Never miss an update Follow AppleInsider
Sunday, April 11, 2010, 02:05 pm
Steve Jobs defends Apple's changes to iPhone developer agreement
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs allegedly responded via e-mail to a developer who expressed his unhappiness with changes to the developer program license agreement for the iPhone 4.0 software development kit.Greg Slepak, CEO of TaoEffect, said he sent an e-mail to Jobs after learning the iPhone 4 SDK banned the porting of Flash, Java and Mono applications. Specifically, the new agreement prohibits the development of apps using "an intermediary translation or compatibility layer tool."
Slepak told Jobs he believed the reaction to the change across the entire internet was negative, including from Daring Fireball's John Gruber, who Slepak called Jobs' "biggest fan." Jobs reportedly responded by sending a link to Gruber's commentary on why Apple changed section 3.1.1 of its developer agreement. "We think John Gruber's post is very insightful and not negative," the Apple CEO allegedly said.
Slepak wrote back and said he believes Apple's changes are "limiting creativity itself," and said he believes there are a number of applications written with cross-platform frameworks that are "amazing," such as Mozilla Firefox. Jobs, Slepak said, responded to his second note in about three minutes.
"We've been there before, and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform," he wrote.
Last October, Adobe announced that developers would be able to create native iPhone applications ported from existing software written in Flash. The feature is set to become a part of the forthcoming Creative Suite 5 from Adobe.
Apple's changes have sparked spirited debate, with one Adobe evangelist this week lashing out at the iPhone maker for what he felt was a "hostile and despicable move." Lee Brimelow, a platform evangelist with Adobe, who advocates Flash and related Flex and Air developments, gained attention when he said he believes Apple timed the change to "hurt sales of CS5."
On Topic: iPhone
- iPhone urinalysis app draws scrutiny from FDA
- Best Buy to offer $50 off all iPhone 5 & 4S models starting Sunday
- New service delivers passes for Apple's Passbook via text message
- AT&T to reportedly add Apple's iPhone to GoPhone prepaid lineup
- Apple airs new iPhone ad, continues brilliant 'quiet' TV campaign
Previous Comments View All
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp 
I suppose this individual developer could create his own hardware platform if he is unhappy with Apple's license. Then he would be free to do whatever he wants with it, just like Apple. He could also just stop developing for the Apple platforms but that would probably hit him where it hurts, his income. Adobe could do the same thing, right? What to do, what to do?
Does he have the right to criticize Apple's policies? Absolutely but it's a two way street and his lane is much narrower than Apple's. He's got less room to maneuver and Apple's has a bigger, heavier vehicle rumbling down the road.
I suppose this individual developer could create his own hardware platform if he is unhappy with Apple's license. Then he would be free to do whatever he wants with it, just like Apple. He could also just stop developing for the Apple platforms but that would probably hit him where it hurts, his income. Adobe could do the same thing, right? What to do, what to do?
Does he have the right to criticize Apple's policies? Absolutely but it's a two way street and his lane is much narrower than Apple's. He's got less room to maneuver and Apple's has a bigger, heavier vehicle rumbling down the road.
That's right. Apple is the big boy on the block now, so that makes the right by default. While one does have the right to complain, you really shouldn't. Only if you have the resources to develop an entire platform on your own do your complaints have any merit. And in that case, you are then a competitor to Apple, so that invalidates your complaints as well. Best to just keep quiet and assume Apple cannot be wrong. Success==right.
This is a non-issue. This is not any different than working on any other closed, proprietary system. You want bad? This was lifted from the Nintendo Developers Site thanks to a poster on the Taoeffect site:
Developer Qualifications: An Authorized Developer will have demonstrated the ability to develop and program excellent software for Nintendo video game systems or for other game platforms. In addition, an Authorized Developer will have a stable business organization with secure office facilities separate from a personal residence ( Home offices do not meet this requirement ), sufficient resources to insure the security of Nintendo confidential information and in order to ensure an effective environment for working with Nintendo and/or its Publishers. Nintendo provides Authorized Developers with highly confidential information and many of Nintendos Publishers also rely on recommendations and referrals to Authorized Developers. For these reasons, Nintendo exercises a very high level of care in evaluating Authorized Developers.
Other makers have just as bad policies as to what you can and can't do in order to make anything for their system. Raise as big a stink with other closed systems (including toasters) and maybe more people will listen to you.
Until then, this is a non-issue for developers that did the smart thing by using the native SDK. The complainers are just the ones resistant to change. They are afraid to venture out of their safe bubble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
I suppose this individual developer could create his own hardware platform if he is unhappy with Apple's license. Then he would be free to do whatever he wants with it, just like Apple. He could also just stop developing for the Apple platforms but that would probably hit him where it hurts, his income. Adobe could do the same thing, right? What to do, what to do?
Does he have the right to criticize Apple's policies? Absolutely but it's a two way street and his lane is much narrower than Apple's. He's got less room to maneuver and Apple's has a bigger, heavier vehicle rumbling down the road.
And every time a new OS X update comes out we see the results of those "intermediate layers" in the form of problems, crashes, reversions to the previous point release, and so on.
I suppose this individual developer could create his own hardware platform if he is unhappy with Apple's license. Then he would be free to do whatever he wants with it, just like Apple. He could also just stop developing for the Apple platforms but that would probably hit him where it hurts, his income. Adobe could do the same thing, right? What to do, what to do?
Does he have the right to criticize Apple's policies? Absolutely but it's a two way street and his lane is much narrower than Apple's. He's got less room to maneuver and Apple's has a bigger, heavier vehicle rumbling down the road.
And every time a new OS X update comes out we see the results of those "intermediate layers" in the form of problems, crashes, reversions to the previous point release, and so on.
I somewhat agree with this. But I also don't like the direction this is going. When large platforms like Apple's and Microsoft's start locking out third parties it's putting the users in the position to choose one over the other. You're not going to be able to mix and match what you want. Or, like so many do now, jail break your device to get what "YOU" want on it.
What would happen if Microsoft suddenly released an update that prevented iTunes from running? Think of the chaos that would ensue. Microsoft could take a big cut out of Apple's sales by doing just that. Could they get away with it? Probably not. Lawyers would be swarming everywhere.
Here we go again...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sashuey
What would happen if Microsoft suddenly released an update that prevented iTunes from running? Think of the chaos that would ensue. Microsoft could take a big cut out of Apple's sales by doing just that. Could they get away with it? Probably not. Lawyers would be swarming everywhere.
What would happen if Microsoft suddenly released an update that prevented iTunes from running? Think of the chaos that would ensue. Microsoft could take a big cut out of Apple's sales by doing just that. Could they get away with it? Probably not. Lawyers would be swarming everywhere.
Good point. Apple uses a compatibility layer (Cocoa) to get iTunes and Safari to run on Windows without having to rewrite them from scratch as native applications. And they do it in a different programming language than what Windows' native APIs are written in.
Oh the Irony. And what hypocrisy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
That's right. Apple is the big boy on the block now, so that makes the right by default. While one does have the right to complain, you really shouldn't. Only if you have the resources to develop an entire platform on your own do your complaints have any merit. And in that case, you are then a competitor to Apple, so that invalidates your complaints as well. Best to just keep quiet and assume Apple cannot be wrong. Success==right.
That's right. Apple is the big boy on the block now, so that makes the right by default. While one does have the right to complain, you really shouldn't. Only if you have the resources to develop an entire platform on your own do your complaints have any merit. And in that case, you are then a competitor to Apple, so that invalidates your complaints as well. Best to just keep quiet and assume Apple cannot be wrong. Success==right.
This isn't an issue of right or wrong. Apple created a hugely popular system for the masses and they are being associated as a company that may very well change the way people use computers in the next 10 years. Frankly, I think that scares a lot of developers that have spent years learning their craft in another language / system and shudder at the thought of having to learn something new. That's life.
It's called evolution. Do you think we all should have stayed on FORTRAN and COBOL because too many people would raise a stink about having to learn a new language?
Technology has been like this since the beginning. Adapt or get left behind.
But the poster is right. If you want to change the world then develop your own system. That's what Android is supposed to do right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by amitofu
Good point. Apple uses a compatibility layer (Cocoa) to get iTunes and Safari to run on Windows without having to rewrite them from scratch as native applications. And they do it in a different programming language than what Windows' native APIs are written in.
Oh the Irony. And what hypocrisy!
Good point. Apple uses a compatibility layer (Cocoa) to get iTunes and Safari to run on Windows without having to rewrite them from scratch as native applications. And they do it in a different programming language than what Windows' native APIs are written in.
Oh the Irony. And what hypocrisy!
well - from what i read about itunes on windows - you just proved steve's argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sashuey
I somewhat agree with this. But I also don't like the direction this is going. When large platforms like Apple's and Microsoft's start locking out third parties it's putting the users in the position to choose one over the other. You're not going to be able to mix and match what you want. Or, like so many do now, jail break your device to get what "YOU" want on it.
I somewhat agree with this. But I also don't like the direction this is going. When large platforms like Apple's and Microsoft's start locking out third parties it's putting the users in the position to choose one over the other. You're not going to be able to mix and match what you want. Or, like so many do now, jail break your device to get what "YOU" want on it.
But they're not locking anyone out; they're just making sure developers use the official SDK. This is a good thing for end users because when Apple adds new features or makes major changes to the platform they almost always make sure it's as painless as possible for developers to update their apps accordingly - but they cant do that if they're not using the tools apple provided. Take the move to intel processors on the mac platform for instance; Apple continually highly recommended developers code their apps in xCode using cocoa; those who listened were able to make the switch fairly easily. Those who didn't took years to port their apps.
You don't want to come to rely on an app that won't run on iPhone OS 5 until sometime after iPhone OS 6 has shipped.
The reality is that devs now who haven't been using Apple's tools now have to do so. Their previous investments have been intentionally deprecated by Apple. They can either develop their applications solely for apple, or develop 2 versions side-by-side, one for Apple, the other for the other OS's.
This at a time when Android is making great strides and a growing number of devs had voiced their dissatisfaction at developing for the iPhone OS. Does not seem like a smart move for me. Gruber says no one ever makes a good application using a 3rd party toolkit. Is that true?
Latest Apple Headlines
-
Google's Motorola issues second appeal of ITC case dismissal against Apple
~16 minutes ago -
iPhone urinalysis app draws scrutiny from FDA
~1 hour ago -
South Australia's first Apple Store draws line hours ahead of opening
~2 hours ago -
Best Buy to offer $50 off all iPhone 5 & 4S models starting Sunday
~4 hours ago -
Rains once more cause damage at Apple's Fifth Avenue NY store
~5 hours ago - more...
Want to write for AppleInsider? Submit your application now!
| Model | White | Black | |
|---|---|---|---|
| iPad mini (WiFi only) | |||
| 16GB WiFi |  |
$329.99 | $329.99 |
| 32GB WiFi | |
$429.99 | $429.99 |
| 64GB WiFi | |
$529.99 | $529.99 |
| iPad mini (WiFi + 4G) | |||
 |
 |
 |
|
| 16GB 4G White | $459.99 | $459.99 | $459.99 |
| 32GB 4G White | $559.99 | $559.99 | $559.99 |
| 64GB 4G White | $659.99 | $659.99 | $659.99 |
| 16GB 4G Black | $459.99 | $459.99 | $459.99 |
| 32GB 4G Black | $559.99 | $559.99 | $559.99 |
| 64GB 4G Black | $659.99 | $659.99 | $659.99 |
Lowest Prices Anywhere!
| Model | Price | You Save |
|---|---|---|
| Core i5 MacBook Pros w/ Retina | ||
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/128GB | $1,406.48 | $292.52 |
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,479.99 | $519.01 |
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/512GB | $1,699.99 | $799.01 |
| Core i7 MacBook Pros w/ Retina | ||
| 13" 2.9GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,599.99 | $599.01 |
| 13" 2.9GHz/8GB/512GB | $1,799.99 | $899.01 |
| 15" 2.3GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,899.99 | $299.01 |
| 15" 2.6GHz/8GB/512GB | $2,299.99 | $568.01 |
| 15" 2.7GHz/16GB/768GB | $2,699.99 | $499.01 |
I suppose this individual developer could create his own hardware platform if he is unhappy with Apple's license. Then he would be free to do whatever he wants with it, just like Apple. He could also just stop developing for the Apple platforms but that would probably hit him where it hurts, his income. Adobe could do the same thing, right? What to do, what to do?
Does he have the right to criticize Apple's policies? Absolutely but it's a two way street and his lane is much narrower than Apple's. He's got less room to maneuver and Apple's has a bigger, heavier vehicle rumbling down the road.
And every time a new OS X update comes out we see the results of those "intermediate layers" in the form of problems, crashes, reversions to the previous point release, and so on.