
It's all about the framework - pieter
http://www.devwhy.com/blog/2010/4/12/its-all-about-the-framework.html
======
Aegean
I think at least this part is a valid and solid reason for Apple's new
developers agreement.

"So, if you will indulge my claim that backwards compatibility is hard (even
absent the private API issue) it is pretty easy to see why supporting other
runtimes is ceding a lot of control to a 3rd party. Imagine if 10% of the apps
on iPhone came from Flash. If that was the case, then ensuring Flash didn’t
break release to release would be a big deal, much bigger than any other
compatibility issues. Since Apple doesn’t have access to Flash CS5’s runtime
library code or compiler frontend, they might be put in a position where they
would need to coordinate with Adobe to resolve those issues. Shipping a new
release where Apple breaks any specific application, even a top seller, is not
an issue if the release is compelling, most apps work, and Apple has the
option of working with the vendor to help them fix their app. Shipping a
release where they break a large percentage of apps is not generally an
option. Letting any of these secondary runtimes develop a significant base of
applications in the store risks putting Apple in a position where the company
that controls that runtime can cause delays in Apple’s release schedule, or
worse, demand specific engineering decisions from Apple, under the threat of
withholding the information necessary to keep their runtime working."

~~~
tptacek
And combine that with the fact that Apple is _just now_ shipping a release
that depend entirely on application/platform support for its most important
feature (multitasking), and the fact that the TOS change is tied to exactly
that release.

~~~
blasdel
I don't think Apple will mind much if games don't have explicit support for
multitasking right away, but they do care a great deal about getting massive
uptake of their new GameCenter API, which a full-service cross-platform game
framework might have a hard time supporting.

------
naner
This is the kind of writing I really like. Insightful on the strategies
involved and what is plausibly going on behind the scenes.

All the other articles on the 3.3.1 change have been mostly superficial and
overly emotional. Even the Gruber article that Jobs allegedly referenced
didn't offer any insights that weren't obvious.

------
cosmicray
> Letting any of these secondary runtimes develop a significant base of
> applications in the store risks putting Apple in a position where the
> company that controls that runtime can cause delays in Apple’s release
> schedule, or worse, demand specific engineering decisions from Apple, under
> the threat of withholding the information necessary to keep their runtime
> working.

Boy does that bring back memories, from the late 1980s, of various Microsoft
products running on MacOS. Apple had to bend over backwards to make API
improvements, while not breaking Excel (and others). IIRC, there were various
kludges that Apple finally removed, causing much distress to the average user.
This wasn't about frameworks per se, but it was about the MacOS toolbox during
the 6.x and 7.x era.

------
markkoberlein
"If Adobe actually wants to persuade Apple to support Flash on iPhone (either
as a plugin or compiled to native apps), I know how they can do it. They can
get an awesome, high performance, Flash environment working on Android, and
get a bunch of great Flash apps running on Android phones"

So true.

Apple has every right to do what they are doing with their new developer's
agreement. It's their platform, they own it. Just like it's every developers
right to choose whether or not to develop for it. Let's face it, if all the
developers stopped developing for it Apple would change their approach.

Adobe should stop complaining and put all their efforts into other platforms
like Android. I think they have rode the Flash wave for too long and have
become too fat and lazy.

If Android gains a lot of traction and Apple either becomes stagnate or falls
behind because of lack of Flash support then I bet you would see Apple either
try to make a deal with Adobe or they would build their own SWF player.

