Stop the madness Steve Jobs
-
First reports are that Windows Phone 7 is extremely unstable so it doesn't really matter what language you use. :) (BTW, to my horror, I tend to agree with Jobs, and Microsoft, on this up to a point. I see no problem with using third party libraries if they were certified and ultimately used only the required languages/system calls. As way of explanation: when an application breaks on the iPhone, the user doesn't blame the app writer, they blame Apple and they call Apple and all that costs reputation and money . While this won't stop applications from breaking, it will mitigate it somewhat and create an overall more stable platform.)
Joe, Windows Phone 7 isn't released yet. You can't buy a W7 Phone right now. Saying it's unstable is like saying Windows 9 is unstable. It's not even freakin' released.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon
Judah Himango -
Recalling our discussion here about developing for Apple devices I just came across this: http://stopthemadnessstevejobs.com/wordpress/[^]
Yesterday they said today was tomorrow but today they know better. - Poul Anderson
I wonder how this will affect MonoTouch. It seems the MonoTouch homepage talks about this terms of service change, though it doesn't offer anything definitive. Looks like MonoTouch may try to work with Apple to negotiate a change in the terms of service before iPhone OS 4.0 is released, but that doesn't guarantee anything. If they kill MonoTouch, I will be boycotting Apple.
-
All MS apps for the phone ARE written in managed code. :laugh: But where does it say they will brick your phone if you write one that isn't? But what you say could be possible, if they have a chip that runs IL directly. Then not just the apps, but the OS is written in it, too.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
RichardM1 wrote:
All MS apps for the phone ARE written in managed code.
Irrelevant. The point is that now ALL apps must be written in managed code, not just MS's. And this is a new restriction, similar to that from Apple. That's all I'm sayin'.
RichardM1 wrote:
But where does it say they will brick your phone if you write one that isn't?
The statement from Petzold doesn't say native apps will brick your phone. It just says they won't run. (At least that's the way I'm reading it.)
RichardM1 wrote:
But what you say could be possible, if they have a chip that runs IL directly. Then not just the apps, but the OS is written in it, too.
This is just speculation, but I don't think that would be necessary. All they need to do is block execution of native C++ apps that aren't part of the OS. And it sounds as if that's what they're doing, one way or another.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
-
All programs for the phone are written in managed code. OK, explain to me how this statement implies that native C++ apps will be allowed, as they were in previous versions. And I don't mean managed C++ or some parallel that allows the use native C++ syntax but produces .NetCF apps.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
LunaticFringe wrote:
explain to me how this statement implies that native C++ apps will be allowed, as they were in previous versions.
They have this restriction[^] But if it is an IL chip, then IL is native ASM, and managed code comes from native c++. Either way, you have native c++ if you want it. :-\
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
Don't beat me, I promise I'll be good. But I promise my wife I'll be even better if she beats me! :-\ :wtf:
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
The Apple license agreement says the code must be *originally* authored in the language they like. It would be akin to Microsoft saying, "You cannot write in Foo language, even if it compiles down to C# code."
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon
Judah HimangoI was more focused on the bottom line of what type of apps were to be allowed. Agreed, there's a difference in the structure of the restrictions as you note, but the end result is still similar, in that they've disallowed a whole class of apps that were previously permitted.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
-
Joe, Windows Phone 7 isn't released yet. You can't buy a W7 Phone right now. Saying it's unstable is like saying Windows 9 is unstable. It's not even freakin' released.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon
Judah HimangoThere are people with the latest beta. You have heard of those, right? You know, where some people get early copies of something to try out and so forth. Pretty interesting concept. (Sarcasm flag off.)
-
LunaticFringe wrote:
explain to me how this statement implies that native C++ apps will be allowed, as they were in previous versions.
They have this restriction[^] But if it is an IL chip, then IL is native ASM, and managed code comes from native c++. Either way, you have native c++ if you want it. :-\
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
There are people with the latest beta. You have heard of those, right? You know, where some people get early copies of something to try out and so forth. Pretty interesting concept. (Sarcasm flag off.)
Latest beta of what? The phone? There isn't any beta hardware out. There's "oh, here's what we're working on" preview, and it's entirely private, given to a few select individuals. The only thing the public has is the WP7 Emulator. Seriously, people. Complaining something is unstable when said thing is 8+ months away, and not even available to the public, is just whiny foolishness.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon
Judah Himango -
It must be tough when they're too stupid to debate an issue that really bothers them, and they're reduced to prowling the lounge looking for revenge on irrelevant threads.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
LunaticFringe wrote:
It must be tough when they're too stupid to debate an issue that really bothers them, and they're reduced to prowling the lounge looking for revenge on irrelevant threads.
Which is why I've given up defending Apple on here. You can't fight zealotry with intelligence.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Recalling our discussion here about developing for Apple devices I just came across this: http://stopthemadnessstevejobs.com/wordpress/[^]
Yesterday they said today was tomorrow but today they know better. - Poul Anderson
Ya know, I'll bash Apple when the time calls for it. But, do you realize just how many embedded devices only support X languages? Just because the iPhone is more robust shouldn't mean it should be the only one under scrutiny at CP. And, I'd be willing to think it's more about quality control than anything else. After all, Apple cares about that stuff. It's easier to make one or two things work really well than a thousand. And I mean really, C/C++ is so popular it's not like they picked a bad choice of supported languages. Their whole model is around a tight ship on the machines they make. I mean, this isn't really a shock here. The trade off is a better experience rather than a ton of crashes. No, this does not mean stuff will never crash before someone twists my words. I would love to see you actually post some pro Apple stuff.
Jeremy Falcon
-
That does not address the issue of whether or not the OS allows the execution of 3rd party native C++ apps. That is the question. And the answer seems to be that no, it will NOT allow 3rd party native C++ apps to run. Right?
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
But, it's Microsoft doing it, so that's ok.
Jeremy Falcon
-
But, it's Microsoft doing it, so that's ok.
Jeremy Falcon
-
RichardM1 wrote:
All MS apps for the phone ARE written in managed code.
Irrelevant. The point is that now ALL apps must be written in managed code, not just MS's. And this is a new restriction, similar to that from Apple. That's all I'm sayin'.
RichardM1 wrote:
But where does it say they will brick your phone if you write one that isn't?
The statement from Petzold doesn't say native apps will brick your phone. It just says they won't run. (At least that's the way I'm reading it.)
RichardM1 wrote:
But what you say could be possible, if they have a chip that runs IL directly. Then not just the apps, but the OS is written in it, too.
This is just speculation, but I don't think that would be necessary. All they need to do is block execution of native C++ apps that aren't part of the OS. And it sounds as if that's what they're doing, one way or another.
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
LunaticFringe wrote:
The point is that now ALL apps must be written in managed code, not just MS's. And this is a new restriction, similar to that from Apple. That's all I'm sayin'.
I think you are stretching to get from "are" to "must be", that's all I'm saying. ;)
LunaticFringe wrote:
The statement from Petzold doesn't say native apps will brick your phone. It just says they won't run. (At least that's the way I'm reading it.)
In fact it says NOTHING about what will run, managed code or otherwise. THEIR c# apps might not run. Have you thought about that? So, I know that is how you are reading it, and I think you are reading too much into it. Almost to the point of asking if your account was been hacked by CSS. :rolleyes:
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
Latest beta of what? The phone? There isn't any beta hardware out. There's "oh, here's what we're working on" preview, and it's entirely private, given to a few select individuals. The only thing the public has is the WP7 Emulator. Seriously, people. Complaining something is unstable when said thing is 8+ months away, and not even available to the public, is just whiny foolishness.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon
Judah HimangoDon't be a jackass; Microsoft isn't writing the software in the dark for phantom hardware yet to be produced. It may not be available to the public, but it's there and what it does has leaked. Moreover, it was a a joke, but I guess you are completely devoid of humor. :)
-
Ya know, I'll bash Apple when the time calls for it. But, do you realize just how many embedded devices only support X languages? Just because the iPhone is more robust shouldn't mean it should be the only one under scrutiny at CP. And, I'd be willing to think it's more about quality control than anything else. After all, Apple cares about that stuff. It's easier to make one or two things work really well than a thousand. And I mean really, C/C++ is so popular it's not like they picked a bad choice of supported languages. Their whole model is around a tight ship on the machines they make. I mean, this isn't really a shock here. The trade off is a better experience rather than a ton of crashes. No, this does not mean stuff will never crash before someone twists my words. I would love to see you actually post some pro Apple stuff.
Jeremy Falcon
I'm not really out to bash them at all, we've just been discussing it here off an on for some time and I have a small interest in it as a potential development platform but seemingly weekly now something comes along that wanes my interest more and more.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
And, I'd be willing to think it's more about quality control than anything else.
There's one thing it's always about first and foremost and that's profit. They've determined their way to profit is by tightly restricting what runs in their hardware. However they take it to drastic lengths and it's not always about technical limitations, in fact it's often *not* about technical issues at all and more about business issues.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I would love to see you actually post some pro Apple stuff.
Me? Half the planet seemingly does that every second of the day. Surely any negative posts about Apple are a drop in the bucket.
Yesterday they said today was tomorrow but today they know better. - Poul Anderson
-
But, it's Microsoft doing it, so that's ok.
Jeremy Falcon
I am no MS fanboy. :rolleyes: I used a Lisa before I used a PC. C# is cool, because it almost to where objective-C was, back on the next boxes. It's just LF is talking like CSS here. He went from a statement that said "are" straight to "must from now on, or they will not work, we will put fluoride in your water and have aliens visit you with probes"
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
LunaticFringe wrote:
It must be tough when they're too stupid to debate an issue that really bothers them, and they're reduced to prowling the lounge looking for revenge on irrelevant threads.
Which is why I've given up defending Apple on here. You can't fight zealotry with intelligence.
Jeremy Falcon
-
LunaticFringe wrote:
The point is that now ALL apps must be written in managed code, not just MS's. And this is a new restriction, similar to that from Apple. That's all I'm sayin'.
I think you are stretching to get from "are" to "must be", that's all I'm saying. ;)
LunaticFringe wrote:
The statement from Petzold doesn't say native apps will brick your phone. It just says they won't run. (At least that's the way I'm reading it.)
In fact it says NOTHING about what will run, managed code or otherwise. THEIR c# apps might not run. Have you thought about that? So, I know that is how you are reading it, and I think you are reading too much into it. Almost to the point of asking if your account was been hacked by CSS. :rolleyes:
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
Joe Woodbury wrote:
First reports are that Windows Phone 7 is extremely unstable so it doesn't really matter what language you use.
Gee, what a surprise. Any word on when Phone7 SP1 will be released? :laugh:
L u n a t i c F r i n g e