backtop


Print 39 comment(s) - last by AntDX316.. on Apr 12 at 1:23 PM


Apple may be bringing video chat with the next generation iPhone.  (Source: Tuaw)

Apple CEO Steve Jobs has taken another swipe at Adobe's Flash restrict apps developed in a Flash environment. The move comes at the expense of app developers.  (Source: AFP)
Developers can no longer use non-C language development platforms

Apple fans received a bit of good news, when observers studying the newly aired iPhone OS 4.0 SDK used the utility iStat to reveal a new Apple app called "iChatAgent".  Most observers say that it's unlikely that Apple would just release another instant messaging app; most believe the app will be a video chat app, and that the upcoming fourth generation iPhone will have a front-facing camera to support it.  An Apple patent hints at this development.

Developers, on the other hand received some bad news from Apple.  The new SDK license agreement states:
Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs
(e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

What does this mean?  What might seem like an innocuous addition is actually another swipe at Adobe by Apple.  Adobe last October released an iPhone-ready Flash CS5 development environment that took apps written in Flash and then converted them to an iPhone-ready binaries using linked Apple APIs.

Apple has been rallying to promote a proprietary video codec-based version of HTML5 to combat Adobe's proprietary Flash format, which Apple CEO Steve Jobs accuses of "crashing Mac computers" due to it being, in his opinion, buggy and insecure.  The good news is that HTML5 is an open standard and could support other video codecs.  The bad news for open software advocates is that Apple is pushing for the web to exclusively use a proprietary video codec with the new HTML version.

For developers the battle is bad news as well.  On top of restrictions on programs that execute their own code, apps the overlap the iPhone software's functionality, and certain adult-themed apps, developers now will have a much harder time porting their Flash apps to the popular platform.

For small developers, it might be less of a deal.  Its unclear if Apple could detect the subtle differences in compiled code between a binary made with the Flash development environment versus a C development environment.  Small devs might be able to ignore the restriction, at their own risk, and get away with it.

For big developers, though, like Condé Nast, who were banking on using the Flash development environment to port their Adobe Air apps to the iPad and iPhone, they are now forced to scrap those efforts and resort to a full port if they want to get approved.  That may tempt some to switch over to Google's Android, which has a soaring number of apps and much fewer developer restrictions.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

No way to detect this
By Spivonious on 4/9/2010 11:37:32 AM , Rating: 2
There's no way Apple can tell what language the app was developed in. This is just a license agreement, similar to the one that says you can't run OSX on a non-Apple machine. We saw how well that one worked out.

My question is why is Apple so anti-Flash? Do they have stakes in the W3C?




RE: No way to detect this
By tspinning on 4/9/2010 11:48:46 AM , Rating: 5
Anti Flash because with Flash support comes about a million web based games and apps they can't charge for.


RE: No way to detect this
By reader1 on 4/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: No way to detect this
By invidious on 4/9/2010 12:35:56 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Steve Jobs understands that a vertical monopoly is best for consumers.
lol woah there.

Verticle monopoly is horrendous for consumers. I would argue that consumers SETTLE for Apple's tight control because the other benifits of the product outweigh that drawback. A small percent of users may prefer not have to make content decisions, but the vast majority would prefer more options.


RE: No way to detect this
By amanojaku on 4/9/2010 1:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I would argue that consumers SETTLE for Apple's tight control because the other benifits of the product outweigh that drawback.
No, Apple consumers settle for Apple's tight control because they're stupid sheep. I pay for the product, I download the software. That means I dictate what my devices should do. If the device cannot do what I want then I don't buy it and the company gives me what I want or goes out of business. When did consumers forget that companies need our money more than we need their products? What's next, Apple decides desktops and notebooks suffer from poor Flash performance and removes it from Safari and MacOS X? Windows isn't good enough on the Mac and Bootcamp support is removed? Don't EVER let your vendor dictate your use.


RE: No way to detect this
By rocky12345 on 4/9/2010 12:55:16 PM , Rating: 4
Dude the truth of the matter is Mr Jobs does not want to lose control of the app store he don't care about you or any one else he cares about the bottom dollar & thats it.

By the way who the hell does Mr Jobs think he is telling me or you what we can & can not run on our bought & paid for hardware. If I want to run a flash movie then that is my choice not his.If I want to throw my Apple hardware on the floor stump on it that is my choice as well(I don't own Apple just an example).

You will defend well when you buy a apple product you agree to all this well dude one thing I would never agree on is being shafted up the a$$ & that is what it all comes down to if you play by their rules. They need to either revise their way of thinking a bit or revise the agreement because this is 2010 & things have changed since the 80's a lot has.

But of coarse you will defend the dream boat company to the end & not find any problems with the way they do business & how they step on everyone else to get a head including their very own customers.


RE: No way to detect this
By Xavi3n on 4/9/2010 11:51:06 PM , Rating: 1
And with that post i finally realize that reader1 is a joke character, I'm amazed there are so many still replying to him/her.

Probably someone trying to satirize Apple Fanboy/girls.


RE: No way to detect this
By AntDX316 on 4/12/2010 1:23:59 PM , Rating: 1
Actually it's the fact the "touch screen" design is not like Microsoft Cursor. When you use the pen or a touch screen on windows it's basically cursor position. With Apple's software it's probably far different. Talking about coding, probably there is a limitation placed for the software restriction memory and processing power to prevent the iphone from crashing. Loop holes that can be filtered to hack iphones and install advertisements through flash app is also another possible reason. I'm sure it's not all about the "adobe" market share.


RE: No way to detect this
By DanNeely on 4/9/2010 11:54:22 AM , Rating: 2
It's simple. Flash apps don't have to go through the app store which means Jobs doesn't get to skim off part of the sales price.

I'm not as confident as you are about being able to slip apps through. The translation layer will likely do things differently in some ways than how someone writing objective C directly would do it. These things will be checkable. I suspect it will work about as well as trying to cheat in an assembly language programming class by writing the assignment in C++ and then doing an asm dump in the debugger.


RE: No way to detect this
By omnicronx on 4/9/2010 1:20:26 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see how this is only aimed at Adobe as the article seems to imply.. This applies at any third party tools doing the same thing, (MonoTouch(.net), Titanium etc..) will also be banned.

Apple is just trying to get a handle on developers here. To program for the iPhone OS platform, you need to use Apple endorsed technology.(which in tern keeps more developers on the Apple side of things, including developers for OSX).

Sneaky move if you ask me.. that being said, this is still only a beta release, perhaps if there is backlash it will be removed from the final terms of contract.


RE: No way to detect this
By Pirks on 4/9/2010 1:49:44 PM , Rating: 3
Well, I don't think this clause will be a problem. It's just that all the higher-layer alternative SDK's like Mono will be forced to output code in the form of a Obj-C XCode project.

Since it's technically impossible for Apple to figure out that this particular Obj-C app was written by hand and that one was generated by some Obj-C code generator in Mono or something - there's no way to enforce this clause at all.

So chill out people, Jobs is just barking here. He can't bite for technical reasons.

Noone cares really, Unity or Adobe or any other SDK vendor will just rewrite their code gen backend to Obj-C/XCode if necessary. Pfft, big deal. *yawns*


RE: No way to detect this
By omnicronx on 4/9/2010 2:28:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Since it's technically impossible for Apple to figure out that this particular Obj-C app was written by hand and that one was generated by some Obj-C code generator in Mono or something - there's no way to enforce this clause at all.
How do you figure? Are you telling me they won't be able to figure out code patterns in compiled code? COf course the fact you don't submit source to Apple will make it harder for them, but calling it 'technically impossible' is vastly incorrect. This could easily be an automated process by Apple if they so choose, not saying they will, but who knows, it still leaves the final decision up to them, if they feel the need to reject a certain app where they previously had no grounds.

If they take the time to figure out these patterns for the leading alternative SDK's, they can very much so figure out what tools you were using.


RE: No way to detect this
By Spivonious on 4/9/2010 2:48:02 PM , Rating: 2
But Apple never sees the source code, so they would have no idea what you used. It's all bits by the time it gets to them.


RE: No way to detect this
By omnicronx on 4/9/2010 4:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
Already explained why you don't need the source code.. Even compiled code will have specific code patterns that can be used to figure out how it was compiled. Generated code will follow certain patterns, have certain markets etc etc.. that will not exist in normal natively developed code.

Yes they will have to study these alternative SDK's to do this, but its not like its going to be a particularly hard thing to do.


RE: No way to detect this
By Pirks on 4/9/2010 3:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If they take the time to figure out these patterns for the leading alternative SDK's, they can very much so figure out what tools you were using.
The SDK vendors will just obfuscate it.

I don't think Apple has any chance here since they can easily produce a lot of false positives and blame innocent devs that produce hand crafted code that just SEEMS LIKE the autogenerated code by .Net-to-ObjC translator or something.

This is eternal war between a cannon and an armor, and Apple has no chance to win it once and for good. If they figure out some pattern in say .Net SDK - the SDK vendor obfuscates/changes it and voila, Jobs sucks eggs again. This is Sisyphean effort, I won't be afraid of it at all if I were an iPhone dev using C# or AS or what not.

You can't technically enforce it, once and for all and without making any false positives.


RE: No way to detect this
By omnicronx on 4/9/2010 4:26:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The SDK vendors will just obfuscate it.
Ha, easier said than done, and not fool proof either..

For example Novell could start changing these signatures, but then it would bone for everyone. Apple would just have to keep up with these new signatures similar to how Virus scanners do. Would there be a 100% success rate, no, could they figure it out the majority of the time should they choose, most likely.. i.e its a cat and mouse game, its not like ALT SDK's can just close the doors for good.

So unless you can get the source of the compiler itself (which is not possible for the majority of these ALT SDK's), and change it, you most likely can't just 'obfuscate it'.


RE: No way to detect this
By Pirks on 4/9/10, Rating: 0
RE: No way to detect this
By jezzza234 on 4/9/2010 10:20:53 PM , Rating: 2
To be honest, the fact that this is happening is going to deter developers from using technology that could potentially cause their software investment from not being allowed. I'm a .Net developer but I would rather invest in the time learning Objective-C than stand the risk of my app being denied after spending so much time working on it. The same will happen for many other people too


RE: No way to detect this
By darkblade33 on 4/9/2010 6:57:02 PM , Rating: 2
I posted a long thing about how good and useful flash has been as a multi-media platform.

Flash is proprietary is one issue.. while HTML5 standards i beleive arent finalized completely.. it can basically do everything flash can .. and open standards..

Google removed flash from its mobile Youtube so people like me ( I have a blackjack 2 ) and anyone with a smartphone with no flash can use youtube.. many sites in the last couple yrs have followed suite.. TIME, CNN, Disney, Sports Illustrated, The New York Times, Vimeo, Major League Baseball, The White House, Virgin, Flickr, People, Reuters, and Associated Press are a few that also have HTML5 versions of their mobile websites making it 'un-important' whether or not your phone even uses flash..

I beleive flash will be around for many yrs.. its useful.. but there is a slow, but sure transition away from flash especially in the mobile market.. so companies are going to make alternate HTML5 sites as this transition happens. I beleive flash does slow down mobile browsing and even occasionally causes browser to slow, stop, or crash.


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki