Unity should be fine. It creates an XCode project, which is then compiled into native code.
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
Unity should be fine. It creates an XCode project, which is then compiled into native code.
You can see this translated as, "You got cheap and outsourced your software development. From that, you have crap for code. Now, you are paying for it!"
No developer wants to invest significant time into an application that has been rendered useless by Apple making a sudden change to the developer agreement. When this kind of instability exists, on an already unstable development platform where rules change and dollars are wasted, developers will switch to far more stable platforms where the lines are clearly defined.
The source of Apples success comes from the Apps developers create. Without them, the iPhone OS wouldn't be as far reaching as it is today.
Middleware is used by almost every major game developer out there, even big ones like EA. And yes, even on the iPhone. Middleware for games exists for a VERY good reason.
Many skilled developers use middleware. We're not even talking about Flash at this point. MikaMobile, the team behind Zombieville USA, was two people plus a part time graphic designer (hired only for specific tasks).
But those new T&C rules say it has to be ORIGINALLY written in Objective-C, C or C++. I would hope something like Unity is exempt too, it doesn't seem to be the kind of thing they're after here, but technically it could fall victim. Only time will tell.
It comes down to trust and easy.
Apple is showing that you can not trust them. Apple action work great when they are top dog but when they lose that the complete lack of trust will hurt them because who wants to work with someone you can not trust unless you have to?
fundamental flash problem
I think it's an interesting info
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/02/20/an-adobe-flash-developer-on-why-the-ipad-cant-use-flash/
I think it's an interesting info
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/02/20/an-adobe-flash-developer-on-why-the-ipad-cant-use-flash/
Well you have to understand the mind set of the apple fanboys.
They attend the church of Apple and their god is Steve Jobs.
Anything SJ says is the word of god. If he said go jump off a cliff they would do it with out question.
Long long time ago Iphone development environment was considered to be better than others because it was easy to use and allowed fast learning curve.
Now Iphone development environment is good because it's so difficult to use it weeds out weak developers.
How times change...
This has already been counterpointed as false by Mike Chambers:
Flash Player content, Mouse Events, and Touch input
I think this quote from the tao effect blog said it well:
That crazy guy is Steve Jobs. I knew he was going nuts. I called it a while ago. He truly is a modern day Howard Hughes.
That crazy guy is Steve Jobs. I knew he was going nuts. I called it a while ago. He truly is a modern day Howard Hughes.
The free iPhone XCode tool suite has always been a reasonable trade-off between fairly easy to use and fairly powerful.
However, provisioning and installing apps on an iPhone has always been a moderately difficult IQ test hurdle for potential developers. If a developer couldn't carefully read the all documentation and follow 100 or so steps precisely, and debug any slight mistakes, they were toast and could never get their apps installed or submitted. The iPhone dev forum here on MacRumors has evidence of several "experienced" developers for major companies getting stuck for days.
I suspect that set of hoops was never fixed on purpose.
Odd perspectives
I've read messages in the forums quite a bit before this, but this is the first time I've felt like posting.
I have to admit that I find it odd that so many people think these restrictions are positive. But then again, I have a different perspective than most; I'm a software developer - but just for windows (using c++ and c#). I have played around with some iPhone development in the simulator.
Cocoa touch and objective c (or c, or c++) and the various different practices and paradigms just represent additional things for developers to learn. They are not some tremendous hurdles that will keep out bad developers. Most software developers, even the bad ones, have to learn new things constantly to keep their jobs. Even if this learning was troublesome, this set of restrictions is completely unnecessary. Apple already has to approve all apps in the app store - simply don't approve crap apps - regardless of what language they were originally written.
Personally, I like objective-c and cocoa. I just think developers should get to choose the best solution for the task at hand. Why shouldn't a developer be able to develop part of their app in another language or using some framework and the UI in objective C (or c or c++) and cocoa touch? Applications are typically written now with the UI and business logic separated. If the business logic was written in another language or using some framework to ease cross platform development, then this is a benefit for iPhone users. This means that the business logic will receive more testing and can receive the same updates across different platforms. A fix for another platform would then become a fix for the iPhone. This also means less development time spent on common business logic and more spent on getting iPhone specific stuff done well.
I don't think the concern of a meta-platform essentially taking control over the iPhone platform has much merit. If some meta platform were truly deficient, some enterprising developers would develop competing apps that take true advantage of the iPhone and steal market share. Also, if Apple were to make some severe change that wasn't reflected in some framework, they could just not allow new apps that didn't have this change, and even remove existing apps missing this change. Apple controls the iPhone app market; if apps are bad, they just have to ban them from the market.
I've read messages in the forums quite a bit before this, but this is the first time I've felt like posting.
I have to admit that I find it odd that so many people think these restrictions are positive. But then again, I have a different perspective than most; I'm a software developer - but just for windows (using c++ and c#). I have played around with some iPhone development in the simulator.
Cocoa touch and objective c (or c, or c++) and the various different practices and paradigms just represent additional things for developers to learn. They are not some tremendous hurdles that will keep out bad developers. Most software developers, even the bad ones, have to learn new things constantly to keep their jobs. Even if this learning was troublesome, this set of restrictions is completely unnecessary. Apple already has to approve all apps in the app store - simply don't approve crap apps - regardless of what language they were originally written.
Personally, I like objective-c and cocoa. I just think developers should get to choose the best solution for the task at hand. Why shouldn't a developer be able to develop part of their app in another language or using some framework and the UI in objective C (or c or c++) and cocoa touch? Applications are typically written now with the UI and business logic separated. If the business logic was written in another language or using some framework to ease cross platform development, then this is a benefit for iPhone users. This means that the business logic will receive more testing and can receive the same updates across different platforms. A fix for another platform would then become a fix for the iPhone. This also means less development time spent on common business logic and more spent on getting iPhone specific stuff done well.
I don't think the concern of a meta-platform essentially taking control over the iPhone platform has much merit. If some meta platform were truly deficient, some enterprising developers would develop competing apps that take true advantage of the iPhone and steal market share. Also, if Apple were to make some severe change that wasn't reflected in some framework, they could just not allow new apps that didn't have this change, and even remove existing apps missing this change. Apple controls the iPhone app market; if apps are bad, they just have to ban them from the market.
It truly is like a church. And I'm not making fun or anything, just the way it seems.
Risk versus rewards. A lot of developers have stuck around in spite of rejections and changing rules. Why? They're following the money. Apple's window for doing this to developers might be shrinking, but it's still open because the App store is still generating a huge portion of mobile app revenue. I'm in that camp. Had an app rejected. Stuck around and had other apps accepted and sell more than I ever sold on another previous platform.
Plus, these alternate API cross-platform tools weren't even around for most of the first 100k apps, so there many 10's of thousands of those developers who not only don't care about this particular rule change, but are probably happy to get rid of the portion of their competition who isn't willing to learn to use Apple's APIs. I'm in that camp as well.
caveat somethingoranother
huh? i dont see anywhere that Steve says Unity is banned. He doesnt even respond to the part where Unity is mentioned. Unity is a game engine. The most popular game engine on the appstore. Apple wants a game center. They need games to keep gamers happy. Unity is NOT FLASH and shouldn't be lumped in with that POS.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
Personally I prefer Eclipse (Java and python) and Xcode..........haven't really used netbeans mutch.
MorphingDragon said:
That is a matter of opinion, an IDE is an IDE and can be changed si its a moot point.
I personally hate Eclipse and prefer XCode over it. I like netbeans most of all.
Personally I prefer Eclipse (Java and python) and Xcode..........haven't really used netbeans mutch.
Steve explicitly said that usage of any meta-layers is prohibited. Flash is not specifically mentioned in Apple agreement. Unity offers development in C#. C# is not one of the Apple approved languages. The issue is very clear. Apple lumped a lot of tools into this ban. If you study the subject you will discover that Adobe and Unity use similar techniques for building the iPhone executable.
However, a JavaScript application runs in different environment such as Safari, IE, and Firefox on different operating systems. Google even made a toolkit that compiles Java into JavaScript optimizing it along the way.
JavaScript applications are not crap as a whole. In other words, your argument is bogus.
Regarding tools and crappy developers, you can write Fortran in any language.