At 4/10/10 07:13 AM, Xeptic wrote: although if you ask me Apple could be more strict on that, but some people might like apps others don't. It's about the quality of the user experience, they don't want memory/battery hogging apps
I'd be fine with that if they were more strict, ABOUT QUALITY. Right now, they do continue to get more and more strict. About TERMS. As long as you don't compete with AT&T, Apple, or use private APIs, then you should be good to go. Doesn't matter the quality of the app. And don't forget, soon it'll matter what the app was written in, but still not the quality of the app.
We're in a transition period from Flash to HTML5. Transitions are never easy, you need a couple of assholes to speed up the process every now and then. Apple is doing just that at the moment. In a year or two, maybe three this won't be an issue anymore, and people won't know any different. For a nice review on Flash for tablets you should give this a read (and watch the videos).
Seriously? The HP slate has awesome specs, and I guarantee you Flash will run great because you better believe that HP and Adobe will be working hand in hand to make that happen. I don't care what other tablets have done, I'm looking at the Slate.
And for the record I'm not too happy about Apple's decision to block CS5 content, as I was very interested in giving it a go myself. But hey, if the apps run as shitty as Tyler says I couldn't care too much. Guess that means I'll have to spend some time learning a different language.
At according to that term, that language might legally have to be Objective-C. Even though with software like Titanium you can create NATIVE apps with JavaScript.
I will bookmark this page, wait a year or two and send you a pm so we can both smile. Deal? Like it or not the thing will sell like almost everything Apple makes. The Slate won't even make a dent.
You're confusing the word obsolete with "higher revenue". Completely different things. Look at the specs for the slate, and then look at the specs for the iPad. You can say today that the iPad will be obsolete, no need to wait until it comes out. But you're probably correct, there's so many uniformed Apple consumers that they'll still be buying up those iPads. I would never doubt that.
At 4/10/10 08:10 AM, Doomsday-One wrote: What Apple is doing, on the other hand, is making the decision for every person who buys the iPad. If it runs so poorly, why not tell people about that with a warning message whenever they try to use it, so that they can decide whether it is worth using or not. Taking people's options away is not what I call technological progress.
Very well said. Performance is just what Steve Jobs tells his dumb followers to make them believe that every Flash performance issue is the fault of Flash, even though he refuses to allow any hardware acceleration. And this works for him, because he has no interest in making user experience better. Since he doesn't have that interest, it helps him to discredit Flash and keep it off his devices.
At 4/10/10 09:12 AM, Xeptic wrote: Developers aren't morons. Almost everyone with an interest in tech knows Apple is quite restrictive with these kind of things, especially developers that fork over $100 to get a license. The pros the App store offers simply outweigh the cons.
No doubt, but the fact that the pros outweigh the cons doesn't mean they aren't boderline abusive to developers. I think it's that fact that allows them to be abusive to developers. Because they've created such a monopoly, and it's only going to get worse.