John Gruber's original blog post about it: link [daringfireball.net]

My reading of this new language is that cross-compilers, such as the Flash-to-iPhone compiler in Adobe’s upcoming Flash Professional CS5 release, are prohibited. This also bans apps compiled using MonoTouch — a tool that compiles C# and .NET apps to the iPhone.

Adobe has released a statement about it, but it seems like Apple and Adobe aren't playing together nicely on the playground these days.

Apple is getting closer to anti-trust territory everyday.

Harry, please explain your reasoning for this statement.

Is this why we are never going to get Flash on the iPhone?

I know some think it is a resource hog, but why then do other phones support it. Enable and have it turned off in settings by default, and let folks turn it on if they want it.

Unfortunately I'm looking at moving to the Droid since my 2G phone won't be getting the multi-tasking this summer with the new 4.0 upgrade.

Apple has a great product, just crappy policies. It took 2 years for them to allow Slingbox to run... while every other smart phone allowed it.

I just grow tired of the constant control over something I paid a lot of money for...

Well anytime you act against competition you do start down the anti-trust road.

If Windows can be slapped for forcing IE and WMP on users then by the same token Apple could be slapped for forcing iTunes and Safari on it's users.

My main issue with the way Apple does things is this..... who owns the phone once it is purchased? If I want to install Opera on my iPhone I should be able to, and efforts to block me from doing what I want on MY phone can't be justified.

I am not saying Apple should be forced to facilitate apps by adding them to it's app store, but when they take active steps to block companies from getting their app on MY phone, by issuing updates and patches that are meant to limit my ability to add an app of my choice then they are the very definition of anti-trust.

Imagine not being able to install Firefox on your windows machine. Imagine Windows taking steps that would make it so only software developed in VB could be installed on a windows machine. That is ridiculous and people would lose their minds over it.

What they are doing is removing competition, that is the very nature of anti-trust. It is one thing not to offer support for these things. It is another to block them.

If Apple said to me that installing one of these apps would void my support or warranty with them, then I could accept that, but when Apple says to me, I will block your efforts to installing one of these apps, then I cry FOUL.

If Apple said to me that installing one of these apps would void my support or warranty with them, then I could accept that, but when Apple says to me, I will block your efforts to installing one of these apps, then I cry FOUL.

Agreed. I shouldn't have to jailbreak my phone for software because Apple wants everyone feeding out of their App Store trough. It's ridiculous when a browser is out there that's clearly faster (and less strenuous on AT&T) and Apple says no to it because they want total control.

I'd love to see Adobe to say: "Fine we'll stop making products for Apple hardware."

If Windows can be slapped for forcing IE and WMP on users then by the same token Apple could be slapped for forcing iTunes and Safari on it's users.

Except Windows was the dominant OS for almost 90% of the computer market and Apple, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't dominate the phone market yet. There are a bunch of Androids, CrackBerries and Palms out there, so closing the iPhone isn't anti-competitive yet, it's just plain stupid and could easily tip the scale among developers in the other direction with Android best poised to take the lead.

I'd love to see Adobe to say: "Fine we'll stop making products for Apple hardware."

Here's the irony with Flash is that most photographers, illustrators and other graphics oriented types just love Apple for the color balance from start to finish.

They also love to promote their work using Flash web sites, which is dominant among visual artists websites.

So the fact that the very same professionals that have zealously supported Apple all this time are now having their sites locked out of iPod Touch, iPhone and iPads because of a lack of Flash is quite the ironic twist and a swift kick in the seat of their pants for deifying Apple in the first place.

Got what they deserved for joining the cult IMO ;)

incrediBill, Exactly!

Where would Apple be without the Adobe/Macromedia products in the past years. This is a slap in the face of a company that literally gave the Design Industry a reason to use Macs.

Except Windows was the dominant OS for almost 90% of the computer market and Apple, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't dominate the phone market yet. There are a bunch of Androids, CrackBerries and Palms out there, so closing the iPhone isn't anti-competitive yet,

I am not talking about the smart phone market. I am talking about the hand held device application market, specifically on the iPhone, iTouch and iPad, 2 of which aren't even phones, so the fact that there are Androids and other phones out there really doesn't matter when you discuss apps on an iTouch or iPad.

They are anti-trust not in the phone market but in the app market.

Keep in mind they just sold 300,000 iPads, that has to be an Internet tablet dominate market share, and it is subject to the same App limitations... so it really isn't about phones, Apple is stopping competition of Apps that run on products it SELLS to people.

There is a massive, world, multi-billion dollar market for apps on Apple handheld devices, and that is where they are acting in anti-trust manner.

No matter how bad they want to they don't own the market on apps for their devices, just like Microsoft doesn't own the market for what can be installed on Windows.

Blocking apps on Apple products should be met with the same reaction as if Windows blocked software from registering itself in Windows registry.

Imagine Ford selling you a car that only takes Ford approve gasoline, and they constantly updated your car to block your efforts to use gas from another vendor.

[edited by: Demaestro at 4:47 pm (utc) on Apr 9, 2010]

Except Windows was the dominant OS for almost 90% of the computer market

But apple have 100% of the iPhone market.

Mack.

Apple and the Chinese government probably get along great.

I am not talking about the smart phone market. I am talking about the hand held device application market, specifically on the iPhone, iTouch and iPad, 2 of which aren't even phones, so the fact that there are Androids and other phones out there really doesn't matter when you discuss apps on an iTouch or iPad.

Whether the device has a phone in it or not doesn't really differentiate it, it's the same core device, just varying features and screen sizes.

There are Android netbooks and tablets, the Kindle, and B&N Nook (Android powered), which are all non-smart phone devices.

At CES 2010 MS showed off 7-10 new Windows based tablets, plus more Android tablets were announced.

Apple is far from ruling this space and forcing people to buy Apples to build for Apple will ultimately limit their future.

I have no plans to ever buy an Apple product, although the iPad is tempting, so I'll never write any Apple apps unless they allow cross-compiled products.

Android and Windows will be enough for me to play with.

FYI, I had a Windows tablet back around '91 when I was at Lotus. They've been around for ages but the battery life and bulky size limited their market. My local clinic uses them in a paperless office, that's what they were originally designed to do, replace the paper on a clipboard sized device you could either write on with a pen or type on the on-screen keyboard.

The only new thing Apple is doing is marketing, making them look sleek and sexy so everyone wants one and price them for the consumer.

This is the kind of childishly defensive move that always precedes a company losing a huge part of it's market share.

It also shows no respect for developers, which always backfires in the long run.

I don't see the anti-trust argument though... Apple is far from dominating in any market, and I think it's safe to say we're going to see them lose big chunks of market share this year. They got the jump on the next generation of tablets but everyone else has one in the pipeline that will multi-task and let users do what they want instead of telling them what they want.

This is the kind of childishly defensive move that always precedes a company losing a huge part of it's market share.

Not for Apple though...this is working wonderfully. They're changing the market to work for them, already people are freaking out saying that this may be the end of Flash. Adobe's already had to release a statement:

In the end-of-quarter Form 10-Q it just filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission: it flatly says that "to the extent new releases of operating systems or other third-party products, platforms or devices, such as the Apple iPhone or iPad, make it more difficult for our products to perform, and our customers are persuaded to use alternative technologies, our business could be harmed."

Apple's making companies play ball their way and it's working. Do you think developers are all just going to walk away now that they have to follow even more rules? Probably not. There's just too much money in it to walk away. In fact, they'll have even more incentive to stay thinking other developers will leave and there will be less new apps to compete with.

[edited by: StoutFiles at 7:01 pm (utc) on Apr 9, 2010]

I've shared my mantra before, and I'll do it again. My defensive against abusive bulling behavior from corporations is my wallet: Apple will not see a dollar from me anymore. And I will also make sure my girlfriend, family and whomever trusts me, does not spend a dollar more on an Apple product.

As for the anti-trust, not too sure but there might be a valid investigation: combine ipods, iphones and now ipads, and you get a large number of completely closed-up devices, and clear and open attempts at stifling any and all competition on these devices.

I don't see the anti-trust argument though... Apple is far from dominating in any market

Do they really have to dominate the market to be considered acting in an Anti-Trust, anti-competitive way?

I have no plans to ever buy an Apple product, although the iPad is tempting, so I'll never write any Apple apps unless they allow cross-compiled products.

I am with you, but that still doesn't make what they are doing right. Maybe not illegal but it is dancing right on the line IMO.

To me the market share the devices enjoy isn't the point, they have a 100% share on apps on their devices, this isn't about the phones/devices, this is about the apps that live on them.

If 90% of phones had Apple OS on them would they be in the wrong?
--> If Yes Then
Why aren't they in the wrong if only 20% of the phones have Apple OS on them?

It isn't right that if I develop a good app that Apple should block people who own an Apple device from installing it, just because I developed it on my own terms or because it will allow people to browse the web without Safari, or because it uses Wi-Fi or because it has content that is adult in nature. It isn't up to them, it is up to the person who owns the phone.

[edited by: Demaestro at 7:11 pm (utc) on Apr 9, 2010]

I don't understand why they have to have a dominant market share for this activity to be deemed anti-trust.

Because without a dominant position in the market you can't effectively stifle competition.

Why aren't they in the wrong if only 20% of the phones have Apple OS on them?

Oh they're wrong all right, but as things stand it's up to their customers to decide whether or not to punish them. There are plenty of alternatives to choose from.

Because without a dominant position in the market you can't effectively stifle competition.

But they are stiffing competition. Competition building apps that run on their hand held devices. It really can't matter that the devices aren't dominating the market, because the market isn't smart phones apps, the market is Apple hand held device apps.

They are a closed system so if I want to make apps for Apple hand held devices, which apple holds a 100% market share of, then I can't unless I jump through their hoops and don't compete with their apps like Safari.

This is the very definition of stifling competition.

How can one look at this announcement and think otherwise?

Blackberries don't run iPhone apps so it doesn't matter how many alternatives there are to iPhone if a developer wants to enter the iPhone/iTouch/iPad/ app market they are stifled.

Apple telling Opera Mini no(or in their case, ignoring them) is, in my mind, EXACTLY like if Microsoft told Mozilla no and not letting Firefox run on Windows. Someone tell me why a phone OS can be locked down while a desktop OS cannot.

This is the very definition of stifling competition.

Just the opposite.

It will drive a bigger wedge thrusting Android further into the forefront.

Heck, they're already playing catch up just to be multi-tasking and many other things.

It's the wrong move for Apple at a time when the heat has been turned up to a boil under them, absolutely pig-headed and helping the steam roller chasing them.

Apple telling Opera Mini no(or in their case, ignoring them) is, in my mind, EXACTLY like if Microsoft told Mozilla no and not letting Firefox run on Windows. Someone tell me why a phone OS can be locked down while a desktop OS cannot.

I don't disagree with your sentiment, Apple's being a pig-headed bully, but the circumstances are just very different at the moment.

a) iPhone is a phone, not a multi-purpose desktop with 90% marketshare of all desktops

b) They don't dominate the market yet, Opera has plenty of other places to play

Unfortunately Android is gaining lots of market share so Apple can continue to be a bully.

Don't forget, lots of Windows CE based phones out there too which could run Opera ;)

One thing I think MS have done quite well over the last few years is the way it has treated the development community. The express development suite, action packs, etc. They support multiple languages and platforms. Apple has to beware a little developer backlash on this issue.

I would certainly find it quite a frustrating experience that a platform does not want me to share or combine my efforts on other platforms. Quite a slap in the face really...

Bill I know you are right. I guess I am just bogged down in feelings... my wife, decided to get me an iPhone for x-mas.

It is a pretty cool unit but the longer I use it all I see is what it doesn't or won't do.

Every time that list grows, so does my ire.

Adobe's response: "Go screw yourself Apple." [theflashblog.com]

That was not Adobe's response:

[Adobe would like me to make it clear that the opinions below are not the official views of the company and are entirely my own.]

if a developer wants to enter the iPhone/iTouch/iPad/ app market they are stifled.

I don't, and haven't ever, liked Apple's closed "we know better than our customers" mentality. That's why I don't buy their products, shiny though they may be.

But they have every right to market and manage their products that way. From their perspective it's about quality control. There is no reason why a developer would need to write iPhone apps so I don't see how it's in any way a regulation issue. If developers don't like it they can write apps for other mobile operating systems.

Apple employees are forbidden from blogging, posting to social networks, or other things that we at companies with an open culture take for granted.

Makes the whole Apple 1984 [youtube.com] advertisement more amusing in retrospect as Apple becomes the very type of organization that they claimed to be trying to help people break free from with the Mac.

Stick around long enough and things go full circle as MS opens up more than ever while Apple closes their environment.

Woz is probably having a cow as he watches Jobs turn to the dark side.

Seems to me, SJ's gotten a little narrow-minded in the arrogance of recent success. He'll drive away a great potential source of future success, to the point of limiting his devices to "flake" software items instead of in-depth professional tools.

"flake" software items

make a LOT more money then

in-depth professional tools

as the pool of potential customers is exponentially larger.

apple has to be careful with all this blocking