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).

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.

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.

Of course, having said all of this, I would still like to be able to use
Smalltalk to write apps for my iPhone.

- Stephen

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 3:42 PM, casimiro barreto <
casimiro.barreto at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2010/4/22 Hilaire Fernandes <hilaire at ofset.org>
>
>
>>
>> 2010/4/21 John M McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
>>
>> 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
>>> exchange I had with Steve Jobs. At the time I thought it prudent to wait
>>> a further decision or statement.
>>>
>>> Give that Wired publish Alan & my thoughts on the matter it's likely now
>>> time to consider what to do next.
>>>
>>> So this is NOT the fault of ESUG not being proactive, they were itching
>>> to do something.
>>>
>>> At the moment I believe they are collecting ideas how to approach the
>>> problem in a meaningful manner.
>>> Suggestions are welcome.
>>>
>>
>> I guess you already though about this one but hit *gently* where it hurts:
>> Google.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> Hilaire
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire
>>
>>
>>
>> The problem with Apple policies regarding to what *they allow* to be
> installed either in iPhone and iPad extrapolates by far the problem of what
> computer languages *they allow* 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 *any aplication/content* 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.
>
> So, the problem goes far beyond scratch.
>
> BTW, it is so important that unless they change their police I stopped to
> develop anything using Apple platforms.
>
> CdAB
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100422/3da51930/attachment.htm