Apple to developers: We're no longer suicidal
counternotions.com
counternotions.com
"No other vendor dominates mobile games like Apple now. With over 50,000 games in the App Store, it has 10 and 20 times what Nintendo and Sony offers respectively, and this before Apple’s Game Center has even shipped."
The Nintendo DS is the best selling gaming system of all time, mobile or not. Its not even a competition - they've sold over 2x as many DS's as Apple has sold iPhones.
Not to discredit the iPhone's success in any way, but no one has come close to toppling Nintendo off the gaming throne.
This of course completely ignores the quality of these games and the advantages that dedicated gaming platforms like the DS and PSP have.
Some of the iphone/itouch games (or for that matter, other smartphone-based games) are garbage.
http://www.examiner.com/x-8134-SF-Gadgets-Examiner~y2010m4d8...
(Which may not be correct, but I think the burden of proof is on you if you disagree).
It's summed up by this paragraph, "Today, Apple is more concerned about having to re-live its recent history — getting jerked around by Microsoft or held hostage by Adobe — than what it thinks would be manageable damage by a few developers that may leave its platform. Some may regard that as being arrogant. For Apple it’s the price of being in charge of its own destiny. To capitulate at the height of its newly found vigor would be suicidal."
Which doesn't even attempt to address why requiring all programs be originally developed in objc,c, or c++ is a good way to prevent being held hostage by Adobe, and nor does it address the huge repercussions it could have. It's not a "few" developers that would be effected by this change if its strictly enforced. It's practically every 3d game on the market.
In short, a lot of words, not a lot of content.
Sure it does - it provides a legal footing for denying apps based on Flash. That pretty much prevents Adobe and Microsoft from establishing a mobile platform that would
nor does it address the huge repercussions it could have.
There have been a lot of keys struck in anger since this was announced, and I find it to be too naïve. Apple would never enforce such a clause against something that was beneficial to them. So far, there have been no killer apps in the mobile space (sorry guys). While I enjoy the massively discounted offerings on the AppStore, the core OS and applications that Apple provides are the only things that affect my device buying decision.
When someone makes a killer app that cannot be released on the AppStore, then this will matter. Until then... Sorry, no one was going to buy your Scheme-based app anyway.
How do I determine whether a useful and nonthreatening program in the App Store is beneficial to Apple? It seems like it would go without saying that every good app is a boon, but you appear to imply that there's some threshold of "killer"-ness that needs to be breached before your contribution is beneficial (and by extension you are allowed to use whatever language you want). How is this determined?
Further, since you state that an app must be "killer" to be beneficial, and that there are no killer apps in the store, does this mean that Apple derives no benefit at all from the App Store? Because that seems like a pretty absurd claim.
And games are a killer app for many people, and Unity3D is potentially affected by this. So while you personally may not care, don't assume other people don't have legitimate reasons for caring.
Is it possible they will only selectively enforce this? Of course! But if they only intended to go after flash apps, why bother with the clause at all? Why not just reject all Flash apps?
It is true that adobe literally said "Screw you apple". But sticks and stones can only do so much. Just consider what Apple threw their way. And we shouldn't forget all of the open source projects that have gone down because of Apple's lazy cannon ball.
In four words: "Developers, developers, developers, developers."
Adobe's Flash is a platform for writing applications. Apple's Cocoa is a platform for writing applications. If developers were to all switch to Flash overnight, Adobe would control the application market. If Adobe didn't feel like supporting multi-tasking, no application would support multi-tasking because the Flash runtime wouldn't support it. Apple would lose control of its destiny.
Make no mistake, Adobe and Apple are competitors, and I expect Apple to fight this one to the death. Why? I quote the old adage: "Why do rabbits run faster than foxes? Because the rabbit is running for his life, while the fox is only running for his supper."
Adobe has not bet the company on Flash, but Apple has bet the company on iPhone.
Apple's recovery didn't have anything to do with playing hardball with developers. Apple recovered because it started making better products. Apple can retain its position in the smartphone market by continuing to make the best product. All they'll get from acting like a bully is ill will.
I disagree, I think blocking flash is a good strategy for Apple. They stand to gain a lot and Ill will passes.
If they are able to block the platform and kill it then people will quickly forget if they continue to grow their market share. Apple is not interested in allowing development multiple mobile operating systems easily. Apple sells a platform and they want as many exclusive applications as possible. Exclusive applications retains the value in the handset rather than elsewhere (for example the network). Apple does not the handset to be commodity hardware driving down profits. The applications and their delivery is the unique selling point: hence the advert "there's an app for everything".
The hardware can be emulated.
I found this piece on Ars Technica to be more insightful and closer to reality (i.e., outside of the Reality Distortion Field):
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/steve-jobs-weighs-...
His main point boils down to, "Baby, look how sweet it is up in here, look at this bling bling, now shut up while I smack you about." Sure, I agree, Apple has a wonderful, beautiful setup. I don't think anyone disputes that, but I fail to see how that's supposed to make me respect their actions.
You don't have to respect anything, but not at a certain point it's like being pissed that you can't say fuck in an ad on television. These guys paid a lot of money to build an audience (of extremely high demographic value, mind you), and a platform for you to talk to it on and make money from it directly, sorry but you have to follow their rules.
2) All of these companies and developers have been following the rules only to just now have them changed on them for utterly shitty reasons.
3) Apple isn't enforcing their own rules. Lots of apps break the rules yet are allowed on the store. Their rules, at this point, amount to: we're gonna let you in if we like you. That's a pretty crummy rule; hope your business plan doesn't depend on it.
4) You're missing half the perspective. Apple should be grateful to the developers who have worked their asses off and bent over backwards to satisfy Apple's various restrictions to fill their store with lots of software. If Apple treats them poorly, they'll find developers choosing other platforms.
Totally true, one is not better than the other. But when you've got a ton of developers and you want to raise the barrier to entry (and they do) how else should they be doing it? Choosing the apps themselves?
2) All of these companies and developers have been following the rules only to just now have them changed on them for utterly shitty reasons.
Yes that's true. At the same time, that's life. You play in someone else's playground they make the rules. No one forced anyone to be an iphone developer. It's not your RIGHT to be an iphone developer in the same way it's your RIGHT to be a web developer. Remember when the facebook app developer stopped developing for the app store? That wasn't just for show.
3) Apple isn't enforcing their own rules. Lots of apps break the rules yet are allowed on the store. Their rules, at this point, amount to: we're gonna let you in if we like you. That's a pretty crummy rule; hope your business plan doesn't depend on it.
Again, I'm not saying any of this is nice for developers, but hope your business plan doesn't depend on someone else's marketplace.
4) You're missing half the perspective. Apple should be grateful to the developers who have worked their asses off and bent over backwards to satisfy Apple's various restrictions to fill their store with lots of software. If Apple treats them poorly, they'll find developers choosing other platforms.
Sorry but even without the app store the iPhone would still be the number one selling phone. No question about it. The app store is great, but Apple easily could've done it without it. And please don't forget that all of these developers were chasing what was called a "modern day gold rush" - they weren't volunteering their time for Apple. They bent over backwards more than willingly, and continue to do so.
This is software companies outsourcing their marketing to Apple and complaining when the service changes. This is what happens when you don't have control over your business. It sucks.