The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Jobsian Vendetta - Flash stabbed by Mac the Knife

'Developers are mine'

  • print
  • alert

Agentless Backup is Not a Myth

Amidst all the wonderfully amusing half-truths and haughty hypocrisies dripping from his open letter on Adobe Flash, Steve Jobs has at least made one thing quite clear: his biggest beef with Flash is that it lets you create applications that run on all sorts of devices that weren't built by him.

And his biggest beef is also his biggest hypocrisy.

In his 1,700-word Thoughts on Flash missive, Jobs says his "most important reason" for banning Flash on the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad is not that Flash sucks at online video and other web-based stuff. It's that Adobe wants developers to use Flash as a means of building native applications for his holy devices. This is such a problem, Jobs says, because Flash is a cross-platform development tool.

"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," he writes. "This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms.

"Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. 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."

He takes a while to get there, but eventually he puts the notion into a nutshell. "Flash is a cross platform development tool," he says. "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." For all Jobs' talk of Flash being "closed and proprietary", plagued by security and performance problems, and, um, ill-suited to multi-touch, it all comes down to the fact that Adobe is interesting in helping developers write apps that run everywhere.

Apple as Hal

His letter would seem to indicate that when Apple banned code translation on the upcoming iPhone OS 4.0, its primary motivation was to prevent Adobe from translating Flash script for use on the device. Which is hardly a surprise. Before the letter, others had guessed as much.

The ban arrived just days before Adobe introduced a new iPhone packager with its Flash Professional CS5 development kit. With a few lines tucked into the iPhone 4.0 OS SDK license agreement, Apple barred developers from accessing its APIs with anything other than the language he approves of. "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)," the change read.

Yes, we're still left to wonder whether this new language also buries development kits along the lines of Appcelerator's Titanium and Unity3D. These tools also translate codes written in other languages, but unlike Adobe's iPhone packager - which compiles directly into machine code - they make use of Apple's XCode development kit, compiling code into Jobs' beloved Objective C. Provided these kits are briskly updated when Apple introduces new APIs, they may satisfy the man.

These can be viewed as translation layers. And in his letter - echoing a private email he allegedly sent a few weeks back - Jobs makes it clear that he doesn't want a third party sitting between developers and his APIs. "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. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers," he writes.

But the letter is aimed at Adobe. And only Adobe. In arguing that third-party development kits slow the adoption of Apple's APIs, Jobs calls out Adobe for taking so long to adopt Cocoa, Apple's latest set of APIs for the Mac. "Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms," he writes. "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."

Actually, Microsoft hasn't moved Office to Cocoa. And we would argue that Redmond is a major third-party developer. But as OSNews points out, the larger point to make is that Apple itself has taken its sweet time adopting Cocoa. The Mac's centerpiece application, Finder, didn't adopt Cocoa until Snow Leopard, nearly a decade after the API's debut. And Apple iTunes still doesn't use Cocoa. Neither does Final Cut Pro.

In short, with today's letter, Jobs has achieved the sort of haughty hypocrisy typically reserved for the likes of Eric Schmidt. Yes, there the irony that Jobs is accusing Flash of being "closed and proprietary." But the irony goes much further, rending his cross-platform argument in two.

Yes, Flash has its security and performance problems. And, yes, we'd much prefer a webworld that relies open standards. But with today's letter, Steve Jobs has shown that those are merely side issues. The primary issue is that Jobs wants to exert as much control as he possibly can over his devices - and over, well, developers. Notice that he calls them "our developers."

Well, that's part of the primary issue. The other - perhaps larger - part is that the man has some sort of personal vendetta against Adobe Flash. In so many ways, the letter is nonsense. But on this point, it's completely clear. ®

Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery

Can't we decide ourselves?

As a developer (Java, not Flash but same principle) it should be up to me to decide if I want to use the latest features on a platform or a cross-platform tool not Apple - you give me the option to use these features, you can't *make* me use them.

Having bought a Windows 7 laptop I wanted to use some of the Windows 7 UI bits and pieces so I learned C#. Same for iPhone: if, as a developer, I want to produce something "standard" (and lets be honest, I'm not aware of anything the iPhone has which other platforms don't) then I should be able to to use a generic toolkit/language, be that Flash or whatever. If I want specific features then I can learn the specific language.

Also, if all these "substandard" apps are created which don't use the latest whizz-bang features that his Steveness has blessed us with then people will simply not buy them - someone who does use the native tools will have produced an app doing the same thing but with these features. Hell, even mark apps as "iPhone only" or "cross platform" to show people.

I guess he doesn't think his customers are capable of making that decision though. Says a lot really...

18
1

The real scoop ...

This is a classic case of misdirection. It's about the money peoples. It has nothing to do with battery life, cross platform, or anything else beside the money. We seem to all forget that Uncle Steve gets 30% of all apps sold in the App Store. If they where to support Flash, Flash could easily bypass he App Store and download Flash Apps directly to the iPhone/iPad and Uncle Steve would get NOTHING for the newly installed "app". This is what is unacceptable to Uncle Steve.

19
2

...is Bliss

Lord Clamp-Down has spoken, again; long gone are the days of Mac, the lovable underdog.

So, more and more these days, you have to consider two-stop shopping if you want to get the job done - Apple for style, and something more prole for the censored stuff. (satire, porn, your-own-mucking-about-with-your-kit, flash, and counting)

And all this from a company that seems to be becoming ever more hateful, seeming more draconian than your odd SciFi cult, complete with corporate goons (in addition to the police on whose community board you sit) knocking on the doors of feckless protype-finders, and overbearing underlings hounding hapless Chinese developers to suicide over - another lost prototype.

All this in the pursuit of blingware with eroding content.

So if, as a consumer, you have stuff to do, but desperately need your bling, you might consider stopping at a jeweler's on your way back from the computer shop.

And if you are a developer dependent on the work you do for Apple OSs, well you have got to be a gambler - enjoy the rush.

You never know who grumpy Steve wil cut out next.

Learn to ignore him.

8
1

More from The Register

SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
Bjarne Again: Hallelujah for C++
Plus: Now officially OK to admit you never used STL algorithms
Interwebs taunt Sir Jony over Apple eye candy makeover
Hey Ive, Ive... add more unicorns, willya?
Apple: iOS7 dayglo Barbie makeover is UNFINISHED - report
Plus: You don't like the icons? Blame marketing
Red Hat to ditch MySQL for MariaDB in RHEL 7
So long, Oracle! Don't let the door hit you on the way out
Shy? Socially inadequate? Fiddling with your phone could help
App 'tells the brutal truth' about social inadequates' chatup lines
Java EE 7 melds HTML5 with enterprise apps
New release arrives with GlassFish, NetBeans support
 breaking news
'Office Facebook' firm Tibbr wants you to PAY for mobe-meetings app
Great idea. Punters won't cough for it though
 breaking news
The only Waze is Google: Ad giant tipped to gobble map app 'for $1.3bn'
Pac-Man-satnav-ish upstart in bidding war with Apple, Facebook
 breaking news
PM Cameron calls for modern, programmable computers! (We think)
IT education musings to G8 chiefs to mystify IT industry