![]() ![]() It's agonizingly slow to do it with keyboard (highlighting is worse, for some reason) and inaccurate to do it with finger/fiddly to do it with Pencil. #Textastic haskell proThe 12.9 iPad Pro with smart keyboard is nice for typing text but terrible for moving the cursor around. The absence of a really good typing story. #Textastic haskell codeHonestly, I try to write code on iOS all the time, and it's not really the absence of tools that can execute that code that really stands in the way. The web simply has its 'knobs' set differently to mediate the curation/openness dilemma. (It's not as painful if you are working at a good company with sharp marketers, or if you have an in with a community that exists outside the app store.) ![]() This is what Apple has done, and it explains why their ecosystem is painful in exactly the ways it it painful. So to curate such an ecosystem, while being relatively open to new developers and users at the same time, the below-par apps have to be punished through discover-ability. Here's the dilemma: To have a degree of openness and accessibility for developers while also maintaining convenience for end-users, you have to accept the submissions of new developers that meet a certain (in practical terms, low) bar of standards. And in the case of the App Store, developers can make income from that trust.Īny curated stores (stores for web apps are no exception - like the Chrome store) are going to put limits on what can be published. Developers can leverage that trust if they are willing to submit their work for review. Good curation is hard, and doing it well builds user trust. The curation entices users which creates demand that developers can service. I can experiment, write code, and publish that code without Apple's blessing.Īny curated stores (stores for web apps are no exception - like the Chrome store) are going to put limits on what can be published. Publishing on the App Store is not really relevant. ![]() An Apple ID is still needed, but the direction has been positive. #Textastic haskell downloadI can go to Github, download an open source iOS project and build it for my device. And this has only gotten better for the Apple ecosystem. We (programmers) have great device access without undergoing corporate review. Building code for devices, and distributing that code on the App Store. I feel like you are conflating two issues in your comparison. Or do you accept limited device access in exchange for a truly egalitarian distribution landscape, while hoping device access will improve? To me that's the choice for developers, and I choose the latter. And a vote for bringing the safety and freedom of the sandbox closer to the metal, rather than going straight to the bottom while forfeiting our freedom.ĭo you accept a class-based system where the privileged class gets "full" device access and hope the class divide gets fairer. And different devices make different choices on these subjects.īut choosing to target the browser as The Computer is a vote against app stores. And features like graphics shaders and camera stream take longer to diffuse. There is heavy debate about what constitutes "unsafe". Rather than allowing dangerous apps and requiring them to undergo corporate review, The Web just assumes the app is nefarious, lets anyone at all run anything they want, but architects the runtime so that apps can't do anything unsafe. This thread is getting beastly but I want to weigh in to comment that The Web is an interesting alternative to this problem. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |