5 ms·

Isn't it funny how many people using alternative runtimes seem to say "I can fully understand why they would ban Adobe/Flash but why on earth would they also ba

Isn't it funny how many people using alternative runtimes seem to say "I can fully understand why they would ban Adobe/Flash but why on earth would they also ban my favorite runtime"? Apple didn't make this move because they have some irrational religious hatred against Adobe. They are just betting that a tight control over the technology by which people produce applications for their mobile platform will be advantageous to them. They are fully aware that this is bad for people who have bet on using different technology and I guess is that they just don't care the tiniest bit.

stuaxo 16y ago
Monotouch is not an alternative runtime - it is compiled code. There are alternative runtimes out there such as for lua etc (there is also an LLVM compiled version too).
chops 16y ago
this is bad for people who have bet on using different technology Absolutely true. An intersting thing is that I, and I'm sure quite a few others, would never have guessed that language choice was a "bet" (at least, not this kind of bet, anyway).
- voidpointer 16y ago
  Neither would I. When analyzing risk, there is also always the risk that you didn't recognize something as a risk at all. Maybe this is the Black Swan event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory) of mobile application development... Unlikely but disastrous at the same time...
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > I (...) would never have guessed that language choice was a "bet" Oh boy... It took years for me to convince several companies Java is not the only language that can turn out "enterprise level" applications... That risks putting me back in square one. Thanks, Steve. Well played.
  - chops 16y ago
    Oh boy... It took years for me to convince several companies Java is not the only language that can turn out "enterprise level" applications... No doubt, but that's a different kind of "bet" (I briefly alluded to it in my original comment). There's naturally the bet that the language might not be around in 2 years, or that the language isn't capable enough to do what you need it to do, or that the language is too niche for XYZ Corporation's programmers and finding other programmers might be hard[1]. But that's a completely different kind of bet from "I wonder if this very popular and capable language will be against the arbitrary and ever-changing rules." The former is quite practical. The latter shouldn't have to be a concern. [1] Off-topic, I recently had this debate with a guy I'm going into business with, in which I was trying to convince him Erlang is a viable language. He's more of a business-financial-type and was concerned with the proverbial "what happens if you get hit by a bus." While I understand his concern, eventually he, correctly, resigned the programming stuff to me, where it belongs :)
  - pyre 16y ago
    How is that though? If you were betting on Java for iPhone apps, you're just as screwed here too.
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      Many companies bet on one single technology stack for everything, whether the choice is appropriate or not.

stuaxo 16y ago

Monotouch is not an alternative runtime - it is compiled code. There are alternative runtimes out there such as for lua etc (there is also an LLVM compiled version too).

chops 16y ago

this is bad for people who have bet on using different technology Absolutely true. An intersting thing is that I, and I'm sure quite a few others, would never have guessed that language choice was a "bet" (at least, not this kind of bet, anyway).

voidpointer 16y ago
Neither would I. When analyzing risk, there is also always the risk that you didn't recognize something as a risk at all. Maybe this is the Black Swan event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory) of mobile application development... Unlikely but disastrous at the same time...
rbanffy 16y ago
> I (...) would never have guessed that language choice was a "bet" Oh boy... It took years for me to convince several companies Java is not the only language that can turn out "enterprise level" applications... That risks putting me back in square one. Thanks, Steve. Well played.
- chops 16y ago
  Oh boy... It took years for me to convince several companies Java is not the only language that can turn out "enterprise level" applications... No doubt, but that's a different kind of "bet" (I briefly alluded to it in my original comment). There's naturally the bet that the language might not be around in 2 years, or that the language isn't capable enough to do what you need it to do, or that the language is too niche for XYZ Corporation's programmers and finding other programmers might be hard[1]. But that's a completely different kind of bet from "I wonder if this very popular and capable language will be against the arbitrary and ever-changing rules." The former is quite practical. The latter shouldn't have to be a concern. [1] Off-topic, I recently had this debate with a guy I'm going into business with, in which I was trying to convince him Erlang is a viable language. He's more of a business-financial-type and was concerned with the proverbial "what happens if you get hit by a bus." While I understand his concern, eventually he, correctly, resigned the programming stuff to me, where it belongs :)
- pyre 16y ago
  How is that though? If you were betting on Java for iPhone apps, you're just as screwed here too.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    Many companies bet on one single technology stack for everything, whether the choice is appropriate or not.