If they're concerned about developers using private APIs, make sure that developers don't use private APIs; simple enough.
It seems you misunderstood what the article was referring to. Apple does police submitted apps for this stuff. Any such apps or app updates are denied if found to be using private APIs and frameworks. What the author was referring to are people who say Apple should allow developers to make calls through private channels and support those programs by not breaking them in future software updates (through changes to their private frameworks).
Again, restricting compatibility layers because they might lead to poor apps is equivalent to outlawing hammers because you might kill someone with them. It's ridiculous and absurd, and most importantly, completely disingenuous. What happens when Adobe releases a product that takes Flash source as input and then produces XCode-compatible code as output?
I'm not arguing this point. I've already said it's a dick move on their part and is definitely about their bottom line, not about the PR-cleansed reasons they've been giving. Apart of course from the private API/framework stuff, but that's only just been bought up because it was mentioned in that article I linked.
You seem to be far more interested in business practices than technology or ethics, where as I couldn't care less.
I'm interested in all of it. The least of which has anything to do with MBAs. While I don't agree with Apple in the SDK case, I don't believe it to be unethical. I do believe Adobe has acted unethically by trying to play the consumer against Apple in their spat.
Previous Topic
Index
