News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others by lispm on Thursday April 08, 2010 @07:53PM (#1251448)
Say, one wants to develop a touch user interface for a visual programming language for music composition and the core engine happens to be written in Common Lisp (say, something like PWGL or Open Music) - why can't I have that in Lisp? It is compiled, native and would use the Cocoa libs.

There are not only consumers which want to download ebooks with ads. There could be an area of innovative and experimental use where Universities want to develop novel applications - applications that might be written in Smalltalk, Lisp, Haskell - or any other language that can compile and is not Objective C. In many cases the innovation lies in the core logic and the innovative use of a touch screen. Why should I develop my core logic in a way that it is tied to the iPhone or iPad (assuming that the iPad will get the same developer agreement) and where I have to use a relatively low-level language like Objective C.

It is one thing what you assume Apple's target (Adobe, cross platform frameworks, ...) is and another thing who else is also affected by these clauses the developers have to agree to.

Re:New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others by ftlbaby on Thursday April 08, 2010 @09:12PM (#1251556)
The university example is a good one. I wonder if they will be covered by wireless app distribution, which will bypass the app store. From Apple's iPhone Enterprise Developer page... "Deploy proprietary, in-house applications to authorized users in your company, the iPhone Developer Enterprise Program is available to companies with 500 or more employees and a Dun & Bradstreet number.
Re:New iPhone Agreement Bans Flash-to-iPhone Compiler & Others by bruceboughton on Friday April 09, 2010 @03:52AM (#1252166)
Because companies with fewer than 500 employees have no need for custom apps...