David Wolf

Note: This was originally posted on Don MacAskill’s blog, as a reply to the post entitled, “Apple’s new policy is good for you, me, and the web“. Now, I don’t intend to normally cross-post stuff, but, in this case, I wanted to post it, and ALSO talk about a few new things that’s happened in the world of Flash-based sites. You may want to read it to totally “get” what I’m writing. I hope you’ll indulge me here.

Recently, Apple changed the agreement that all developers have to agree to in order to develop for the iPhone/iPad/iPod. In a nutshell, the new Flash CS5 was supposed to include a compiler that would create iPhone/iPad native code without actually programming in Object C. Apple’s recent change means that Adobe’s Flash CS5 iPhone/iPad compiler, and all the millions they spent developing it, are completely wasted. Apple will NOT approve apps from Flash CS5–even though they WILL technically run on the devices.

Apple’s intentions are far from noble in this case. I suspect it has more to do with the hatred between Apple/Google (since Google recently penned an agreement with Adobe for Flash support in the Chrome/Android products, and a desire to kill Android as a competitive platform).

By disallowing cross-platform apps, Apple has made it harder to target software at multiple platforms in an easy way. Fine; you argue that by doing that, the quality on the Apple device will be better. Let’s assume that your argument is true for a moment. That by using the Apple SDK, suddenly quality products are produced. From Apple’s perspective, this inhibits development on platforms that have a smaller app store (like Android). From a business perspective, the logic has typically gone like this: I create software for a platform that has the largest user base.

If I’m using a language that I can easily port to a less-popular user base, I might be able to expend 10% more energy on the app, to get a larger return on my investment by porting the app. But, if creating my app on another platform requires a re-write, I might be less inclined to create apps for it as my investment to return ratio might be lower than I’d hoped for. If lots of developers do that, then the “other” platform dies.

This isn’t about language agnosticism, it’s about return on investment (ROI).

Let’s go back to your contention that the Apple SDK will result in quality apps.. Using an SDK in and of itself does NOT equal quality. It’s a logical fallacy. By requiring an SDK, all you ensure is that apps are written against the SDK. Nothing more. The APPROVAL process is where you determine quality. So, by your logic, if Apple is convinced that the SDK usage will inevitably lead to high quality apps, why have an approval process? Logical conundrum?

But, even if we buy the argument that the SDK usage is still, on whole, better than Flash, why not enforce the SDK requirements on EA? Apple certainly doesn’t mind that EA doesn’t use the Apple SDK to port their games. Likewise, apps like Line2 (written by Sean Kovacs) are allowed into the app store, while other apps (Google Voice) are not.

Note; Allow me to scramble down a secondary path for a moment.. Sean Kovacs wrote both Line2 and Google Voice apps. He’s posted on his blog that the two programs are virtually identical in every possible way–except for the API endpoint. One ends at Google, the other ends at Line2. Apple approved Line2′s app. Apple battled the FTC on the Google Voice app. Let me reiterate; they are the SAME app–just linked to two different companies. One’s approved, one’s not. My point? Apple has a track record of inconsistent decisions.

Signal to Noise Ratio.. This is hard to dispute. There’s a LOT of garbage apps (although, I can’t help but to notice that you’re helping to prove me point here.. SDK does NOT equal good apps). But, less choice is NEVER good for the consumer. SmugMug itself is arguably a better website because of competitive forces. What REALLY needs to change is not “less apps”, but a better system for indexing, searching and finding apps. Apple took the path-of-least-resistance by adding the app store to an existing (iTunes) framework. It’s not ideal. There’s no way to see star-ratings on the desktop iTunes when browsing. But you can on the iPhone. Sorting is archaic at best, there exists no way to ‘test’ apps before purchase, etc.. The app store is a disaster. But, Apple wont fix the actual problem–they’ll insist that the symptoms are the REAL problem. That allowing Flash apps in the store would somehow make an already horrible UI into something even worse? I don’t buy it.

Now, you say it’s “Good for Adobe”. Honestly, it’s not. Adobe spent a LOT of time creating a iDevice packager. Apple waited until DAYS before the CS5 release to announce the license change. This wasn’t pure happenstance; Apple leaves very little to “chance”. Apple did this in exactly the way Apple wanted to. They intended to cause a huge problem for Adobe, and they did.

Apple is showing its true colors: Apple wants to control–not cooperate. They want to dominate–not collaborate. Apple started as an idealistic company. Using images from the book 1984 to sell Macs. Unfortunately, instead of being the athletic woman with the sledgehammer, Apple is now the disembodied head on the large screen. They’ve decided that I should be protected at any and all costs. But, in so doing, they’ve turned into big-brother themselves.

It’s a pity; Apple does make nice products–it’s just too bad that they’re evil.

**UPDATE**: As a result of all this infighting, Adobe has pretty much told Apple to screw themselves. Which is understandable. But, what’s amusing is the sudden rush to something called “HTML5″. HTML5 is the new version of HTML (the code that’s used to create most websites), and includes something called <canvas> which let’s you draw on the screen, in the same way Flash lets you.

I suspect that you’ll see a lot of sites in the coming months that will try to sell you a HTML5 site so it works with iPad, iPhone, etc. but, be weary. Even if it “works”, it’s probably not ideal. It wont be the same experience that one would have on a PC. And, that lack of consistency is typically a bad thing–especially when the whole point of using a Showit site (or other Flash-based sites) is to have rich-media, animation, music and fluidity.

Better option would be for Apple to quit being stupid and support Flash. That’s not going to happen though. So, an even BETTER option is to not buy brain-dead hardware with a half-eaten fruit.