someone embed, this is hilarious.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-28-2010/appholes

Quote :

""Apple - you guys were the rebels, man, the underdogs. People believed in you. But now, are you becoming the man? Remember back in 1984, you had those awesome ads about overthrowing Big Brother? Look in the mirror, man! …It wasn't supposed to be this way - Microsoft was supposed to be the evil one! But you guys are busting down doors in Palo Alto while Commandant Gates is ridding the world of mosquitoes! What the fuck is going on?! …I know that it is slightly agitating that a blog dedicated to technology published all that stuff about your new phone. And you didn't order the police to bust down the doors, right? I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass! I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone! I mean, seriously! How do you drop four calls in a one-mile stretch of the West Side Highway! There're no buildings around! What, does the open space confuse AT&T's signal?! …Come on, Steve. Chill out with the paranoid corporate genius stuff. Don't go all Howard Hughes on us.""

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 11:03 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 11:02:39 AM

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

No discussion about this yet? Steve Jobs ranting about why he thinks Flash sucks.

4/29/2010 11:08:19 AM

^^Hahaha, thanks for posting that...

Quote :

"[...] and this new, larger, iPhone ... actually, I just use it to pretend to children that I'm shrinking."

That completely caught me off guard, and I actually let loose a laugh.



^I can't believe Steve is serious when he writes this trash:

Quote :

"First, there’s “Open”. Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system. Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member."

HEY STEVE!! ...


[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 11:14 AM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 11:10:41 AM

^^

I am astounded at how oblivious he is about software development.

Quote :

""We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform.""

Is he aware that most of the apps on those nice pretty images of thousands of app buttons that apple likes so much to brag about were written with third party layers of software?

Quote :

""Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms." "

In other words, we want exclusivity on apps released on our devices so that users must buy our hardware to play them.

Quote :

""Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen." "

Thats great, Steve. Too bad your development tools are a joke. Serviceable at best and a hindrance to developers that want to get more complex than another Twitter client.

Quote :

""If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features." "

I can agree with him here. However, eliminating all third party layers to correct a problem like this is like using a mallet to pop a zit.

its also laughable that he tries to make Apple seem 'open'.

Doesn't he have journalist homes to raid?

Completely disingenuous and insulting. He is a tool.

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 11:12 AM. Reason : *]

4/29/2010 11:11:53 AM

i had a dream about meeting him last night

can't remember any details though

4/29/2010 11:15:58 AM

found this on a developer forum

Quote :

"Anyone else notice that Steve referenced h264 as an "industry standard" and not an "open standard?" That's because it isn't. it's licensed by patent holding company MPEG LA, of which Apple is a member. The license fees for h264 kick in on Jan 1, 2016. And Apple will make another killing off of everyone who drank the kool-aid."

4/29/2010 11:31:56 AM

the only valid codecs would be h264 or vc1. If you're on windows you already have licenses for both. If you're on osx, you already have a license for h264. If you're on linux you're fucking irrelevent

4/29/2010 11:44:14 AM

Lol loken, seriously? You sound like you have a giant hard on for Steve.

Have you used apples development tools or are you just hating because it's the popular thing to do?

4/29/2010 11:46:56 AM

Of course I've used them. In fact you can't get around them even with third party tools.

The day I got the mac for development I sat down and watched the Stanford iPhone development course that you can get free on iTunes. Not all in one day of course, over the course of a week.

I find it quite hilarious that you, of all people, are saying I have a hard on for Steve Jobs. Please reference gs7's picture above.

4/29/2010 11:52:22 AM

Quote :

"The day I got the mac for development I sat down and watched the Stanford iPhone development course that you can get free on iTunes. Not all in one day of course, over the course of"

Ok, so what about it is so terrible?

4/29/2010 11:55:25 AM

Terrible, nothing. It is fine for simple apps.

The problem comes with teams that want to create more complex experiences.

Unity3D for example, is a fully functional 3D engine. Of all the teams that produced 3D games for the itouch devices, how many of them do you think built a 3d engine using xcode themselves; or even had the ability/resources?

Its just a joke he is hiding this control restriction under the guise of 'poor quality apps', which isn't the case

4/29/2010 12:10:54 PM

Quote :

"Unity3D for example, is a fully functional 3D engine. Of all the teams that produced 3D games for the itouch devices, how many of them do you think built a 3d engine using xcode themselves; or even had the ability/resources? Its just a joke he is hiding this control restriction under the guise of 'poor quality apps', which isn't the case"

So for starters, Xcode doesn't suck from your own experience? You are just voicing your hate for it to help other developers?

Also, can you give me specifics why xcode is so difficult to use for 3D, or as you put it, building more then just another twitter app?

So maybe you are hinting at the fact that its not a terrible IDE but more so that people aren't as familiar with it as they are other tools?

Quote :

"First, there’s “Open”. Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system. Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member."

gs7 whats inaccurate about that? Just curious.

Quote :

"Steve Jobs ranting about why he thinks Flash sucks."

More like stating the obvious.

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 12:25 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 12:16:22 PM

A fighter pilot had some fun in his F-16 with an iPhone ... apparently some pixels couldn't stand the pressure of 9 G's

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xnir/4461163613/



[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 12:17 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 12:17:05 PM

Quote :

"Have you used apples development tools or are you just hating because it's the popular thing to do?"

To be fair, compared to a lot of IDEs, XCode is pretty close to the bottom and I'd really love for Apple to give it a good overhaul.

Quote :

"In other words, we want exclusivity on apps released on our devices so that users must buy our hardware to play them. "

I think it's more of a, we want applications on our platform to behave and work like our applications, and not some lowest common denominator application. See Java apps vs native apps and pretty much the entire disaster that was Adobe's new ui stuff with CS4 (http://adobegripes.tumblr.com/).

Apple is 100% about the user experience, and they want their developers to be 100% dedicated to that experience too even if it means more pain for the developer. It's part of why I'm so disappointed with Apple's dev tools. If there is one thing they're good at, it's taking complexity and abstracting it away, and if they really want to hold on to this "our way or the highway" position, they need to make that position compelling by making XCode development the absolute gold standard for IDEs

4/29/2010 1:13:47 PM

Quote :

"To be fair, compared to a lot of IDEs, XCode is pretty close to the bottom and I'd really love for Apple to give it a good overhaul."

fair enough, but what are some of the reasons that make it close to the bottom? What other free tools are more of a shining example of what a good IDE should be?

4/29/2010 1:21:19 PM

Free ones, I haven't played with much except Eclipse and I don't really call that a shining example of quality IDEs, but I've been pleasantly surprised at the quality of Microsoft's Visual Studio IDE (at least the one for VB, I don't know if it's different for other languages), in the semi-free category, IntelliJ IDEA is a nice IDE IMO than XCode.

Ultimately, Apple makes the whole widget here, all the frameworks and the IDE and the GUI stuff. And Apple knows how to make a simple tool for building programs (RIP HyperCard), and while things have changed considerably in the coding world since those days, if anyone should be able to abstract the difficulties of programming away, Apple should.

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 1:37 PM. Reason : sfg]

4/29/2010 1:35:59 PM

But how much does Visual Studio cost?

XCode is free...it only costs the developer money if they want to publish an App in the App Store. But XCode is used for more than just iPhone OS Apps.

I use eclipse on a regular basis (for Java) and I can tell you its not fun but its got its moments. What I don't know is why is Xcode bad specifically?

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 1:40 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 1:38:05 PM

Quote :

"But how much does Visual Studio cost? XCode is free...it only costs the developer money if they want to publish an App in the App Store. But XCode is used for more than just iPhone OS Apps."

I think Visual Studio starts around $800, but the Visual Studio Express series (as far as I know) is free.

4/29/2010 1:57:20 PM

http://www.microsoft.com/Express/

4/29/2010 2:52:25 PM

Golovko. Your argument boils down to "but what else do you expect from free" and that's all fine and good except some developers want a better more powerful system. apple should make Xcode better and charge for it with some sort of pro and express versioning.

4/29/2010 6:36:18 PM

Quote :

"Terrible, nothing. It is fine for simple apps. The problem comes with teams that want to create more complex experiences. Unity3D for example, is a fully functional 3D engine. Of all the teams that produced 3D games for the itouch devices, how many of them do you think built a 3d engine using xcode themselves; or even had the ability/resources? Its just a joke he is hiding this control restriction under the guise of 'poor quality apps', which isn't the case "

I really don’t think steve was talking about unity3d, and no unity3d app has been denied yet because of unity3d. Last I saw, Apple was still working with them directly because they have a good product that only helps the iPhone OS apps out.

I do think it was funny though that Apple blasted Adobe for just now embracing Cocoa, when the Finder and iTunes, and probably tons of other Apple software, still isn’t 100% Cocoa. I’m guessing he must not have had one of the tech guys look over his memo first.

4/29/2010 6:39:49 PM

^He isn't blasting Adobe as a whole, he's blasting FLASH. A single product that blows.

He supports the rest of Adobe products just not FLASH on the mobile platforms.

And for good reason too.

Mobile devices that are supporting flash are simply doing it for one reason only...to have one extra bullet point that the iDevice doesn't. They aren't doing it for the user experience at all because if they were they'd be taking the same road as apple.

Quote :

"Golovko. Your argument boils down to "but what else do you expect from free""

not at all. There is no argument here yet. I never said Xcode sucks but hey, its free! I said its a FREE tool and I have yet to hear a valid reason why it sucks. I've heard that it sucks from people ITT but no specific reason as to why. I've used Xcode and I don't think it sucks, sure there are some gripes with it (mainly limitations in Interface Builder) that I've come across but I wouldn't write off the whole IDE as 'sucks'

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 7:04 PM. Reason : .]

4/29/2010 7:01:50 PM

Xcode doesn’t have all the features that Eclipse or the .Net IDE have, so from this angle, it “sucks.” But Xcode is a million times better than it was in earlier revisions, or if you ever used the Metroworks IDE from Classic Mac OS, so from this angle, it’s great.

4/29/2010 7:08:53 PM

Quote :

"^He isn't blasting Adobe as a whole, he's blasting FLASH. A single product that blows."

You have really got to stop posting before you read. He specifically was talking about CS5 in that passage, and in particular about why he doesn't trust Adobe as a whole to keep up with changing Apple tech.

Quote :

"I do think it was funny though that Apple blasted Adobe for just now embracing Cocoa, when the Finder and iTunes, and probably tons of other Apple software, still isn’t 100% Cocoa. I’m guessing he must not have had one of the tech guys look over his memo first."

I'm pretty sure with snow leopard, pretty much every Apple app (except maybe one or two of the pro apps) is cocoa. I could be wrong though. That said, the point is well taken as it took this long to get there.

Quote :

"I've heard that it sucks from people ITT but no specific reason as to why. I've used Xcode and I don't think it sucks, sure there are some gripes with it (mainly limitations in Interface Builder) that I've come across but I wouldn't write off the whole IDE as 'sucks' "

Barring moron's post up there I don't think anyone in this thread has actually said the words "XCode sucks", and even in moron's case, he's not saying it sucks, just that it isn't as good as some of the better IDEs. This is a pretty damning statement for software from a company that prides itself on the best damn use experience it can deliver.

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 7:20 PM. Reason : gsfg]

4/29/2010 7:20:03 PM

Quote :

"I really don’t think steve was talking about unity3d, and no unity3d app has been denied yet because of unity3d. Last I saw, Apple was still working with them directly because they have a good product that only helps the iPhone OS apps out."

I agree but even so, Unity3D IS a third party layer, it runs on interpreted code and its a build once, deploy to multiple platforms system. Which is pretty much exactly what Steve-o wants to stop.

4/29/2010 7:20:46 PM

Well it certainly doesn't have the plugin community of eclipse. It's also pretty sketchy with source control and integrating with svn

4/29/2010 7:21:29 PM

Quote :

"You have really got to stop posting before you read. He specifically was talking about CS5 in that passage, and in particular about why he doesn't trust Adobe as a whole to keep up with changing Apple tech."

Apparently we read two different posts because the one I read blasted FLASH repeatedly with a one liner at the very end saying Adobe just now moved to Cocoa.

So what passage are you talking about exactly? He made no mention of other Adobe products sucking like Flash.

4/29/2010 7:27:21 PM

Quote :

"I'm pretty sure with snow leopard, pretty much every Apple app (except maybe one or two of the pro apps) is cocoa. I could be wrong though. That said, the point is well taken as it took this long to get there."

iTunes can’t be all cocoa, because then it’d be a bitch to maintain parity between the mac and windows versions (for whatever that’s worth). It is DEFINITELY a Carbon app.

The Finder made the jump to all cocoa (maybe…) in Snow Leopard.

DVD Player, Final Cut, Shake, and probably all the Pro apps from Apple still have Carbon bits about them.

4/29/2010 7:28:40 PM

All system applications except DVD Player, Front Row, Grapher, and iTunes have been rewritten in cocoa.

4/29/2010 7:31:53 PM

Quote :

"So what passage are you talking about exactly? He made no mention of other Adobe products sucking like Flash."

Really? You really missed it?

Quote :

"It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X."

Yes, all of this is in the context of why Apple doesn't want flash on the iphone, but this particular passage is about Adobe as a company and their slowness when it comes to adopting new Apple technology.

[Edited on April 29, 2010 at 8:56 PM. Reason : adobe]

4/29/2010 8:55:53 PM

Quote :

"one liner at the very end saying Adobe just now moved to Cocoa. "

4/29/2010 9:02:54 PM

Quote :

" This is a pretty damning statement for software from a company that prides itself on the best damn use experience it can deliver. "

This only applies to their consumer stuff.

Their enterprise/server/developer stuff has always been mediocre.

It's like they only have a small group of great designers/programmers and they have to rotate them around each year to the different projects.

4/30/2010 12:09:20 AM

^^ I count 5 lines. and in the context of the whole document, that was almost a whole paragraph. The point is, in addition to the actual performance concerns over Flash, Apple is wary of letting Adobe have any sort of position to control applications on the iPhone because Apple and Adobe, as a whole, have had a lukewarm relationship at best over the last 10 years and Adobe has been slow on the uptake when it comes to new Apple tech.

Quote :

"This only applies to their consumer stuff. Their enterprise/server/developer stuff has always been mediocre. "

True, but even those have been getting better by larger leaps and bounds more than XCode, and to be honest, if they want to maintain iPhone dominance, development for the iPhone is going to have to become a "consumer" product I think. I mean if they're going to keep with the stupid app review process, it's not like it hurts to have more people developing as they'll weed out the crap anyway (in theory).

4/30/2010 7:46:20 AM

why is it that everytime I enter this thread Golovko is just arguing with someone?

[Edited on April 30, 2010 at 8:58 AM. Reason : f]

4/30/2010 8:58:04 AM

4/30/2010 8:59:37 AM

hahhahahaha, just watched that dailyshow clip. fucking heeeelarious

4/30/2010 9:52:21 AM

he's got some good writers, and it's so freakin' hilarious because they know everybody's thinking it.

4/30/2010 11:08:44 AM

I just watched it. OMG that was hilarious!

"Apple stores are like futuristic swedish hospitals!" Hahahaha

and the "Theres an app for that! Ram iT"

I probably shouldn't have watched that at work... can't stop laughing.

[Edited on April 30, 2010 at 11:23 AM. Reason : .]

4/30/2010 11:20:04 AM

link pls

4/30/2010 11:30:28 AM

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-28-2010/appholes

4/30/2010 11:31:31 AM

Yeah, that was pretty good and mostly on point.

4/30/2010 11:40:02 AM

the only thing that was a little meh was how he portrayed Gray Powell as a BubbleBobble type. I don't know gray or anything, but I'd imagine that's probably not quite accurate.

4/30/2010 11:50:58 AM

From what I heard from people who know him and worked with him...he's a bit of an idiot.

He should add that you can't enjoy this daily show clip on your iDevice. (no flash)

[Edited on April 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM. Reason : .]

4/30/2010 11:59:58 AM

^LOL

4/30/2010 12:05:20 PM

Don't know when this happened...maybe its a 4.0 feature?

When you connect your iPhone to iTunes and select 'manually manage my music' several changes there:

1) if you already had music synced automatically it no longer has to resync because you opted for manual management. It simply unlocks your playlist.

2) you can now play music off of your iPhone when its hooked up to a computer without having to download it to the machine (as you could with iPods).

4/30/2010 4:07:08 PM

that sounds more like fixes to itunes, but i dont care enough to install itunes to find out.

4/30/2010 4:10:35 PM

Quote :

"2) you can now play music off of your iPhone when its hooked up to a computer without having to download it to the machine (as you could with iPods)."

THE FUTURE IS NOW!

Does it work for apps too? That'd be wonderful.

4/30/2010 4:12:22 PM

^in what capacity for apps?

manage manually? no.

but don't blow your loads just yet...you still can't transfer the music OFF of the device...you can only listen to it

until that day comes... http://thelittleappfactory.com/irip/ will have to do.

[Edited on April 30, 2010 at 4:19 PM. Reason : .]

4/30/2010 4:17:53 PM

you can if you dont use shitty software. Sharepod lets you drag and drop stuff off of any apple device without the hassle of itunes.

4/30/2010 4:21:29 PM

Quote :

"until that day comes... http://thelittleappfactory.com/irip/ will have to do."

4/30/2010 4:29:57 PM