warranty because the car will not perform as is suposed to.

Apple is just doing what it can to make its platform run just fine.
 
From Adobe's Website (Source Link):

"Are applications for iPhone built with Flash Platform tools interpreted at runtime?
No. iPhone applications built with the Packager for iPhone are compiled into standard, native iPhone executables, just like any other iPhone application."

and

"Can applications load SWF files or other code at runtime, such as a module from a website?
No. iPhone applications built with the Packager for iPhone are compiled into standard, native iPhone executable packages and there is no runtime interpreter that could be used to run ActionScript bytecode within the application."

If the information provided on the above site is true and not committing any lies by omission, an application written using flash and compiled using their tool into an iPhone app is a native iphone app. No runtime. No interpretation. No intermediary layer. Just native code in the end result that links up to official apple blessed APIs.

Back on topic though, is it possible Adobe might be going for an angle of Apple abusing their iPhone market to force developers to purchase from their otherwise unrelated computer division to write for the platform? Does Apple have any financial interests in H.264 video? I'm a software engineer, not really a lawyer.
 
Back on topic though, is it possible Adobe might be going for an angle of Apple abusing their iPhone market to force developers to purchase from their otherwise unrelated computer division to write for the platform? Does Apple have any financial interests in H.264 video? I'm a software engineer, not really a lawyer.

Apple has no "market power" in smartphones. It has something like 15% of the market. So it has no monopoly to leverage to force developers to buy otherwise unrelated stuff. The laws against such behavior apply when you are leveraging a monopoly.
 
No Case

Adobe sells a $399 piece of software called Dreamweaver that can be used to develop on the iphone instead of flash. Adobe here has the choice. Also, Adobe currently has a monopoly on Flash (90%+ content). So not clear on any anti-competitiveness laws that are being broken. Especially if Apple can prove that it has requested Adobe improve their product by using the API's that Apple requires them to use.
 
I am guessing Adobe will set out to make Apple the new MS in peoples eyes. Then they hope that will damage Apples business and get everyone back around the table.


It will be interesting to see if Adobe push the lawsuit down the medias throats with vigour or not.......if there is a lawsuit that is.
 
If you have a car under warranty and you take it to an non authorized mechanic to have it fixed you loose the warranty because the car will not perform as is suposed to.

Apple is just doing what it can to make its platform run just fine.

But you can play any CDs you want in the car. Not so much on iPhone :D
 
Your writing is not very clear (I think you have an "inability" in there instead of an "ability" and a couple of other ambiguous passages).

Anyway, I think you may be asking somewhere in there, "why should porn apps be disallowed from the app store, when porn is generally and readily available on the open internet", and a child presumably has access to a browser?

Basically, there seem to be a couple of misconceptions going on here: 1) that a policy prohibiting porn apps is about nothing more than "controlling what you can and can't do" with your iPhone, iPod or iPad. Certainly, someone who is determined, and maybe even only a little curious, can find it if they want to; or can circumvent the restrictions.

2) That since society is pretty permissive these days and porn is pretty much everywhere you look anyway, why not just throw out all the "pretentious, anachronistic, weird and conservative" notions and just let it all hang out -- why pretend to have any principles or give any heed to others' principles?

Simply put, a parent (myself included) will feel pretty good about such a policy. My kids hijack the iPod Touch and iPad as it is and spend hours on it. It's one thing to know they need some guidance or restrictions while using the internet; at the same time, they don't generally click on ads and they don't put odd and unfamiliar words they don't know how to spell into the search field. However, they will browse the app store and movie trailers much more readily.

Yes, one knows that porn is almost openly displayed on some streets -- that doesn't mean a child should have to come face to face with it in the minimarket when they go to do some shopping. The places that keep it off their shelves are much appreciated by parents. They are showing a little backbone, a little restraint, saying they don't have to participate in a free-for-all to get the attention of jaded consumers; that just because the store owner is in business, it doesn't mean he has to accommodate every flashy but empty industry that would like to squat on his premises and shake down his loyal customers.

Discernment used to be such a highly prized attribute. Now of course, it is denigrated, much as hard work and careful planning and attention to detail are.


I doubt you'll see this, and I'll accept you're misunderstanding because the post you responded to lost some context since it was a reply to a reply, but I wasn't arguing for porn on the app store. I was stating that Steve Jobs apparently disallows installing apps OUTSIDE of the app store because of the possibility of porn apps.

I certainly don't want you're children to be exposed to, well, people exposing themselves and I would fully support Apple not letting porn apps into the store for the protection of children (which by the way, they've banned for everyone except the major players like Playboy who I guess just make them too much money to ban).

I just can't see how you're kids would be any more "in danger" of coming across porn if I the iPhone was capable of installing a porn app FROM THE INTERNET!!! Now, I don't believe Steve Jobs statement for a second that porn is whats holding us back from them allowing unsigned applications being installed, I just believe the man is cocky enough to think people will fall for it and leave it at that.

Personally, I prefer it that when I'm told I'm not allowed to do something, the reason I'm given I can at-least believe. Even if it's a lie, because let's face it, the truth that they want complete control over everything on their devices by forcing you to buy apps though them, develop though them, get approval through them, and sell through them, all so that you can further their strength in the market and let them use this power at every level to force their competitors out of the market is not the one they'd want to project to the public.
 
Adobe sells a $399 piece of software called Dreamweaver that can be used to develop on the iphone instead of flash. Adobe here has the choice. Also, Adobe currently has a monopoly on Flash (90%+ content). So not clear on any anti-competitiveness laws that are being broken. Especially if Apple can prove that it has requested Adobe improve their product by using the API's that Apple requires them to use.

Dreamweaver is still HTML4.
 
Dreamweaver is still HTML4.

Well ... according to Adobe
http://suburbia.org.uk/blog/2010/04/12/052642.html
http://www.9to5mac.com/Flash-html5-canvas-35409730

My my point is that Adobe has the choice of supporting HTML5 as well as Flash. Their excuse is that it's not far enough along. If they are willing to put a statement in their financial filings that Apple could hurt them (by not supporting flash), then they could have stated that becoming a proponent of pushing HTML5 would stem this impact (if it's real).

I do my own homework not just listen to either media machine.
 
the app store doesn't exist or isn't exclusive to block porn. It is exclusive for security reasons. Because of the app store, there should never, ever be an iPhone OS virus.

That's fine and dandy (and an argument I'm almost willing to accept, except that the virus could only spread to phones that install apps outside the app store and therefore would leave the risk up to the user to decide if it's worth it, not Apple), but that's not the reason Job's gave at their iPhone OS 4.0 Q&A. He said porn apps was the reason for disallowing unsigned apps.
 
If you have a car under warranty and you take it to an non authorized mechanic to have it fixed you loose the warranty because the car will not perform as is suposed to.

Not true. The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits such restrictions. You can use any mechanic or even do the service yourself in most cases.

Apple is just doing what it can to make its platform run just fine.

Interestingly, a lot of people thought that Apple violated the above act when they decided to void warranties for unlocking.

(If nothing else, it was very sleazy to void a hardware warranty for mod'ing software. There is no software warranty, not even for Apple code, and the hardware one explictly denies any connection to software. But I digress.)
 
Not true. The Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act prohibits such restrictions. You can use any mechanic or even do the service yourself in most cases.



Interestingly, a lot of people thought that Apple violated the above act when they decided to void warranties for unlocking.

He may be referring to third party warranties. For example, my car engine blew with 38 days left in my third party warranty. The warranty contract stipulated that I had to take the car to a mechanic on their list. I imagine that's common, and I don't believe Magnusson-Moss applies in such situations.

Not that any of this is on topic.
 
These are interesting times we live in. Technological upheavals! Dogs and cats living together!

MASS HYSTERIA!
 
There is likely damages for changing development terms after the company invested millions into making development terms for the platform.

Than there is the general anti competitive behavior, you don't have to be a monopoly to get smacked with that.

I hope apple will be forced to open up the platform in the future. The world of computing will be as bleak as cable television if this trend takes place.

I'm all for open standards and net neutrality.

All apple needs to do is to let users install their own apps as they please. Make the store exclusive to apple approved apps.

You said it!
 
I'm actually eager to see if using Optimus is going to bite Apple in the @$$. nVidia doesn't have a good track record with Hybrid Graphics or Laptop Technology.

Good thing they aren't using Optimus, then.

They did the engineering themselves, and it is not Optimus. Works differently, too.
 
That's fine and dandy (and an argument I'm almost willing to accept, except that the virus could only spread to phones that install apps outside the app store and therefore would leave the risk up to the user to decide if it's worth it, not Apple), but that's not the reason Job's gave at their iPhone OS 4.0 Q&A. He said porn apps was the reason for disallowing unsigned apps.

What was the quote? I thought he was asked about their being a porn app store for google and that apple wouldn't go there. I don't recall it being used as the reason for disallowing a 3rd party app store. Right now apps can only be distributed through the app store, have to be digitally signed, and are tested by apple before they are available to buy. There is no other way to install apps on an iPhone OS device.

I'm pretty sure apple's ability to ensure the security and reliability of the iPhone OS devices are a more significant reason than blocking porn apps since porn apps could easily be built with html5, but in that case with the inherent security that comes with running javascript in a web browser.
 
IMO, Html5 is irrelevant and not an adequate replacement for a native application. Time and again, many have said web apps will rise to consume all and it never happens. It isn't because web apps are inherently bad, it is that they aren't inherently good at everything under the sun. Because of this, I don't think it's a viable enough alternative to propose as an alternative to dealing with Apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.