Last time I checked flex eclipse plugin wasn't free
Besides IMHO Eclipse is just bad
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.
Steve Jobs Offers Explanation About iPhone SDK Changes Restricting Adobe and Other Cross Compilers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Last time I checked flex eclipse plugin wasn't free
Besides IMHO Eclipse is just bad
If you cant sing you arent going to be successful as a singer...... unless you use autotune.... but you'll suck live and you'll depend on too many layers of technology to work together so you can have some semblance to a person that has the natural skillset of singing. You want to be a singer but it's too hard.
if you cant program then you arent going to be a successful programmer...... unless you have a shortcut/ go between to help you along.... but you'll suck in translation and you'll depend on too many layers of programming script to work together with the platform you are trying to synergize with and have some semblance of a program that was made in the native language of the platform. you want to be a programmer but it's too hard.
see what i did there?
if you cant program then you arent going to be a successful programmer...... unless you have a shortcut/ go between to help you along.... but you'll suck in translation and you'll depend on too many layers of programming script to work together with the platform you are trying to synergize with and have some semblance of a program that was made in the native language of the platform. you want to be a programmer but it's too hard.
see what i did there?
Exactly. While I agree that controlling the development toolsets will result in a better user experience of those apps that are available, the problem is that this move reduces competition. That's ultimately bad for the end user. The only way this move will not have severe repercussions for end users is if the iPhone OS maintains and builds on its attractiveness to developers from a profitability standpoint. That means it must continue to grow its market share, not make any mistakes (such as the ones you point out about developer agreements), and nurture the app store and other ecosystem elements.
This raises the developer cost for iPhone OS. Apple now has more work to do to ensure that it is still worth it to develop large scale apps now and in the future. Basically, it's made life harder for itself and its developer base.
check again
what? have you magically found a way to publish (or even do some on device testing) these freely compiled C/C++/Objective-C apps to the App-Mart without paying apple $100/year? i suppose you've also found a new way for the 90% of the world's PC owners how they can now develop for iPhone OS without having to by a mac.
Skilled developers use the right tool for the job. There is only so much you can do with Adobe's bloated model of packaging.
No. Once Android gets a little more market share, then lazy devs would be able to double their potential audience by coding to the lowest common denominator via some abstraction API (Flash or some other). These devs won't bother adapting at all. All Apple's OS enhancement will be ignored by a chunk of this crowd, since that would be beyond that lowest common denominator required by the abstraction API. The leverage from Apple's R&D investment in this area would be neutralized. Not good.
Then, whoever bribes or buys the owner of the abstraction layer could then play the game of "Embrace and Extend" to further marginalize Apple. It's a game that's been played out before in this industry.
Now, on a completely different topic:
That $99 buys you the capability not only to provision but to distribute and sell.
Two possibilites: (1) Submit your personal app to the App store, never enable it for sale, but download one (forever provisioned) copy using a redemption coupon. (2) Whip up a nice icon and sell the app. The end of the long tail might not make any good business sense, but it's also non-zero.
One of my personal test apps (really ugly, a few buttons, no graphics) wan't an obvious violation of any SDK agreement rules, so I whipped up a 15-minute icon, submitted it (it was accepted a couple weeks later), and gave it away the first year. Actually got a few downloads. So the second year I raised the price to 99c. It's already paid for my renewal.
Yes, you posted complete rubbish. If you can't sing Bariton, it doesn't mean you can't sing at all. Maybe you just have a Tenor voice. Same with programming. It doesn't mean because you don't know why gets() is bad that your 20 years doing Smalltalk is worthless. Languages are just that, languages. They take a few minutes to learn and years to master. Knowing the C syntax doesn't make you some kind of uber programmer. Likewise, not knowing C like syntax doesn't mean you suck at programming.
Wait, wasn't using the SDK and Xcode supposed to prevent crap apps ? And now you're admitting you submitted crap to the App Store ?
So much for "ensures a better user experience".
Please stop lying. It cost zero dollars for most non-game app developers to develop and test internally on the simulator and 100 dollars per year to both provision on devices late into the dev cycle and to publish to the store. The tools are are free download. I'm currently downloading the official iPad SDK and I paid zero dollars.
RIM's SDK uses Eclipse which is such a crappy IDE that it makes X-Code look awesome in comparison. X-code is really not that bad and most people who compare it against VS are not running standard VS but are also using tools like Resharper which make VS usable. Standard VS is not significantly better than X-Code. I have used Eclipse for Python and based on that experience at work, I would have to tag on another 100 dollars for being forced to use Eclipse.
WebOS is free because they do not provide any tools. You have to supply them yourself.
Windows mobile is really expensive to develop on. Not only is VS expensive but you have to buy a copy of Virtual PC in order to use the Device emulator.
The equivalent of the iPhone or mac dev programs is MSDN and the license for that is astronomical compared to what Apple charges and you do not get any hardware discounts.
I somehow can't picture Steve Jobs personally reading Daring Fireball...
I'm beginning to think the man behind sjobs@apple.com is none other than Gruber himself
I'm beginning to think that the man behind Gruber is none other than sjobs@apple.com himself.
John Gruber is the new Guy Kawasaki.
Edit: I agree with your post though. Jobs did not email this guy. He's just trying to get clicks.
+10
And for those whining that "Steve won't let me develop iPhone apps on Windows":
Apple sells Macs. It's in their interest that you buy one. Sometimes things aren't available on windoze. Deal with it.
I totally agree with Steve Jobs on this. There is no such thing as "code once, run anywhere". Thats exactly why Java (sun) failed on Desktop side. The java GUI (not javascript) doesn't do any good job on any platform. Thats the reason Linux (or any other operating system) gained any momentum either.
Who wants to wait for Adobe to provide a fix for a platform totally designed by Apple. Those developers should just spend their time to code on Linux and leave the apple platform.
Who wants to wait for Adobe to provide a fix for a platform totally designed by Apple. Those developers should just spend their time to code on Linux and leave the apple platform.
Wait, wasn't using the SDK and Xcode supposed to prevent crap apps ? And now you're admitting you submitted crap to the App Store ?
So much for "ensures a better user experience".
(1) My app is less than 300kB (the small Unity and CS5 generated apps are over 5 MB), and extremely processor (and thus battery life) efficient, because it's written in decently optimized C by someone who knows how to pay attention to things such a cache footprints, etc.
(2) One person's cr*p in another person's treasure. I wrote the app because it was useful to me. And if 99.99% of everybody else thinks my app is cr*p, then the remaining 0.01% could well result in over 8,000 happy customers (out of 85M total iP* owners). e.g. I have a ton of 1-star ratings (it's cr*p, delete), but nearly an equal amount of 5-star ratings (it's great!). Who am I to believe? (I won't be objective about the answer, so don't reply...
Thanks for the link
It's not plugin it's procedure to setup eclipse
But it could be useful for us, so thanks a lot
If $100 per year is "very expensive" then I take it that you don't expect to generate any income from your development to cover that expense, but you do expect to make $25 over the span of the rest of your life with RIM. Assuming that your time and efforts are worth nothing, then I can see your point.
If anybody doesn't want to program for Apple products, nobody is standing in their way.
I wish Adobe pulls out of Mac platform(not a good scenario for either company), but then we will really see an alternative to CS5.
Where we should have been if MS didn't pull off Internet Explorer from Mac platform, we won't have Webkit nor Google will seriously consider Webkit. This was before FiexFox etc gained momentum and we used Chimera for native look.
Microsoft did couple of favors for us, one they killed off IE for Mac, then they purchased Virtual PC.(painfully slow). Now we have Safari (and Webkit, Webkit2) and whole bunch of VMs( the intel switch did help).
Where we should have been if MS didn't pull off Internet Explorer from Mac platform, we won't have Webkit nor Google will seriously consider Webkit. This was before FiexFox etc gained momentum and we used Chimera for native look.
Microsoft did couple of favors for us, one they killed off IE for Mac, then they purchased Virtual PC.(painfully slow). Now we have Safari (and Webkit, Webkit2) and whole bunch of VMs( the intel switch did help).
This is a somewhat valid point when it comes to developing an app on multiple platforms. Many applications should be written on the platforms native language. But there are situations when it does make sense to write applications using something like Adobe AIR when it requires deployment across multiple platforms.
Just recently, an Adobe AIR Developer demonstrated this here, and he makes a clear point about it not being practical for all projects, but it does have merit in some.
Today, the iPhone OS may have the largest install base, as well as the most applications written for a mobile platform, and as such, many developers will choose it over Android or WebOS to increase their exposure for potential revenue. But the market can change, and have a more even distribution of market share between iPhone OS, WebOS, Android, and Windows Phone 7. At that point, Developers will have to re-evaluate which platform to pursue, and if an option like Adobe AIR exists to get their app running on the most platforms, they just might utilize it.
A quick note, I'm glad to see some civility in this thread, rather than the usual "bash those that don't agree with Apple".
It's called "investment". Do these PC people want everything for free? That's right, they can just torrent the new CS5 and develop for iPhone with no cost. If they're honest, they can either buy a Mac mini or Flash for the same $599 price (BTW Adobe's RRP is $699 for Flash).
Journalism is dead.
It has been for about ten years. Some would argue twenty.
Just to let you know...
And it certainly looks like that is what Apple is trying to prevent. What's the value to Apple in giving up their leadership position more easily?