For the iPhone maybe, but on Leopard Apple does support Cocoa in languages other than Obj-C such as Python (PyObJC 2.0 is included in Leopard) and Ruby.
"What the hell, Apple?" - What the hell people...
Before you spread silly rumors, perhaps you folks should educate yourself a tiny bit first. I have just watched the iPhone SDK developer intro videos (have you? do you understand them?) and can tell you that the Apple iPhone applications WORK THE SAME WAY. The trick is for your application to SAVE STATE. Rest your case, it will all be good... jeez.
And plenty of fanboys will blindly defend everything Apple does. Look, the iPhone is fantastic. It has the potential to completely change the industry, and because of that I see danger in setting the precedent that Apple should have complete control over what runs on it. Personal computers and the web succeeded exactly because anybody could create anything they wanted, without begging anyone for permission. The iPhone restrictions aren't as bad as they could have been, but they will still stifle creativity, innovation, and freedom.
It isn't. An official channel for Apple-approved iPhone apps is great. The problem is having it be the only option. Would you prefer that Apple lock down Mac OS X so you could only get apps through apple.com?
Sounds like a good idea to me from a battery life point of view, you don't want apps sucking CPU time in the background while you're not using them. iPhone is really a one-app-at-a-time device like Palm Pilots used to be, which I think makes a lot of sense given the screen size.
One would have to assume MS will work on a mobile version of Office for the iPhone, right?
Otherwise, I guess things like NeoOffice could start popping up, so the iPhone can finally have word processing built in, to satisfy all the WM users.
Anyone heard any rumors to this effect?
PS- As an iPhone user, we are finally starting to realize the potential of these devices, and making it easy to forget the price tag. Name another company that supports their product SO WELL, even months or years after it was released!
Makes me proud to be andie hard.
In the very same link you quote from a poster brought up something interesting. If no app can run in the background how does mail do it? How is it supposed to know when to recieve Exchange Mail if there isn't a constant connection back to the server that can run even in the background?I think this was well answered in a post in the previous link's comments:
"Allowing things to run in the background on a cellphone (a device so private) is worrysome.. sniffing data (if technically feasible).. eavesdropping calls.. (if technically feasible).. routing to different nets (if technically feasible) .."
And
"Reliability is king for mobile apps"
Just for the record, I am not saying that I know so much about mobile apps (definitely interested for sure, as of yesterday evening), but I just believe it might be a welcome change to the smart phone business if there is some control and stricter guidelines for a few things.
I've had a crappy Nokia E61 in the past and if you had as much as installed Tetris on it, Nokia was fast to point out that they would take not a single look at the crappy device as to why it kept jumping off WiFi networks and what have you. I've had dozens of Nokia horror stories. Not one glitch on my iPhone. That doesn't make me a fanboy more than the fact that I prefer things that work reliably. And it happens to be that my experience with Apple products far surpasses anything else tech-wise on the grand scale. Nothing is perfect, but show me a manufacturer that's closer.
I'll take a slightly slower adaption to new and "what's technically possible" anyday if it comes with reliability.
And for those mega-tweakers, I'm sure Microsoft and Yahoo will come up with something that makes you all happy dancers. Think - what's the name again... Zune-Phone or whatever...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1274983729713522403
