Hacker News Reader

Comment by khelloworld | Hacker News Reader

While I understand his arguments, I fail to understand how not letting people use x or y language hinders innovation. If they were blocking people from using certain APIs (which they are btw, but its their platform -- they do what they want), I can understand that you wouldn't be able to make so and so products...but not letting people use .NET or actionscript, I dont see how it really affects people's creativity.

View on HN

If you're most creative in .NET or ActionScript, not being able to use them really affects your creativity.

If people are are that enthusiastic about developing for the iphone os, is learning objective-c that big of a deal. Really?

Objective-C is a just a tool, and most of the time it is overkill for creating apps. If you are just creating a single app, you are right, it is not a big deal. But if you do iPhone contracting for a living, and the money you make correlates to how quick you can create an app, Objective-C isn't always the best tool for the job.

Also Dan isn't saying "I'm too lazy to learn Objective-C", he is saying "I don't want to be forced to use Objective-C"

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that people unwilling to learn 'Objective-C' are lazy people. Instead, my argument was that if someone is so keen on developing apps for the platform, learning Objective-c (or C, C++ for that matter) is a no-brainer. Plus, chances are, you could make far better quality apps using QuartCore or CoreAnimation than you would using any Flash API/feature.

However, I do acknowledge the fact that objective-c, given its verbosity, is far from ideal for someone who is looking to churn out multiple apps every other week.

If you are only able to make a profit by cutting corners on app development time, perhaps that means you aren't charging enough for your services.

At least one benefit of this change is that it levels the playing field for developers such as yourself - all of your competition is in the same position as you are, and you can't be undercut by someone who is building their apps using a Flash compiler or whatever.

If you need Lisp, Python, or Ruby to increase your productivity to cut corners on web development times, perhaps that means you're not charging enough for your services.

Java or bust! Level the playing field.

Yes, just completely change the context from one where the code runs at the user's expense, to one where it runs at the developer's, and my comment sounds like nonsense. Aren't you the clever one.

This assumes that a non-apple compiler will yield an inferior result. Unity3D is one example to the contrary. ActionScript may or may not be another, but efficiency is our secret sauce as developers. It is our inherent value.

I'm pretty certain that ActionScript is not an example to the contrary, and I'm fairly fond of it as a programming language.

I'd go so far as to suggest that the majority of the non-Apple tools that people are proposing to use instead of Objective-C will produce an inferior result, and that's why Apple is clamping down on them.

(BTW, love the kneejerk downvoting in this subthread, keep em coming.)

Do you believe that Electronic Arts would use LUA if it produced an inferior result? Do you think it would harm their efficiency and portability if they weren't mystically "excepted" from the policy?

Firstly, that's a call to authority argument, so automatically suspect. Secondly you don't present any evidence that EA uses Lua on the iPhone or that it receives an exemption from Apple to do so.

You're missing the point. This bans everything that isn't direct Objective-C, C, or C++. Not just ActionScript or C# or whatever. Everything.

Objective-C is inefficient to develop in. I ported my app from Objective-C to Titanium, and there was no loss in speed or functionality, only wasted developer time. I am reasonably sure I can write comparable javascript ten times faster than Objective-C.

On top of that, Objective-C isn't a portable skill. It's pretty much only used with Apple products. They should really drop this old, crufty NeXT baggage and develop something that doesn't suck to work with.

Maybe, maybe not. A common case I can think of is that it's easier for cross platform development requirements to not use Objective-C.

In any event, it's absurd to put in the user agreement. It seems like a rather transparent blow in the Apple vs. Adobe war in which developers and end users are caught up in the cross fire. It's obvious that Steve Jobs thinks very little of Adobe, but he's making his platform notably worse in the resulting ego war. Everyone loses.

I think what you mean is "productive" not "creative." If thats what you mean, I am with you. Obviously the more abstracted out low level details are, the more easier it is to churn out code, thus making you more productive.

But, given that you are using the same APIs (or using wrappers that utilize the same API, which is the same thing), I fail to see how you can do things differently in Scheme or some other language that you couldn't do in objective-c.

Programming isn't just using APIs.

For everything else, you may be more creative in a certain language, because you know it inside out, and are able to think in it.

Having better abstractions means you're able to fit more things in your head at the same time.

Of course programming isn't just about using APIs. But, writing apps for the iPhone is.

I am most creative in my head, and there is no .NET, AS or Obj-C there.

Your comment just shows you are not a developer.

Yes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com