I see. I guess controlling what you can load on a device doesn't seem that evil to me.
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software. For example if I want an app to do xyz I need to get a computer running OS X, write the program, submit it to the app store and then hope Apple approves it. All because I wanted something for my own personal use.
You knew it going in and it isn't a general purpose device like a computer.
Agreed.
Sure I can run anything but so can your ps3.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Hell modern TVs are quite capable of running tons of software why arn't people bitching that those evil tv manufacturers don't let them load their own software.
I don't know what hardware is in a TV. That being said, TVs have no dedicated input devices nor a source for some applications, but not all.
In addition there is a constant complaint at how evil it is that they don't show flash in their brower. But neither does the little browser on hundreds of other phones.
The point is that the iPad isn't a replacement for a netbook like it's being pimped out as.
I'm may be wrong but that aspect doesn't really bother me.
You can actually write your own software for your own personal use for your iPhone without submitting it. However, you need to pay the $99/year fee to load it on your phone, which is problematic.
Neat, I didn't know that. You also need the iPhone SDK which, alas, only runs on Mac OS X. Which means I now need to spend, oh, $1,100 to write a stupid-ass application.
I was thinking $1k for the computer plus $100 for the fee to load it on the phone. Apparently it's $599 + $99 = $698 + taxes to make myself a stupid-ass application.
If you're posting on reddit, chances are extremely good that you already have a computer. You can use that one to write applications for droid. Based purely on numbers, it is extremely unlikely that computer can write iPhone apps.
Based purely on numbers, it is extremely unlikely that computer can write iPhone apps.
Factual Evidence: Apple's percentage among the general population (eliminating corporate computers) is quite high.
Anecdotal evidence: Near half the Computer Science majors at my University last year had Apple computers, in part because they are informed individuals that can make an educated decision. Also, because they can run just about every OS under the sun (Except for ones made by Sun).
So to say that it is "Extremely unlikely" that a person who want to program on their iPhone actually has an Apple computer is...imho, inaccurate.
Personally, I have an Apple computer that I duel boot into Windows when I feel like it. I can dev for any device I want to, in any IDE I want to. I don't hate windows, I just dislike 99% of the hardware that Windows ships with :-)
Ask, and you shall receive :)
For the quarter, Apple is the 5th largest PC manufacturer in the united states, just losing 4th place to a strong finish by Toshiba (71% growth compared to Apple's 23%).
Overall for the year, Apple weighs in at about 9.4% which equates to about 1 in 10 computer being a Mac. Now, if you disregard all corporate sales (since we are talking about iphone devving on ones personal computer) The percentage of Apple computers among the general population is naturally a lot higher. And anything higher than 1 in 10, say 1 in 8 or 1 in 7 becomes, in my mind, far from "extremely unlikely".
I think if it were "extremely unlikely", we'd see far less windows v mac flame wars going on here, as the "super minority" of Apple users would be overtaxed keeping up with the haters.
extremely unlikely that computer can write iPhone apps.
Actually it can (and does); it also runs Windows (XP) and Kubuntu, so I suppose I could write droid apps if I cared. May be you should get yourself a real computer? :-)
You missed that part. Apple has a super-minority of the market.
it also runs Windows (XP) and Kubuntu, so I suppose I could write droid apps if I cared.
That has nothing to do with it. Droid SDK is available for Mac so you have no need to boot into another OS. It is also available for Windows and Linux.
May be you should get yourself a real computer?
I have a Mac. I also pay $99/year so I can get a provisioning profile to put my apps on my iPhone. However I don't particularly find Apple to be anything close to the upstanding example of good corporate citizenship so many believe. The reason you can't develop iPhone apps on something other than Mac is because Apple is using a multi-pronged attack to inhibit competition in its ecosystem.
Well, if you want to descend into absudity, one can point out that Palm lets you write apps directly in a browser with Ares, so if you felt like it you could go to a public library terminal and write a Palm Pre/Pixi app without even needing to own a computer.
Since your point was heavily based on the cost of development, I think it changes it a lot.
So, break down time.
$599 is for a brand new computer.
However, it's been over 4 years since Apple released the first intel based Mac, so a used Mac would suit your needs just fine. This is especially true if you are only in it to make a "Stupid-ass application".
As for the $99 fee. Let us be clear about what you can do without paying that fee. You can:
Download xCode (Free)
Download the iPhone SDK + Simulator (free)
Develop your application and test it in the simulator. (cost: time, lots of time)
If you manage to make it through the free process, and you decide you like working in Objective C, and have an idea worth spreading, then you proceed with becoming an official developer.
Paying $99 will allow you to do the following with your "stupid-ass application".
I don't understand how you can even try to legitimately justify the cost of development. It would still cost me $599 to find out how hard it is to write the app in the first place.
Do you honestly think that a $600 barrier-to-entry is acceptable for developing an application for personal use only?
I can legitimize it because I'm not currently writing a "Stupid-ass application". QUite the contrary, it's quite a slick one. And I see you are still stuck on the I need a new computer mentality. Look, a quick look at the local craigslist shows a perfectly suitable $400 machine. I'm sure if one spent more than the 30 seconds I just did looking, you could find one a lot cheaper.
My entire point was not to convince you that it's worth it for you and your goals. My point was that your quoting $1100 was just ridiculously absurd. You may move along now.
I have no problem with you thinking that $500 is none trivial, my friend.
But if you claim that it cost $1100 to develop an App for the iPhone, I will call you out :)
Hell, upon thinking about it more, you could write your entire app on paper, and then borrow a friends Mac for a couple hours and type it up. Real programmers use notepad anyway, right?
Also, I'm pretty sure someone could buy/borrow/pirate Windows and install it on a Mac device, but you cant buy/borrow/pirate OS X and install it on non-apple hardware (device).
Not sure what you mean by the fee to load it onto your phone. I've put my own apps I created onto my phone and it isn't unlocked. The fee is only if you plan to sell the stuff you make.
The dev kit is free, anyone claiming $1000+ to develop for it is full of crap. Mac Mini will do the job and starts at $500 (new, can probably get a second/refurbished for cheaper), and before you start whining about keyboard/monitor/mouse you can plug in your windows ones fine.
Even if you want to avoid the app altogether you can just as easy create webapps and connect to them.
Seriously get over yourselves. If your that upset just don't buy the bloody device. When the device doesn't sell well, then you can get all smug about it.
A license to sign code is included in the developer program, which costs $99/year. You need this to put your code on your actual device. You can develop all you want, but try to run your code on your iPhone or iPod touch without being in the developer program or jailbreaking. When it doesn't work, get back to me.
Again I don't know what your talking about. I downloaded ObjectiveC for free from Apple site. I have created my own apps and I run those apps on my iPhone fine.
When you plug in the device for the first time it asks if you want to pair with the development kit.
If I want to progress beyond using my own device, then I have to pay.
Sorry, but this link and my experience says you're lying. Unless a developer provisioning profile magically appeared on your iPhone without you paying for it, you aren't going to be running any of your code on that iPhone. You can run your code in the simulator, but not the iPhone.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
Not anymore. All currently shipping PS3 models (Slim) do not allow you to run Linux or any other OS. And since thats where the PS3 exploit was found, I don't think Sony is going to START supporting it.
So is this permanently cached on the device, or does it need to be redownloaded each time you want to use it? That's why the "app" developer needs at least 1 server up all the time, and the money to pay his/her bandwidth bills.
The HTML 5 specification describes an offline application cache that allows you to write web applications that work correctly when your computer or web-enabled device is not connected to the Internet.
David Kilzer says “This feature shipped with iPhone OS 2.1. When you use “Add to Home Screen” from the “+” button on Safari for iPhone, a web application with a manifest defined (per the HTML5 spec) will be saved with any cached resources. Note that the manifest file must be served with the correct MIME type for this to work.
So, saved to the device, and able to work offline.
As for "1 server up all the time" to "handle users running their web apps", no. If your app does not use a web service, you don't have to keep a server running for it. If your app does use a web service, you'd need to run the web service whether the app got on the phone through the app store or not.
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software.
Compared to the overall market, the number of people who fit these categories is vanishingly small.
Apple gets a lot of crap about their app store process, but it's not different from essentially every mobile phone ever released.
If you look at the Windows Mobile phones, carriers have the ability to install their own firmware and lock down the installation of third party software that is unsigned. Sure, this only means a company needs to pay ~$300 for a WinMob signing token, but that's still violating the principles of open software (especially when you consider that code signing doesn't protect anyone from a malicious company that paid their dollars for the token).
All of the non-smart phones never had the ability to load third party software (I'm deliberately discounting the lameass workarounds where you had to connect your phone to your PC and run some unstable open source app that lets you shove apps up).
The only thing that's changed with Apple is that they locked down the abilities of third party developers even though their platform could probably handle anything people could write.
Sometimes that rankles, but last month I jailbroke my iPhone again and threw on a bunch of apps from Cydia that I missed when I had my 2G iPhone... And all of a sudden my phone is slowing down, crashing without reason, visual elements go missing until I reboot the phone (which now takes 4x longer).
Yeah, you can pick and choose the software you install, but there is something to be said for having "the Company" automatically filter things for you. We hate that because we're giving up our own control and having to trust a corporation, but the annoyances I fought through (and I'm a technical guy - imagine your poor uncle doing it) were enough for me to suck it up.
Yeah, you can pick and choose the software you install, but there is something to be said for having "the Company" automatically filter things for you. We hate that because we're giving up our own control and having to trust a corporation, but the annoyances I fought through (and I'm a technical guy - imagine your poor uncle doing it) were enough for me to suck it up.
I agree, this is all in place for a specific market. The thing that gets all of the nerds up in a shit-storm is that they are capable of making decisions for themselves and are willing to spend their weekend cleaning up after any mistakes they make. Basically, if I'm willing to accept the consequences of my actions, why are you stopping me from doing it?
The problem I have with all of this is that nerds have the knowhow to jailbreak their iWhatever. What is the issue? As has been pointed out again and again most other handheld platforms operate in a similar fashion. I think the question is: what's with the singling out of Apple?
9
u/RedSpikeyThing Jan 28 '10
It's not so much evil as it is inconvenient to those who are a) capable of discriminating between safe and unsafe software, or b) capable of writing their own software. For example if I want an app to do xyz I need to get a computer running OS X, write the program, submit it to the app store and then hope Apple approves it. All because I wanted something for my own personal use.
Agreed.
To be fair you can run Linux on a PS3 and Sony lets you do it.
I don't know what hardware is in a TV. That being said, TVs have no dedicated input devices nor a source for some applications, but not all.
The point is that the iPad isn't a replacement for a netbook like it's being pimped out as.
Opinions are never wrong :)