It's hard to argue that Apple is a monopoly when they have ~7% of the PC market and there are 3 significant competing platforms in the smartphone market (RIM, Android, and Windows). Now, I'm not defending Apple's stance on alternate languages, but I do think these decisions are based mostly on engineering compromises in an effort to constrain the problems they will face as they evolve the hardware and software. I mean, Objective-C itself is just about the epitome of a language born out of engineering compromise (an early attempt to get a Smalltalk inspired OO system running in a C based environment).<div>
<br></div><div>It's a much simpler problem if they only have to worry about breaking Objective-C and web apps all using official, documented and published APIs moving forward than if they have to worry about a mixed bag of apps all using various idiosyncratic technologies accessing undocumented APIs. As for the AppStore, it's a practical solution to the problem of viruses and malware (there is certainly demand for computers that just work, where viruses and malware are not an issue...the virus problem in Windows has been quite successful in fostering an appetite for that). The AppStore not an ideal solution to that problem, but they are having to work with 40 year old operating system technology here. The AppStore has also been quite successful in dealing with some of the peripheral problems software publishers face (like distribution and payment processing) and in so doing has created a viable business model for thousands of small software publishers.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I don't mean to come across sounding like an Apple apologist, but the arguments here seem to be very one sided. I simply want to express an alternative view.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, having said all of this, I would still like to be able to use Smalltalk to write apps for my iPhone.<br>
<div><br></div><div>- Stephen<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 3:42 PM, casimiro barreto <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:casimiro.barreto@gmail.com">casimiro.barreto@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/4/22 Hilaire Fernandes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hilaire@ofset.org" target="_blank">hilaire@ofset.org</a>></span><div>
<div></div><div class="h5"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/4/21 John M McIntosh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com" target="_blank">johnmci@smalltalkconsulting.com</a>></span><div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex">
Phil, last week I asked the smalltalk community (ESUG etc), to stay claim and wait for Apple to think about it based on an email<br>
exchange I had with Steve Jobs. At the time I thought it prudent to wait a further decision or statement.<br>
<br>
Give that Wired publish Alan & my thoughts on the matter it's likely now time to consider what to do next.<br>
<br>
So this is NOT the fault of ESUG not being proactive, they were itching to do something.<br>
<br>
At the moment I believe they are collecting ideas how to approach the problem in a meaningful manner.<br>
Suggestions are welcome.<br></blockquote></div><div><br>I guess you already though about this one but hit *gently* where it hurts: Google. <br><br>Explain there a few things: in one hand Apple decided to wipe out non home dev. tools, in the other hand Android is wide open, then Google support dynamic languages, and Smalltalk particularly, throught GSoC initiative.<br>
<br>Hilaire<br></div></div><font color="#888888"><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire" target="_blank">http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire</a><br>
</font><br><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div><div>The problem with Apple policies regarding to what <b>they allow</b> to be installed either in iPhone and iPad extrapolates by far the problem of what computer languages <b>they allow</b> applications be developed in. They're actively practicing private censorship over general processing platforms. This is monopolist action and by all means wrong and possibly unlawful against consumers. If they intend to take such actions they should advertise everywhere that <b>any aplication/content</b> allowed to be installed in iPhone/iPad via AppleStore (the only valid source of applications and content unless you jailbreak your iPhone/iPad which is contrary to license agreement) is subject to previous approval by Apple and content may be removed at short notice.<br>
<br>So, the problem goes far beyond scratch.<br><br>BTW, it is so important that unless they change their police I stopped to develop anything using Apple platforms.<br><br>CdAB<br></div></div>
<br><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>