Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Software Apple

iPhone App In App Store Limbo Open Sourced 432

Posted by timothy
from the richarded-over dept.
recoiledsnake writes "The author of iPhone prototyping tool Briefs has decided to open source it after the App store submission has been in limbo for over three months. The app had got into trouble for what Apple believes is being able to run interpreted code, though the author denies it, saying all the compiling happens on the Mac. While Rob stays civil, his co-worker blasts Apple for not even rejecting the app. Three months is nothing compared to Google Voice for the iPhone though, which is still being studied further by Apple after more than a year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPhone App In App Store Limbo Open Sourced

Comments Filter:
  • Not News (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @01:39AM (#33412650)

    Really... Stop posting these gossip articles... Thats what they boil down to... gossip about that hot shallow girl who keeps turning you down.

    "OMG! Did you hear what apple did now?!?!?!"

    Or are you still expecting open and fair treatment from apple... In which case all i can say is.... HAHAHAHAHAHA!

  • by Haedrian (1676506) on Monday August 30, 2010 @01:45AM (#33412676)

    When you've got a market locked down, people think buying your products will make them cool, and you've closed everything off so the only way out is to avoid apple - then you can afford to (mis)treat people anyway you want.

  • his product (Score:2, Insightful)

    by phantomfive (622387) on Monday August 30, 2010 @01:54AM (#33412704) Journal
    His product is one that creates wireframe prototypes of iPhone apps and allows you to run them on the iPhone. Presumably (from his experience, and others he's shown it to) this allows you to make better apps faster.

    He shouldn't be surprised, he is running into essentially the same trap that was built for Adobe when they tried to create a compiler for Flash that translates onto the iPhone. Apple has said they want to be completely in control of the development environment, and anything that threatens to take away that control will not be allowed. They've written this into the license, and explained it several times. There is no reason for him to be upset over something he should have realized.

    Now, if only someone would write a decent GUI builder for Android, I would be happy.
  • by odies (1869886) * on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:04AM (#33412728)

    Open source is open source, meaning you can see the code. What's so hard about that?

  • by phantomfive (622387) on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:14AM (#33412754) Journal
    Oracle doesn't want to cut off Android's air supply. They want to milk it for everything they can. Larry Ellison is certainly greedy, but even he knows not to kill the golden goose. Patent lawsuits like this rarely result in a product being destroyed.
  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:29AM (#33412800)

    They behave the way they do because they are control freaks. They want absolute control over their platform. Their ultimate vision is that they'll be the source of all your media, all your apps, etc. They'll dictate how you consume stuff. Such a setup would be, needless to say, very profitable.

    As for why they can get away with it, well I'd say there are two reasons:

    1) Fanboyism/zealotry. Apple has had a following for a long time of people for whom they can do no wrong more or less. A non-trivial amount of these people are in the press (Macs are big in prepress work). They just love Apple and everything they do. So when something bad comes out, they find ways to rationalize it away, or ignore it.

    2) For many of the Apple buyers these days, Apple is not a technology company but a fashion company. They largely won't admit it, but they buy them as fashion accessories. They are the "cool" product to own. As such they are purchased based on that alone. Whatever restrictions/costs accompany that are ok because they want to be cool. I see the same thing these days with fixed gear bikes. They are in with college kids (I work on campus and bike to work). They buy brand new, surprisingly expensive, fixed gear bikes. This, of course, makes them harder to ride up hill, but they are ok with that because fixed gear is cool, road or mountain bikes are not.

  • by beh (4759) * on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:41AM (#33412824)

    Like many here you're not getting one thing - developers / geeks do not account for 90% of possible iPhone customers. There is something that is a problem for YOU and a problem for many OPEN-SOURCE type people - but not really something that is seen as a problem by the majority of people out there.

    And it's not even limited to the iPhone - most people still use MS Office, despite how many competitors again? Despite the free OpenOffice?

    You might like Android - and you're perfectly in your right to be. Be happy with it. But please accept, that if I had to buy a new phone for my parents/grandparents, it'd be an iPhone - I think it would be more geared to what she'd need and what she'd be capable of using, simply because it is more streamlined.
    The closed Appstore may be something you hate - on the other hand, as far as non-geeks are concerned, I'd rather have the AppStore than seeing a proliferation of new phone threats (like - wouldn't you hate being spammed by a mobile botnet?). As a developer myself, I also see the stores limitations, but as a normal person, I see the advantages of the store as well in that it gives some more peace of mind to the less tech-savvy user.

    Don't get me wrong - the iPhone has its own set of quirks I don't like. On the other hand - for me (and most people), it was APPLE that made smart phones a lot easier to use - everyone, including Android, is trying to copy that ease of use (with varying amounts of success).

    What annoys me about the whole discussion of the iPhone is this: Noone attacks MS for being a commercial enterprise. MS is commonly attacked for 'innovating' things that have been out there for ages. With Apple it's the other way around - they're being attacked for trying to make money - while it's the 'open source' crowd 'innovating' all the things Apple has done on the phone.

    The same with the iPad - the iPad came out to much ridicule from the tech-savvy crowd - but see how many projects there are out to 'innovate' a tablet computer now that the iPad is out? Some of those may even offer some more eye-candy - but eye-candy alone isn't going to make me buy one of them. It's the usability - the general usability for the majority of people out there (inclusive of all the non-geeks) - that needs looking at, not flashy graphics.

  • by Michael D Kristopeit (1887500) on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:53AM (#33412868)

    look at windows... the root cause of most problems is the requirement to keep legacy software supported...

    What does that have to do with interpreted code?

    are you serious? how do you think the old dynamically linked libraries are updated to run on a vastly different modern multiuser operating system?

    even briefs isn't about interpreted code... i never said the issue was with interpreted code. apple never said anything... let alone this being about interpreted code.... the REAL question is why are YOU talking about interpreted code? the problems apple is taking a stand against stem from unnecessary emulation and virtualization layers that degrade latency and mask application thread information from the operating system, that could be used to optimize the user experience.

  • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:55AM (#33412874) Journal

    And so does Sony AND Nintendo. I am of course talking about game consoles. Closed platforms where the owner of the platform (not you dear consumer sheep) decides what gets to run on it.

    Apple has made the decision to follow the console model rather then the PC model. That is their choice. Your choice as a consumer is whether you choose to buy it or not. Your choice is NOT to force Apple to go another way other then through voting with your dollars.

    Why has Apple made this decision? One of the many stupid mistakes MS has made in its lifetime is to allow Emails to contains executable code. For the email reader, the application to run external code. Abobe is regularly blamed for doing the same with PDF's. Lots of people here claim that data should not contain code. So when Apple decides that it does not want the option on ITS platform for 3rd party apps to run totally unknown 4th party code, of course they are COMPLETLY wrong in doing so...

    Apple has made a reputation for itself by having a better, more solid, hassle free user experience. But how has it gotten this? Partially by its users being UNABLE to install the crap they do under windows. IF the mac platform got the same kind of malware and cripple ware attention as the PC, it would be just as bad an experience, with DRM overwriting sectors on the HD it has no business overwriting.

    Is Apple right in believing that a controlled environment makes for a better user experience? Who knows, what I do know is that they sell millions of iPhones. People are voting with their dollars. Apparently they like SOMETHING about the iPhone more then they don't like.

    Don't buy/develop for a closed platform and then complain it is closed. That is like breaking into a prison and then complaining they won't let you go.

  • by Michael Kristopeit (1751814) on Monday August 30, 2010 @02:59AM (#33412882)

    Go watch Flash running on a Nexus One and tell me Apple is saving the world from those milliseconds of latency.

    milliseconds of latency on every single executed flash bytecode instruction... billions and billions and billions of them, all of which also require electricity that will be drained from the battery.

    show me a flash application that can't be written natively and function better and use less resources.

    show me a flash application that without it, your phone is useless.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @03:26AM (#33412968)

    but not really something that is seen as a problem by the majority of people out there

    For the majority of people, it's not a matter of perception.. this really isn't a problem. There are iPhone apps for just about everything, they're cheap and easy to access. The majority of people love their iPhones and for good reason.

    most people still use MS Office, despite how many competitors again? Despite the free OpenOffice?

    But it works. And whenever Microsoft creates a new file format (ie. every release of office), OO isn't compatible ... again. As long as most people continue to use MS Office .. most people will need to continue to use MS Office. It's a matter of practicality not politics.

    It's the usability - the general usability for the majority of people out there (inclusive of all the non-geeks)

    The iPad is so much more of a killer tool than the iPhone. It's a cheap, secure web browser for all the people who don't need anything more than a web browser. Sure you can also load apps on it (which'll make all the people who love their iPhone apps want one) but ultimately it's the computer for the people who don't want to have a computer... most people.

    Apple is fighting the same front as Microsoft. They're turning the computer into a commodity .. a tool for every man. The only problem with OSS and geek elitism is that they (we?) don't understand how to make a computer for every man. That's why OSS is so big in the server room and so small on the desktop.

    Do me and my granny a favour and stop bashing Apple for accomplishing what me / you / Ubuntu / Richard Stallman keep failing to accomplish.

  • by beakerMeep (716990) on Monday August 30, 2010 @03:30AM (#33412976)

    milliseconds of latency on every single executed flash bytecode instruction... billions and billions and billions of them, all of which also require electricity that will be drained from the battery.

    show me a flash application that can't be written natively and function better and use less resources.

    show me a flash application that without it, your phone is useless.

    Seems the mods are taking the axe to your posts (from two accounts?) but I wanted to reply to this one.

    Interpreted code doesn't need to function as fast as native code in order to be good or useful. Look at JavaScript/Java/Python/Lisp/PHP/C#. And the software: Open Office, Eclipse, etc, etc. There are endless examples. Google Docs, Desktop Tower Defense.

    The beauty of interpreted code is that it opens up a platform to developers who think differently about how they write code. And who prefer different tools. It enables rapid prototyping. And, if the end result is good, it doesn't matter if a native app is a tiny bit faster or uses a tiny bit less resources. (You really have no idea how fast Flash is on an N1 or how much battery is uses either though, do you?)

    Nothing needs to be essential to a phone in order for a user to have the opportunity to try it out. How many fart apps are essential to the phone? Are you really arguing Apple should be protecting it's users from everything it deems non-essential?

  • Re:Hey timothy... (Score:0, Insightful)

    by madddddddddd (1710534) on Monday August 30, 2010 @03:31AM (#33412980)

    the moderation system has failed.

    in it's stated goal of minimizing demoralizing offtopic posts, it has created an incentive to create such posts to take the heat off other such posts. it doesn't give any 1 user more than a few mod points because 1 user shouldn't have too much power, but they do absolutely nothing to stop 1 PERSON from creating thousands of users and build up their moderation through automated self fulfilling "karma whoring". if 1 user shouldn't have too much power, then methods have to be put in place to require 1 PERSON per moderation enabled user. only problem with that is there is already legions of trollbots ready to whine about privacy so they can keep up their same games on this internet chat board.

    slashdot = stagnated.

    pathetic.

  • Re:his product (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Penguinisto (415985) on Monday August 30, 2010 @03:44AM (#33413000) Journal

    "...this allows you to make better apps faster."

    To be honest, this seems pretty subjective. It also misses the definition of "better" - is it "better" as in the app has better performance than a native-built app? Is it "better" as in it can have more features than a native-built app?

    "Apple has said they want to be completely in control of the development environment, and anything that threatens to take away that control will not be allowed. "

    Can't blame 'em in this case, at least from an objective viewpoint. The phone's reputation relies a lot on the apps' reputation. Apps that hang, or run slow, or basically sucks the battery dry in short order affects the users' perception of the phone. If that perception is destroyed by a bug in this particular app causing a raft of apps that basically suck (not in content, but performance, efficiency, etc)? For Apple, that would suck - far better to have flaws in an API, runtime, or etc that they themselves can fix in short order, than to stumble across flaws that they'd have to beg a third party to fix. It also leaves open a trap that Microsoft is stumbling on with each new version of Windows: Compatibility/Legacy issues. Given that there isn't too much capacity on a smartphone for Moore's Law to cover bloat, you can't just code your way out of a legacy issue - especially those caused by some third party build/prototyping app.

    Apple's stance is pretty simple, really: If you want to build an iPhone app, learn to write code and do it your own damned self. The tools are free. The store fees are dirt cheap.

    Personally, vote with your wallet. Android phones (esp. thanks to Verizon's BOGO deals and a far larger pool of manufacturers) are selling like mad right now. iPhones are still selling like mad right now. May the market determine the best model...

  • by Haedrian (1676506) on Monday August 30, 2010 @04:15AM (#33413074)

    I didn't mean that, I meant -

    1. You need to use their hardware (smaller SIM Card, propriatry charger/connector)

    2. You need to use their store to get applications

    2a. You need to obey their rules to get your application there

    2aI. [I'm not going into these, seriously]

    -
    That sort of thing is what I meant. Once you 'buy' apple what you can do with it is pretty much dictated.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @04:28AM (#33413100)

    1. You need to use their hardware (smaller SIM Card, propriatry charger/connector)

    The Micro SIM wasn't developed by Apple.

    "The micro-SIM was developed by the European Telecommunications Standards Institute along with SCP, 3GPP (UTRAN/GERAN), 3GPP2 (CDMA2000), ARIB, GSMAssociaton (GSMA SCaG and GSMNA), GlobalPlatform, Liberty Alliance, and the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA) for the purpose of fitting into devices otherwise too small for a mini-SIM card." source [wikipedia.org]

    As for the other point, your on the mark.

  • by steveha (103154) on Monday August 30, 2010 @04:55AM (#33413158) Homepage

    How many more people does Apple have to hurt before it starts to tarnish the brand?

    Apple has done a fabulous job of polishing the iPhone and iPad. If you really want the best available phone, and you aren't too choosy about your freedom, you buy Apple.

    Sure, they won't get my money because I refuse to pay a company to tell me what software I may and may not install on my own device. That's okay, they don't care about me. But the more time goes by, the more stories like this one come to light. How much of this before people start to view Apple not so much as the hip, cool company but rather as the controlling, evil company?

    And stories like this one are inevitable, because Apple is exerting such a high degree of control. The approval process isn't a simple rubber-stamp thing. The more innovative and unusual an app is, the harder it is for Apple to decide whether it gives the user too much freedom. In this case, I would guess that the problem is that an app for mocking up new apps is a little too much like an emulator, and Apple can't quite make up its collective mind whether this is a sort of emulator or not. (I can't even guess why Apple approved other app mockup apps while letting this one languish.)

    So, the more time goes by, the more wronged people there will be. I guess as long as the majority of Apple customers are happy, and the majority of app developers aren't mistreated too much, the Apple brand will be undiminished.

    But you know, if he had released his app for Android, it would be on the market now. He could even make an Android app for mocking up iPhone apps! I wish he would, just for the irony value.

    steveha

  • by indiechild (541156) on Monday August 30, 2010 @04:57AM (#33413170)

    Your argument doesn't make sense to me. Why would having Flash running on iPhone be a threat to Apple's profits? It's not like those Flash apps/games can replace App Store apps -- Flash apps would always be less than a native app. If Flash worked properly and efficiently, I can tell you that it would've been on the iPhone already and we would not be having this debate. Steve Jobs doesn't tolerate failure or incompetence, and Flash on mobile devices has been less than spectacular so far.

    Apple has draconian App Store restrictions and unwritten rules etc not because they want to protect their profits, but because that is how Steve Jobs operates. He's a control freak -- he will do anything to protect his vision of how things are supposed to be. If he's purely in it for profit, there's dozens of things he could've done differently in order to milk the cash cow to the max. But nope, that's not how Apple rolls -- Apple is the embodiment of a technology company that intersects with the Liberal Arts. Steve Jobs is the brooding, demanding and often cranky artist holding the paintbrush. The App Store is effectively a dictatorship largely run at the (sometimes changing) whims and desires of one man.

    "Saving the users" or "protecting the users" is exactly the kind of thing that Steve Jobs does.

    Geeks tend to claim Apple's decisions are always in the name of protecting their profits, but that's usually not the case. It's about protecting Steve's vision of how things should work. Profits come second. That's why Apple has been so successful after Steve's return. Apple was in trouble during Steve's absence precisely because they were only concerned with milking for cash, and they didn't care about quality or the user experience. Steve turned that all around. Geeks keep on screaming how Apple is the ultimate evil and how its downfall is imminent, but it won't happen as long as Steve Jobs is the CEO. He's got too strong a vision. He won't sell out.

  • by indiechild (541156) on Monday August 30, 2010 @05:05AM (#33413198)

    Well said. Apple products tend to be understated and a bit minimalist -- sometimes even conservative in design. It's the competitors' products that tend to be flashy and overdone.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @05:21AM (#33413248)

    They just love Apple and everything they do. So when something bad comes out, they find ways to rationalize it away, or ignore it.

    This is overstated. Sure, Mac fans have been giving me hives too for 25 years now, but c'mon -- _no_ company is lambasted by the general populous and general media for something as obscure as this. It's only an issue to friggin geeks like you, me, and the parent. This isn't time to pull out the fanboy charge.

    Apple is not a technology company but a fashion company.

    Oh just stop. Yes, shiny tech is fashionable. So what? You're just pulling "I liked it before it sold out & got popular." This too is "Fanboyism/zealotry", just of a different stripe than Apple fans.

    [And hey, try a fixie sometime. They're a blast. Yeah, I know it's stomach-churning to try something when it's fashionable, but if you can get over that ego-blow, they're a lot of fun. And not actually harder to ride up hill, just different. Your legs bitch for the first week, then figure out 'standing' and then you wonder what the problem was. Me, I prefer a one-speed coaster for city use. Did the mountain/road/touring/track nonsense years ago and finally got over it. But if you haven't played with a fixie yet, do.)

  • by beh (4759) * on Monday August 30, 2010 @05:31AM (#33413274)

    They behave the way they do because they are control freaks.

    What is it with all the hate-mongering nowadays?

    Have you also thought, that the same control also keeps the phone fairly free of malware?
    You might be able to diagnose that - but most of the people outside the geek community can't.
    I have a tough enough time telling people that they need to secure their PCs - you don't believe how many are out there that simply shrug and say "Why bother? I have nothing important on my computer."... The fact that their system could in turn be abused into participating in cyber-crime? "Nah... Why would anyone want to use my computer for that?"

    They buy brand new, surprisingly expensive, fixed gear bikes. This, of course, makes them harder to ride up hill, but they are ok with that because fixed gear is cool, road or mountain bikes are not.

    Not sure on the fixed-gear bike thing - don't have one of those. But sometimes restrictions can also be positive... Say, forcing you to rethink perspectives when using a prime lens on a camera as opposed to a zoom.

    Also, sometimes the extra gears themselves can cause problems. One of the things Linux on the desktop still isn't happening, is that Linux may have all those fancy extra gears - but usability wasn't high up on the scale of important things, so the gears are in an awkward order, making them unnecessarily hard to use... (And - before you just apply your fanboi hatred on me - I have been using linux for a LONG time - since before linux 1.0 came out... I still use linux, but my desktop machine for the past 3 years has been a Mac - they're more expensive, but to ME, the extra convenience they offer on the desktop is worth it. Your mileage obviously varies...)

  • by mgblst (80109) on Monday August 30, 2010 @05:50AM (#33413318) Homepage

    You are right, but your two points are just stupid.

    The reason is that most people are not affected by these problems affecting developers. A casual user isn't out screaming for this app. There are already 250,000 apps in the app store, I think most people are happy with that.

    Apple products are purchased because they are great devices, designed well, fantastic support, easy to use. They cost a bit more, but most people do not mind paying a bit more for a better device. Not everyone, plenty of people love shopping at Walmart getting the cheapest stuff they can.

    Why you people can not understand this just makes you sound and look stupid.

  • by paiute (550198) on Monday August 30, 2010 @05:52AM (#33413326)

    I'm a dreamer I envision a day when the truth is the only acceptable and legal form of advertising. Any time a company falls short of that they pay triple the profits they generated as damages and that goes into a public fund so that victims can make claims against it. In this current day and age I'd expect that fund to be worth a trillion dollars within a couple of years.

    And who gets to define the truth?

  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Monday August 30, 2010 @06:14AM (#33413376)

    In the case of a bike variable gears are well established and nearly universally used. The reason to own a fixed gear bike is cost. It is simpler and cheaper to build. You sometimes find people who own old ones for that reason, the can be purchased cheaply and maintenance is potentially less as there is no derailleur or internal gear hub to break. However the cost advantage is not present when you buy a brand new, trendy one complete with the "bull horn" handle bars. Many of the trendy fixed gear bikes cost more than my commuter, which features a gear hub.

    Sorry if you don't like the control freak assessment but it is accurate. You can argue that there are benevolent reasons behind it, however that doesn't make it any less true. Apple has always had serious control issues and as of late they've been able to expand that a lot. They dictate to you how the platform goes.

    Something to consider, with relation to that, is would you be ok if Microsoft did the same thing? Suppose Microsoft allowed Windows to only run on Microsoft hardware. Suppose Microsoft wanted to be the sole apps provider for some of their devices. Would you be ok with that? If not then ask yourself why you are ok with Apple doing it. There is no evidence to suggest that Apple has any process in place to prevent them from abusing their power, and several examples of them already abusing it in one manner or another.

    If you are ok with Apple doing something but not MS, that implies that your emotions, like or dislike for the companies, are influencing the decision, not logic.

    Personally, I don't like a system where one person controls everything. I like it when things are more divided, where no one company has the sole deciding power over everything.

  • That is exactly what MS does, although in a more devious manner...

    The xbox already functions much like the iphone, you need to sign up (and pay) to be a developer, you must use their sdk which runs only on their os and any code you release must first be approved and signed by ms and they take a cut of any sales you make.

    They do the same thing in other areas too, not by directly dictating, but through market inertia and various forms of lock-in... This is arguably worse because when people start sending proprietary formatted files around the lock-in extends to people who would prefer not to be customers of ms.
    Apple on the other hand, can be totally ignored should you wish. You may have an iphone and i may not, but i will still be able to access the emails, photos, video, sms and voice calls generated by your iphone either on another type of phone or a computer.

    That's not to excuse apple's behaviour, just pointing out that apple are a minor offender compared to ms here.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @07:06AM (#33413506)

    except that you don't get working apps from Briefs, you get wireframes. It doesn't produce stand-alone applications at all.
    So the scenario you described wouldn't happen.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @07:59AM (#33413650)

    Yes, the phrase has a definition, and it's not the page you link to. It is in fact the meaning to which your parent poster referred.

    The desire on your part and the part of others to inflict additional meanings is irrelevant.

    A waterbird is a waterbird, be it a duck or not.

    Open, in the sense of 'can be seen', source as in 'source'. Source can be seen. Q.E.D.

  • by BasilBrush (643681) on Monday August 30, 2010 @08:09AM (#33413686)

    MICRO-sim, MINI display port, MINI dvi. Spot the thing in common. You're criticising Apple for leading the way on implementing new open standards, developed by standards bodies for mobile devices?

    The difference between a mini-SIM and a micro-SIM is a few millimetres of redundant plastic. Nothing else. With the level of effort that goes into making the most powerful device in a tiny package, it makes no sense to waste those millimetres. Every phone/tablet manufacturer will use micro-SIMs in the future. It just takes one manufacturer with the balls and and the clout to lead the way. Very often that's Apple.

    If it wasn't for Apple, PCs would probably still have RS232 and floppy drives. Again, Apple let the way there, replacing/removing obsolete technology whilst the rest of the industry were too scared to be different.

    The recessed jack was a case of providing mechanical support for the jack plug. But Apple listened to the negative comments from customers and didn't have recessed jacks after the first model.

  • by BasilBrush (643681) on Monday August 30, 2010 @08:17AM (#33413724)

    So, you're saying that a company that only offers a fixed gear bike is a control freak company. Even though people can choose to buy a bike from many other companies.

    And that anyone that chooses a fixed gear bicycle must be deluded/a fanboy/a hipster, because you happen to prefer a bike with gears.

    Does that about cover it? Or do you have some more hatred to vent?

  • by MogNuts (97512) on Monday August 30, 2010 @08:43AM (#33413866)

    And above is the perfect fanboy. Rationalizing Apple's decisions.

    For every one of those device's, PC did it first. And they all eventually came to every PC. The only ones that *didn't* were the ones that people said, "that's retarded and I'm not buying a new connector just for Apple." (mini-DVI, etc).

    And no, Apple just wants another barrier so you only buy the IPhone through the approved way and they get a cut. Every other manufacturer has done fine with the normal SIM and don't have this problem. It's simply a case of more lock-in.

    But you're the typical blind-eyed fanboy so you wouldn't realize the difference.

  • by Moryath (553296) on Monday August 30, 2010 @08:50AM (#33413916)

    If it wasn't for Apple, PCs would probably still have RS232 and floppy drives. Again, Apple let the way there, replacing/removing obsolete technology whilst the rest of the industry were too scared to be different.

    Oh please, pull the other one.

    Unused ports die when their time is up. Seen a gameport off an audio board lately? Nope. Why? USB.
    Seen a firewire port lately, despite all that Apple did to try to hype it up over USB? Nope. GUESS WHY.
    No computer uses floppies any more because they don't have enough capacity. Heck, most computers have a DVD burner rather than CD-only for the same reason. If you really need to use a floppy, you can get a USB floppy drive for $5.

    Apple doesn't "lead" the market. They produce a proprietary, closed-scale system that has a small enough market share that virus writers don't give a crap about infecting it and then claim it's "secure." And they sell it to people who have too much money and not enough common sense to compare prices on similar hardware.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @08:59AM (#33413994)
    If you don't say what you mean, people mostly will not understand you. You're abusing the analogy/building a straw man.
  • by the_womble (580291) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:06AM (#33414052) Homepage Journal

    So if tight vendor control equals security, my Linux laptop must be incredibly insecure?

    I have a tough enough time telling people that they need to secure their PCs - you don't believe how many are out there that simply shrug and say "Why bother? The fact that their system could in turn be abused into participating in cyber-crime?

    The only solution would be to allow victims to sue people who are negligent with security.

    Also, if people do not care about security, why would they buy Macs because they are secure?

    The reason for the hatred is that people find it very annoying to be told what they can and cannot do with their own property.

    As for Mac vs Linux, you are quite right that YMMV: I never really saw what the convenience advantage of MacOS is.

  • by MogNuts (97512) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:10AM (#33414088)

    Wrong. 100%. Remember when the first IPhone came out and *everything* in his vision was HTML apps?

    If he truly felt he is protecting the users, then he should fix the malware problem on the IPhone.

    If he truly felt he is protecting the users, he should fix all the insecure ways of protecting your computer on MacOS X. Imagine that. Win7 has better security mechanisms than MacOS now.

  • by jedidiah (1196) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:22AM (#33414188) Homepage

    > If it wasn't for Apple, PCs would probably still have RS232 and floppy drives.
    > Again, Apple let the way there, replacing/removing obsolete technology whilst
    > the rest of the industry were too scared to be different. ...the "Apple invented USB" fallacy again.

    Infact, Intel bundled USB ports on all of their motherboards before Windows even
    bothered supporting it. All Apple did was to FORCE THE ISSUE by making it impossible
    to use legacy ports (including their own) and to leave everyone in the lurch (including
    their own fanboys) scrambling to deal with artificially obsoleted hardware.

    Each revision of the Mini seems to have yet a different video port. You need a different
    dongle for each one to hook them up to normal monitors. It's bloody annoying and in no
    way "innovative" or "progressive".

    It's just stupid and bad engineering. ...and some PCs still have RS-232C ports. For some things, there's really no substitute.

  • by terwey (917072) on Monday August 30, 2010 @09:44AM (#33414360) Homepage

    You seem to be missing something, which is the large number of people who were already working on tablet computers before Apple even announced the iPad. Several manufacturers released devices in a similar factor before the iPad was released (e.g. Asus's T91). Microsoft have been working with numerous manufacturers on similar devices since the late 90s. It's hardly a new idea.

    Great there were TV's before Philips made them watchable. The point is not WHO STARTED it, it's WHO MADE IT USABLE. I've owned 4 different brands of MP3 players (not counting the MP3 portable CD player that had to be imported directly from the factory) which all pissed me the fuck off EVERY time I had to either: look for a song, change the volume or do something else which is BASIC shit. Then I bought an iPod and back then I was very wary of Apple. But hey, everyone loved it so... gotta have a reason right? Well guess what, it fuckin worked and kept working after I sold it to someone (current status unknown, it got stolen) so I could buy the latest-gen (more space! hooray!).

    Same goes with OSX, you can bitch and moan all you want but the fact simply is: I replaced the Ubuntu (and before Windows) machine with an iMac at my mother's and now suddenly she's sending me emails with links of friggin websites she made with photos on it that she edited herself! How much I explained? Well NOTHING. Before every week something came up that either didn't work as expected or... she couldn't figure out how to do something....

    The iPhone made my life so much fuckin better, sure it has it flaws but do they weigh more then the pro's? Hell no. It's the first fuckin (smart)phone ever I had that didn't require me going through 5 fuckin menu's to set an alarm clock. I've owned S60 and WM in the past and holy shit what a retarted messed up fuckin things can some developers come up with. No I don't first want to go to "Menu" -> "Extra" -> "Clock" -> "Alarms" -> "Set alarms" -> "Activate alarm". Hello?! It's a fuckin alarm clock, the goddamn thing on my nightstand HAS ONE SWITCH! Email on the S60 was horrible, even more so on WM.

    I jumped the iPhone bandwagon when the 3GS was released since it was a moment I could afford one. One year later... well how many times has it pissed me off? Quite a lot. But considering that's maybe once every month/two months as opposed to every frigging time I want to do something on EVERY OTHER PHONE I EVER OWNED?! Amazing.
    Ok so, Apple took a phone and made it an iPhone. zomgwtfhax it can't be good and everyone claims they invented touchscreen and phones and crap! No, they just made it usable.

    Cue the iPad: same fuckin story. Tablets were out there but have you actually ever USED one?! Virtual keyboard popped out, time to bust out the pen and start tapping... handwriting recognition: orly? So basically you had a retarded laptop cause the CPU's were always shit in the tablets (no idea why) fun tho show to people but usability: zero. Sure some people liked it but some people also think Britney Spears was actually a good singer.
    Everyone makes the jokes of the iPad just being a larger version of the iPhone: guess what? it is! BRILLIANT! All iPhone users have immediate recognition to the device and just start working on it right away. Great thing is though, since the iPhone was something you could give to a total idiot and he was able to figure out how to use it: SAME GOES FOR THE IPAD!
    OSX on a tablet? Sure sounds sweet, usable? I think not. This is the perfect middleground for me between the smartphone and laptop. I bring my Macbook when I go on business trips cause somethings I have to get crackin and do some typing. But chillin in the lounge and want to read the latest news? iPad.

    [/rant] Sorry I just can't take fuckin nerd-zealots who claim that just because a device with the same "general concept" existed before so the newer one can't add anything to the concept. Well throw away your fuckin CD's, DVD's, BluRays etc. Let's all start rockin the cr

  • by khchung (462899) on Monday August 30, 2010 @10:27AM (#33414778) Journal

    How many more people does Apple have to hurt before it starts to tarnish the brand?

    Well, the funny thing is how many people in /. who actually believe that these news will hurt Apple at all.

    Look, to 99.9% of iPhone's target market, these news means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. If anything, these news will be taken as a sign that the App Store is working! "Wow, those guys at Apple are really taking the time to approve the apps and not just let everything pass to boost the number of apps!"

    I do software development for a living, and I own an iPhone. Even I do not care about these news. There are already more apps available than I can ever use, I am all for anything that Apple do that might increase the quality of the apps available rather than quantity. Even if those actions may turn some developers away.

    But you know, if he had released his app for Android, it would be on the market now. He could even make an Android app for mocking up iPhone apps! I wish he would, just for the irony value.

    Yes he could do that, but good luck trying to earn much money from Android's app store, where lots of Android users can't even pay him even if they wanted to because payment from their country is not yet supported on the store!

    As an iPhone owner, I am willing to PAY for high quality apps. More importantly, I am ABLE to pay for the apps, and very conveniently too. Money is what lures developers to the platform, and fewer higher quality apps will draw more money than a hundreds of sloppy apps.

  • by bm_luethke (253362) <luethkeb@comcaCU ... minus physicist> on Monday August 30, 2010 @11:02AM (#33415188)

    "How many more people does Apple have to hurt before it starts to tarnish the brand?"

    Not very many. It is mostly selling as a fashion statement, not on its technical merits. Fashion is fickle and, for whatever reason, whomever is currently on top thinks they will always be. In this case it is because they are squatting on devs and the customers will not care so it will remain the fashion have to have. The issue is that those two ideas are orthogonal - the devs aren't the ones driving the fashion, they are the ones driving the technical superiority route.

    Once the fashion moves on then it has to live or die by it's technical status, further the next fashion statement to make may not even be in the cell phone arena. At that point several things are big against the iPhone - one is AT&T only (but, of course, they could change that). The other *is* devs. Of course as stated no consumer cares what hoops a dev has to jump through, however what they care about is having the apps they want to use and apps are driven the devs. It is why (and how) Microsoft initially became so dominate - developers, developers, developers, developers. They may even *always* have more apps than an Android (though I doubt it), but if they aren't having the few key apps for general usage then it doesn't matter.

    Flash is a biggie - many here want it gone, however the reasons are gook related, not consumer related. Consumers do not care about so much of the arguments against it - they just want to be able to view web pages. Niche apps can also often drive acceptance. Sure there may only be 150 people in the world care if they can get an archery journal app and no one develops one for the iPhone because of Apples rules - but there are *tens of thousands* such apps like that. It isn't any one of those that will kill it or give it a bad name but all together.

    All one has to do is look at the sales between the iPhone and the Androids to see where it is going - the 1980's again as Apple going from a market leader to - while one of the biggest *single* deliverer of computers - only a small part of the whole market and mostly marginalized. The more open systems ended up crushing them because you could get them all over the place and get any software you wanted for them. There were few single points of distribution as large as them - after all if you had ~10% of the market and the rest was split between several hundred companies chances are you are the biggest single player - but you still only had around 10%. For Apple they made a profit and catered to their market niche so it was certainly a success, but it wasn't a dominate force at all.

  • by alispguru (72689) <bane AT gst DOT com> on Monday August 30, 2010 @11:19AM (#33415366) Journal

    I agree with the primary idea above, but wish people would stop conflating languages and implementation details.

    JavaScript/Java/Python/Lisp/PHP/C# are languages. Interpreted code is a method commonly used for early implementation of languages, and it is usually replaced by better methods as implementations mature.

    Saying that language X is inherently slow because "it's interpreted" is wrong, but sounds superficially convincing enough to allow pointy-haired people to reject languages without really understanding the issues.

  • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday August 30, 2010 @01:25PM (#33417056) Journal

    It's not about Flash specifically, it's about portable code. I used Windows from 3.0 to 2000, via 3.11 and NT4. I no longer have a Windows machine at all, and the thing that enabled me to switch was the fact that I'd been running cross-platform apps on Windows. I could run exactly the same apps on Windows and FreeBSD (the two platforms that I used at home). When I got a Mac, I could run the same programs there too.

    Every time a discussion about people switching to Linux comes up, you always find that they have one Windows-only app that they can't live without. Apple wants to create the same experience on the iPhone. If you can run exactly the same applications on an Android phone and an iPhone, for example, that makes it much easier for your next phone not to be an iPhone.

    Even if the iPhone is better, there eventually comes a point when a one-generation-old Android phone is cheaper and there's no advantage in buying a new iPhone. Hopefully, by this point, you will have at least one app that doesn't run on any other platform and that you consider indispensable, so you'll buy a new iPhone instead of a competitor's phone.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 30, 2010 @03:32PM (#33418518)

    You are ignoring their point and using a straw man to make yours.

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley

Working...