Adobe CS5 iPhone building is "*Subject to Apple's current requirements and approval."

If you read my last post, you know that Apple altered their licensing agreement for applications. Not only is apple telling you how you can distribute them, but now they are telling you how you can build them.

Here's the meat of the matter:

"3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

It's corporate control at it's worst. Apple has surpassed Microsoft in terms of "evil empire". Microsoft may be berserk with their licensing pricing and enforcement, but one thing is true, they NEVER told me that I couldn't use my computer whatever way I wanted as far as a developer. As long as the binary output runs, I can install it, for FREE. Apple, however, has decided that's not enough money or control. Now they want to specify the language you write in, how it should be compiled, and all the rest of it, AND get a fee JUST so you can put an app on an iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad. The more I look at it, the more I see corporate, hysterical paranoia. Apple simply wants to own and control all content distribution on the web.

Apple = Open Web? No, they do not. They = closed devices supporting the technologies they choose, the way they specify. They are doing evil; they could learn a lot from Google.

What evil?

The change has affected numerous small development shops that were counting on Adobe's Release of Flash CS5, as well as shops working on compilers for various dev technologies. Apple is taking every step they can to keep anything other than Apple licensed developers, and Apple licensed tools, out of the realm of Apple mobile development, in particular, the petulant snubbing of Adobe's Flash. They offer all kinds of weak, easily repudiated reasons for not allowing the technology to be installed in their Safari browser on the iPad and the iPhone, or as a runtime that can support Air apps. I won't rehash these, other than to say, if a $250 netbook can run Flash and Air, then there's no reason in the universe that the iPad shouldn't be able to, unless all it really comes down to is that the iPad is a glorified iPod Touch without the camera. I mean...no USB port...no Flash...no multitasking yet...come on. Has Apple forgotten that technology isn't just about designing cool looking things?

Anyway, Adobe has added this little quip to the pre-release announcement of the CS5 Master Suite, due for release in mid-May:

"Publish content virtually anywhere, using Adobe AIR® for desktop applications and mobile platforms including the iPhone®*, or Adobe Flash Player for browser-based experiences.
*Subject to Apple's current requirements and approval."

Notice that last line. This means that, Adobe may give you a tool that can build iPhone apps from Flash/ActionScript...but you may never be able to use it. All Apple has to do is keep modifying the license agreement to shut Adobe out forever, and as they clearly show by the new 3.3.1 paragraph, they're more than willing to do it.

For shame Apple. You're supposed to enfranchise developers, let us create tools to work with your platform. But instead, you react by putting more mortar on the walls around your mobile platform, paid for by developers that just want to put an app on an iPad.

HP Slate for me (google it), and depending on how Android 2 goes over the remainder of my iPhone contract, it's a distinct possibility I'll abandon Apple's mobile platform altogether. My whole perception of what I see when I look at my iPhone has changed, and I don't like it. Sure, this may only matter to developers, but developers build the apps you love. Historically, where the developer goes, the consumer follows. If Apple keeps heading this way, it's just a matter of time until people start jumping ship.

Is this all written in stone? Hard to say. But it is indeed written, at least for now.

Apple tightens control over development...again.

Take a look at this: Before today, the Apple License Agreement for apps read like this:

3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.

As of today, it looks like this:

3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

Now, I don't think this necessarily means the Flash CS5 is torched (if you didn't know Flash CS5 has the ability to compile ActionScript apps to run on iPhone). The only thing it MUST do is, it must appear to the external eye that the app was written in C (objective, C++, etc.). If there is a compiled binary that speaks to the iPhone API through an intermediary layer, it's out of license.

Whatever the case, this is going too far. Not only does Apple want to specify how you can distribute your apps, they want to tell you exactly how to write and compile them. I'm reasonably confident this won't stop Adobe, as they wouldn't have gone this far without understanding Apple's probable reaction to their iPhone compiling tools, but it will certainly torch a number of efforts underway to get iPhone dev into general development, like Java, etc; I know for sure the .Net->to->iPhone effort is now out of license, as it uses an intermediary layer (or did anyway).

C'mon Apple. You've got your distro lock, for pete's sake if home engineers can come up with another way to put it on wax, and it passes your already existing restrictions, back the hell off.