On 23 April 2010 02:44, casimiro barreto <casimiro.barreto at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2010/4/22 Stephen Pair <stephen at pairhome.net>
>>
>> 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).
>
> They have monopoly over platform (iPhone and iPad) and until other tablets
> reach market they have monopoly over tablet market.
>
> Suppose Job's idea flourishes and Microsoft decides next version of Windows
> will load applications via MicrosoftStore only and that they decide which
> applications are fit for Windows and which aren't and, more than that, what
> content is appropriate for Microsoft attendance and what is not (like
> well... no P2P, no Flash, multimedia only via ... you got the picture).
>
> Suppose everybody let this frog go down our throats and Jobs think: "well,
> it would be nice if all MacOS X applications could only be loaded through
> AppleStore..."
>
> The trouble with the iPhone/iPad marketing model goes far beyond Apple
> controlling things that can crash iPhone/iPad. It means that us, as
> developers, have to beg blessings to have the applications we develop
> available for a given platform; that we submit ourselves to the scrutiny of
> someone else than the customers or each country legal system and even so,
> "platform god" is free to decide that your application is not "appropriate"
> to his platform anymore and just throw you out of market.
>
> But it is really worse than that because, if your application let you upload
> something "filth" like Kama Sutra (wtf) then both your application and
> content can be banished from god's own store. Btw, Bukovisky works were
> banished from AppleStore (among many other authors).
>
> But it goes beyond: as was discovered, Apple have ways of remotely nuking
> iPhones and iPads (OS feature). Then, according to license, if you keep
> "unsuitable content" on your device you're prone to have it nuked. So...
> yeah I think iPhone/iPad market model is a big problem.
>

Yup. And they deserving it:

http://linuxoniphone.blogspot.com/2010/04/ive-been-working-on-this-quietly-in.html



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.