On Apr 9, 2010, at 9:31 AM, Henry Vermaak wrote:
Really? I was under the impression that you need to jail break the phone to be able to install any app (or get a dev licence, of course).
I don't think you need to jail break anything to put apps on the phone that don't come from the store, what's preventing folks from just uploading the apps to their phones then executing them as normal? perhaps there's something I'm not aware of here, but the developer kit is free to anyone who has an ADC account, you merely need to register with apple to be able to download the developer kit and develop apps. I have the kit, but haven't written anything, mostly because I personally don't see the need to put out useless apps just for the purpose of having produced an iphone app. Sure it gives you bragging rights, but bragging about a number guessing game doesn't sound to me to be all that interesting, yet that's exactly the kind of thing I've seen, and to be honest, it kind of makes me not want to develop apps. But I guess you'll get that with anything, so I really shouldn't let it bother me I suppose. But anyhow, my guess is that apple just wants to ensure that all apps they promote are apps that are completely compatible with the iphone. It seems to me that if folks can demonstrate that fpc apps *are* 100 percent compatible, then apple will allow them as well. The whole reason for dropping carbon support is because it isn't being maintained by apple themselves anymore, and they are (eventually) going to have apis that will break under carbon usage. Also, because of the accessibility features in apple's os, which a lot of people now depend on, the cocoa interfaces are automatically supported by these apis, where carbon apps had to make special efforts to make themselves accessible, and most developers did not take the time to do this, and as a result, many applications were inaccessible to folks who depended on the accessibility features of the os. I actually applaud apple's efforts in this area (the accessibility stuff, not the dropping of api support), because I am one of those individuals who depend on the features that allow voiceover to operate out of the box on a huge percentage of osx apps right out of the box, which is something that cannot be said for any other operating system. I would love to write full-blown cocoa apps using fpc, but as of yet, I've had zero luck in doing so, either because the gui generation kits did not work at all, I couldn't get them installed, or they generated code that did not comply with apple gui accessibility guidelines, and as a result, produced apps that did not work with voiceover, which of course leaves me out. I'm still stuck using command-line apps when using fpc, though I have no trouble producing accessible apps when using the sfml libraries under C/C++. Which, really is a shame, but that's what we have to work with. The mono framework (via renasaince) seems to work for some, but I've been unable to get it to work on my system, so I'm stuck using terminal apps if I want to use fpc.
I'll make sure I complain to apple about not allowing fpc apps though, as I see no reason why properly built fpc apps should be excluded. The reasoning is sound, but sometimes companies tend to carry things too far, and I think this is probably one of those times. <sigh>
_______________________________________________ fpc-other maillist - fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
