Xojo Conferences
MBSSep2018MunichDE
XDCMay2019MiamiUSA

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB (Real Studio network user group Mailinglist archive)

Back to the thread list
Previous thread: Getting user name/privilege level and admin name
Next thread: Writing a DTD for a XML


Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   William Squires
  Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Daniel Stenning
  Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
   Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Daniel Stenning
  Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
   OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   William Squires
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Tom Benson
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Thom McGrath
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Grant Dixon
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Grant Dixon
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Grant Dixon
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Grant Dixon
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Daniel Stenning
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   joe strout.net
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Charles Yeomans
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Charles Yeomans
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Terry Ford
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Tim Jones
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Giovanni
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
     Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Chris Little
      Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Charles Yeomans
      Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Tim Jones
       Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Chris Little
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Thom McGrath
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Joe Huber
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Norman Palardy
  Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Robert and Sigrid
   Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   joe strout.net
    Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Sam DeVore
  Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Emile Schwarz
   Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB   -   Thorsten Hohage

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 16:19 (Sat, 4 Aug 2007 10:19:38 -0500)
From: William Squires
As regards AppleTV, I look into my crystal ball (oddly enough, its
flat, rectangular, and 20" diagonally!) and see.. a great gaming
console that can run OS X games on your HD TV! (once they up the
graphics chipset, anyway.) much like an XBox with the Apple logo on
the side :)
And think - you could use the 'flip though' (album) feature of
iTunes to flip through your library of installed games (at least once
there's some way to produce album covers for OS X games, anyway!)
Of course, you'd have to trade HD space for games with recording
your fave TV programs, but hey - what the h*ll!
Perhaps even a version of RB optimized just for games (the only
controls would be the Note Player, QuickTime player, Canvas,
SpriteSurface, RB3D, and - perhaps - RBScript) that would also have a
simplified 3D modeler for use with the RB3D licensed from
Lightwave3D, Maya, or others.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:42 AM, Emile Schwarz wrote:

> Think at that:
>
> The good people from REAL Software (Geoff being there) told us somany
> years ago that they would love to have a Palm target (be able to
> generate applications for the Palm PDA).
>
> I would too.
>
> And, because I never get (buy) a Palm PDA (nor any other), I never
> rant
> on that thing not done, and stay with "I love to have that". My
> sleeping
> was good not to have this (not promised) done at all.
>
> So, for the iPhone and the current situation (Apple, and REAL
> Software),
> I do not expect anything (related to the iPhone nor the AppleTV) built
> in a near future version of REALbasic.
>
> And for the future, who knows how it will be?
>
> Not me :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Emile
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 18:00 (Sat, 04 Aug 2007 18:00:43 +0100)
From: Daniel Stenning
Well for the European and "freeview/DVB-T" crowd - an evolved AppleTV that
had a built in DVB-T tuner pair, plus a chip to compress Video fast enough
to stream high quality video live ( and with low power consumption ) over
Wi-fi and the internet, giving Slingbox some competition - would be a better
"sweet spot" imo. We have so many boxes under our TV these days. I would
like to reduce it to one, and be able to view ALL my content, anywhere.
So far I'm down to two - A slingbox and a DVR. I would love to be able to
use the elgato stuff over the net instead since their EyeTV products are a
true Knockout. Something like EyeTV + streaming built into AppleTV would be
very desireably.

Trying to compete with the games console players would be an unnecessary
diversion. Interestingly there is buzz about a future PS3 incorporating DVR
and TV reception

Whoa - is this off topic or what!

On 4/8/07 16:19, "William Squires" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> As regards AppleTV, I look into my crystal ball (oddly enough, its
> flat, rectangular, and 20" diagonally!) and see.. a great gaming
> console that can run OS X games on your HD TV! (once they up the
> graphics chipset, anyway.) much like an XBox with the Apple logo on
> the side :)

Cheers,
Dan



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 18:08 (Sat, 4 Aug 2007 10:08:05 -0700)
From: Giovanni
Have you tried the Minis? ;)

I have a configuration for the mini that does everything you speak of
including streaming, but thats a different story.

Kind regards,

Giovanni
<email address removed>


On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:00 AM, Daniel Stenning wrote:

> Well for the European and "freeview/DVB-T" crowd - an evolved
> AppleTV that
> had a built in DVB-T tuner pair, plus a chip to compress Video fast
> enough
> to stream high quality video live ( and with low power
> consumption ) over
> Wi-fi and the internet, giving Slingbox some competition - would be
> a better
> "sweet spot" imo. We have so many boxes under our TV these days. I
> would
> like to reduce it to one, and be able to view ALL my content,
> anywhere.
> So far I'm down to two - A slingbox and a DVR. I would love to be
> able to
> use the elgato stuff over the net instead since their EyeTV
> products are a
> true Knockout. Something like EyeTV + streaming built into AppleTV
> would be
> very desireably.
>
> Trying to compete with the games console players would be an
> unnecessary
> diversion. Interestingly there is buzz about a future PS3
> incorporating DVR
> and TV reception
>
> Whoa - is this off topic or what!
>
> On 4/8/07 16:19, "William Squires" <<email address removed>> wrote:
>
>> As regards AppleTV, I look into my crystal ball (oddly enough, its
>> flat, rectangular, and 20" diagonally!) and see.. a great gaming
>> console that can run OS X games on your HD TV! (once they up the
>> graphics chipset, anyway.) much like an XBox with the Apple logo on
>> the side :)
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 18:21 (Sat, 04 Aug 2007 18:21:44 +0100)
From: Daniel Stenning
Would have gone for one, had they been core2 Duos. Sadly many rumours
suggest that Apple are to kill that line altogether

On 4/8/07 18:08, "Giovanni" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> Have you tried the Minis? ;)
>
> I have a configuration for the mini that does everything you speak of
> including streaming, but thats a different story.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Giovanni
> <email address removed>
> On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:00 AM, Daniel Stenning wrote:
>
>> Well for the European and "freeview/DVB-T" crowd - an evolved
>> AppleTV that
>> had a built in DVB-T tuner pair, plus a chip to compress Video fast
>> enough
>> to stream high quality video live ( and with low power
>> consumption ) over
>> Wi-fi and the internet, giving Slingbox some competition - would be
>> a better
>> "sweet spot" imo. We have so many boxes under our TV these days. I
>> would
>> like to reduce it to one, and be able to view ALL my content,
>> anywhere.
>> So far I'm down to two - A slingbox and a DVR. I would love to be
>> able to
>> use the elgato stuff over the net instead since their EyeTV
>> products are a
>> true Knockout. Something like EyeTV + streaming built into AppleTV
>> would be
>> very desireably.
>>
>> Trying to compete with the games console players would be an
>> unnecessary
>> diversion. Interestingly there is buzz about a future PS3
>> incorporating DVR
>> and TV reception
>>
>> Whoa - is this off topic or what!
>>
>> On 4/8/07 16:19, "William Squires" <<email address removed>> wrote:
>>
>>> As regards AppleTV, I look into my crystal ball (oddly enough, its
>>> flat, rectangular, and 20" diagonally!) and see.. a great gaming
>>> console that can run OS X games on your HD TV! (once they up the
>>> graphics chipset, anyway.) much like an XBox with the Apple logo on
>>> the side :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
>> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>>
>> Search the archives:
>> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Cheers,
Dan



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 18:48 (Sat, 4 Aug 2007 10:48:51 -0700)
From: Giovanni
Well that would be terribly wrong...

Appletv is ok but it doesn't have as nearly as much power as a mini..

Mine is core duo. The performance is good for even 720p.

Giovanni
From my iPhone
alphaview.com

On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:21 AM, Daniel Stenning <<email address removed>> wrote:

> Would have gone for one, had they been core2 Duos. Sadly many rumours
> suggest that Apple are to kill that line altogether
>
> On 4/8/07 18:08, "Giovanni" <<email address removed>> wrote:
>
>> Have you tried the Minis? ;)
>>
>> I have a configuration for the mini that does everything you speak of
>> including streaming, but thats a different story.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Giovanni
>> <email address removed>
>>
>> On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:00 AM, Daniel Stenning wrote:
>>
>>> Well for the European and "freeview/DVB-T" crowd - an evolved
>>> AppleTV that
>>> had a built in DVB-T tuner pair, plus a chip to compress Video fast
>>> enough
>>> to stream high quality video live ( and with low power
>>> consumption ) over
>>> Wi-fi and the internet, giving Slingbox some competition - would be
>>> a better
>>> "sweet spot" imo. We have so many boxes under our TV these days. I
>>> would
>>> like to reduce it to one, and be able to view ALL my content,
>>> anywhere.
>>> So far I'm down to two - A slingbox and a DVR. I would love to be
>>> able to
>>> use the elgato stuff over the net instead since their EyeTV
>>> products are a
>>> true Knockout. Something like EyeTV + streaming built into AppleTV
>>> would be
>>> very desireably.
>>>
>>> Trying to compete with the games console players would be an
>>> unnecessary
>>> diversion. Interestingly there is buzz about a future PS3
>>> incorporating DVR
>>> and TV reception
>>>
>>> Whoa - is this off topic or what!
>>>
>>> On 4/8/07 16:19, "William Squires" <<email address removed>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As regards AppleTV, I look into my crystal ball (oddly enough,
>>>> its
>>>> flat, rectangular, and 20" diagonally!) and see.. a great gaming
>>>> console that can run OS X games on your HD TV! (once they up the
>>>> graphics chipset, anyway.) much like an XBox with the Apple logo on
>>>> the side :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
>>> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>>>
>>> Search the archives:
>>> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
>> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>>
>> Search the archives:
>> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
>>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 12:14 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 04:14:31 -0700)
From: Giovanni
A few thoughts:

I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
iPhone.

Creating an app for the iPhone using RB should not be a major deal
and it could benefit RB in a big way, that is, if they are willing to
be market leaders rather then reactors.

With so many people working on hacks already, being first may prove
beneficial.

I went to an apple store today, and was amazed that their scanner are
Windows Mobile. Building a compiler for Arm should not be that
difficult.

What do you guys think?

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 15:06 (Sat, 4 Aug 2007 09:06:39 -0500)
From: William Squires
I suspect it'll be easier to make an RB program to develop web apps
for the iPhone - especially if RS (ever) comes out with
Swordfish... :) The trick is, how do you get the web app into the
iPhone once you've developed it? d/l via bluetooth? 802.11? USB 2
connector to a base station?

On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:04 AM, Thom McGrath wrote:

> Agreed.
>
> I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
> despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
> is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
> OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
> password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
> and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.
>
> Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
> of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
> officially support a hack such as this.
>
> But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
> *Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
> flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
> any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
> For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
> features because the User Interface is so radically different.
>
> After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
> iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.
>
> One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
> SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
> but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
> completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
> and we'll see.
>
> --
> Thom McGrath
> The ZAZ Studios
> <http://www.thezaz.com/> AIM: thezazstudios
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Tom Benson wrote:
>
>> I think that even if RS built an ARM target that they would be
>> supporting an unknown/ unspecified set of API's.
>>
>> Until Apple release an official system level SDK (expect this about a
>> week after the first hacked together system level apps emerge) then
>> for RS to even consider supporting an ARM target is a waste of their
>> development time.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 04.08.07 17:07 (Sat, 4 Aug 2007 09:07:04 -0700)
From: Giovanni
Currently there is no "installation or file copying on the iphone",
not automatically.

the only way to do it currently is through a few hacks that require
that you tamper with the firmware. But apple just release a security
firmware fix which would require you to re-apply the firmware and
loose all the functionality you had gain through the hack.

As it stands the only way to deploy to the iPhone(supported way
anyways) is to deploy through the web using a web server of sort.

Technically, you could develop a webserver based on RB to work with
the iPhone by simply posting web pages compatible with it and since
its just safari, thats not difficult.

We have a presentation software that is web enabled, so for the
iphone what we are doing is generating pictures of the slide, and
showing them to the iphone which in turn the iphone is used to
control the presentation software. it works, it trully works.

I am waiting for the day that apple opens up the iphone for
developers the real way, someone mentioned how "Secure" the iphone
was as it was web based, and a few days later, a major security flaw
that could give your personal information away.

Come on apple! Give us an SDK!!!

Kind regards,

Giovanni
<email address removed>


On Aug 4, 2007, at 7:06 AM, William Squires wrote:

> I suspect it'll be easier to make an RB program to develop web apps
> for the iPhone - especially if RS (ever) comes out with
> Swordfish... :) The trick is, how do you get the web app into the
> iPhone once you've developed it? d/l via bluetooth? 802.11? USB 2
> connector to a base station?
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:04 AM, Thom McGrath wrote:
>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
>> despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
>> is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
>> OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
>> password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
>> and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.
>>
>> Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
>> of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
>> officially support a hack such as this.
>>
>> But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
>> *Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
>> flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
>> any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
>> For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
>> features because the User Interface is so radically different.
>>
>> After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
>> iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official
>> method.
>>
>> One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
>> SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
>> but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
>> completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
>> and we'll see.
>>
>> --
>> Thom McGrath
>> The ZAZ Studios
>> <http://www.thezaz.com/> AIM: thezazstudios
>>
>> On Jul 24, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Tom Benson wrote:
>>
>>> I think that even if RS built an ARM target that they would be
>>> supporting an unknown/ unspecified set of API's.
>>>
>>> Until Apple release an official system level SDK (expect this
>>> about a
>>> week after the first hacked together system level apps emerge) then
>>> for RS to even consider supporting an ARM target is a waste of their
>>> development time.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
>> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>>
>> Search the archives:
>> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 13:49 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 22:49:00 +1000)
From: Tom Benson
I think that even if RS built an ARM target that they would be
supporting an unknown/ unspecified set of API's.

Until Apple release an official system level SDK (expect this about a
week after the first hacked together system level apps emerge) then
for RS to even consider supporting an ARM target is a waste of their
development time.

- Tom

On 24/07/2007, at 9:14 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> A few thoughts:
>
> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
> iPhone.
>
> Creating an app for the iPhone using RB should not be a major deal
> and it could benefit RB in a big way, that is, if they are willing to
> be market leaders rather then reactors.
>
> With so many people working on hacks already, being first may prove
> beneficial.
>
> I went to an apple store today, and was amazed that their scanner are
> Windows Mobile. Building a compiler for Arm should not be that
> difficult.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> Giovanni
> <email address removed>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:04 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:04:10 -0400)
From: Thom McGrath
Agreed.

I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.

Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
officially support a hack such as this.

But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
*Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
features because the User Interface is so radically different.

After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.

One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
and we'll see.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:15 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:15:46 -0300)
From: Grant Dixon
Agreed.

I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.

Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
officially support a hack such as this.

But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
*Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
features because the User Interface is so radically different.

After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.

One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
and we'll see.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:15 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:15:48 -0300)
From: Grant Dixon
Agreed.

I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.

Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
officially support a hack such as this.

But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
*Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
features because the User Interface is so radically different.

After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.

One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
and we'll see.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:16 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:16:00 -0300)
From: Grant Dixon
Agreed.

I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.

Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
officially support a hack such as this.

But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
*Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
features because the User Interface is so radically different.

After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.

One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
and we'll see.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:16 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:16:02 -0300)
From: Grant Dixon
Agreed.

I honestly believe Apple is worried about security as they've said,
despite the skeptics. I mean, we have a whole new platform here that
is only secure by keeping developers off of it. Think about it, it's
OS X with a single (likely uniform) user with no or again, uniform
password that has lots of personal data and limitless internet access
and ready-to-use email. I mean, that's a wet dream for any evil-doer.

Back to the original point, RS would most certainly be in violation
of the EULA. It would be foolish and irresponsible of RS to
officially support a hack such as this.

But let's say Apple does release an official API that RS can use.
*Should* they really? I mean, software quality hasn't exactly been
flawless in the last few years. I don't believe RS should bite off
any more, because it seems they can't chew what they have already.
For the developer, you certainly couldn't use the Cross-Compile
features because the User Interface is so radically different.

After all this, there is zero reason RS should support building to
iPhone. Every developer would be better off using the official method.

One more quick thought. Here's a good reason why there is no iPhone
SDK: Windows. We Mac users are used to having Xcode to work through,
but what would Windows developers use? So maybe we'll see a
completely new IDE for iPhone development. Who knows. Just be patient
and we'll see.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:19 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:19:51 +0100)
From: Daniel Stenning
The first major step would be to write the ARM compiler of course. Non-
trivial naturally. It would be cool to have an IDE with a compiler that has
tackles the 3 major instruction sets in play these days - PowerPC, X86 and
ARM. However by far the biggest headaches would be all the different O/S
APIs out there. They haven't sorted out enough bugs in the APIs they
currently DO support judging by many comments here, plus their staff
resources are limited, so I wouldn't hold out any hopes.

Also, what is the market for iPhone Apps ? tiny I would say compared to the
overall Mobile app market (using the Symbian ,Windoze MoanBile + Java
platforms )

However I guess iPhone would be the easiest thing to attack first though due
to a shared OS API with the Mac. The majority of effort would go into the
ARM compiler I suspect. This would then open up the later possibility of
attacking Symbian or WinMob at a later time when resources allow. I guess
WinMob would be the easier one to tackle first after OSX since at least it
shares some commonality with Windows.

On 24/7/07 12:14, "Giovanni" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> A few thoughts:
>
> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
> iPhone.
>
> Creating an app for the iPhone using RB should not be a major deal
> and it could benefit RB in a big way, that is, if they are willing to
> be market leaders rather then reactors.
>
> With so many people working on hacks already, being first may prove
> beneficial.
>
> I went to an apple store today, and was amazed that their scanner are
> Windows Mobile. Building a compiler for Arm should not be that
> difficult.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> Giovanni
> <email address removed>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Cheers,
Dan



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 15:18 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 08:18:59 -0600)
From: joe strout.net
On Jul 24, 2007, at 11:14 UTC, Giovanni wrote:

> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
> iPhone.

I started with Palm development when it was new -- and at that time, it
was super-simple, easy to develop for, and well designed. They
basically took the Mac toolbox, stripped it down to the core
essentials, applied design and naming principles uniformly, and made
everything easy and Just Work.

But I wonder if you got into Palm development within the last several
years, where by now they're on version 7 or so of the OS, and it's
gotten quite nasty and complex. This was partly due to poor subsequent
design, but largely due to unavoidable complications of supporting
different resolutions, color depths, screen sizes and shapes, and new
technologies.

So, I would expect iPhone development to be simple now -- but I'd also
expect it to be just as warty and difficult in 5 years as Palm
development is now.

Best,
- Joe

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 20:53 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:53:31 -0700)
From: Giovanni
One of the issues with some companies are backward compatibility. It
has its perks, but it also has its issues.

Palm is good but for development things are always made harder then
simpler.

Now in Windows based solutions, development has gotten pretty simple.
If you learn Net Compact framework, you can develop just about
anything on those devices using Visual Studio 2005. I would think
that Apple could lead on that as they do design simpler machines with
futuristic features.

One thing about apple tho, it seems that they really try to block
development under this platform as much as they can. When you invite
development, the first thing you do, is provide an SDK which was not
the case for apple.

With security issues already popping up with Safari for the iPhone, I
dont know where Steve got the idea that WEB 2.0 is safer then built
in apps. Now you have to worry about 1) Make your site secure, 2)
make your code secure, and sooooo many other issues including that if
you have no wifi and no edge, your basically off the edge.

The only security issue(IMHO) is them being the only developers
developing for the iPhone, its about market share rather then
platform equality and security.

I know thats changing because the entire iphone community wont take
that, but its great when the manufacturer really thinks of its users.



On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:18 AM, <email address removed> wrote:
>
> But I wonder if you got into Palm development within the last several
> years, where by now they're on version 7 or so of the OS, and it's
> gotten quite nasty and complex. This was partly due to poor
> subsequent
> design, but largely due to unavoidable complications of supporting
> different resolutions, color depths, screen sizes and shapes, and new
> technologies.
>
> So, I would expect iPhone development to be simple now -- but I'd also
> expect it to be just as warty and difficult in 5 years as Palm
> development is now.
>
> Best,
> - Joe
>
> --
> Joe Strout -- <email address removed>
> Strout Custom Solutions, LLC
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 21:11 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:11:37 -0400)
From: Charles Yeomans

On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:53 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> One of the issues with some companies are backward compatibility. It
> has its perks, but it also has its issues.
>
> Palm is good but for development things are always made harder then
> simpler.
>
> Now in Windows based solutions, development has gotten pretty simple.
> If you learn Net Compact framework, you can develop just about
> anything on those devices using Visual Studio 2005. I would think
> that Apple could lead on that as they do design simpler machines with
> futuristic features.
>
> One thing about apple tho, it seems that they really try to block
> development under this platform as much as they can. When you invite
> development, the first thing you do, is provide an SDK which was not
> the case for apple.

In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list claiming
to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
why these appear to be good decisions.

Charles Yeomans
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 21:27 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:27:41 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 2:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:

> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list claiming
> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
> why these appear to be good decisions.

I think it's because Apple realizes that most of their clients are
consumers and they are a consumer device company that happens to make
computers.
People want devices that "just work" (TV's, dvd players, stereo's,
iPod's phones) and not something they have screw with to make it work.
It's why they changed their name to Apple, Inc from Apple Computer, Inc.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:21 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:21:01 -0700)
From: Giovanni
LOL

People want devices that work? Sure, thats why the Razor will still
sell because it just works. But thats not the point.

Not to mention that the Razor is free.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

>
> On 24-Jul-07, at 2:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:
>
>> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
>> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list claiming
>> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
>> why these appear to be good decisions.
>
> I think it's because Apple realizes that most of their clients are
> consumers and they are a consumer device company that happens to make
> computers.
> People want devices that "just work" (TV's, dvd players, stereo's,
> iPod's phones) and not something they have screw with to make it work.
> It's why they changed their name to Apple, Inc from Apple Computer,
> Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:23 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:23:34 -0700)
From: Giovanni
So you think that Apples not delivering a SDK to developers is of
best interest to the user?

On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:
>>
> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list claiming
> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
> why these appear to be good decisions.
>
> Charles Yeomans
>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:35 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:35:45 -0400)
From: Charles Yeomans
The point is not what I think; it is to understand what Apple thinks.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> So you think that Apples not delivering a SDK to developers is of
> best interest to the user?
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:
>>>
>> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
>> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list claiming
>> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
>> why these appear to be good decisions.
>>
>> Charles Yeomans

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:37 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:37:04 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 3:21 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> LOL
>
> People want devices that work?

Sure. Want a car you have to tinker with to keep it running ? Some do
as a hobby but not everyone has that hobby.
Or a TV that you have to reboot all the time ?

Consumer devices people expect to "just work"
That's not to say they all do

> Sure, thats why the Razor will still sell because it just works.

It sells because people think it does.
The young fellow who lives with us just got one. 4 days old and he's
falling out of love with it already :)

> But thats not the point.
> Not to mention that the Razor is free.

"free" ... After you sign up for how long a plan ?
Here it requires a 3 year plan to get the phone for "free" (but then
our phone plans are nowhere near what they are in the USA)

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:51 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:51:57 -0700)
From: Terry Ford

On Jul 24, 2007, at 2:37 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

>> But thats not the point.
>> Not to mention that the Razor is free.
>
> "free" ... After you sign up for how long a plan ?
> Here it requires a 3 year plan to get the phone for "free" (but then
> our phone plans are nowhere near what they are in the USA)

Nothing in life is "Free". One always pays one way or another
otherwise those so called "free" things wouldn't exist.

That is, unless the provider is using it as a tax write-off so other
taxpayers take up the slack. :)

Terry

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 22:54 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:54:15 -0700)
From: Giovanni
thats a deep calling as most companies cant act like apple.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 2:35 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:

> The point is not what I think; it is to understand what Apple thinks.
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> So you think that Apples not delivering a SDK to developers is of
>> best interest to the user?
>>
>> On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
>>> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list
>>> claiming
>>> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
>>> why these appear to be good decisions.
>>>
>>> Charles Yeomans
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:04 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:04:21 -0700)
From: Giovanni
Some of that falling out of love is because of misunderstanding the
technology. Some people want a Razor to do the job of a PDA and it
wont. Its a phone with nice features.

the iPhone is advertised as a PDA all around phone. Which is not at
the moment. That is, unless there is open apps for it. Which is
happening as we speak.

Unless you owned an iPhone, you wouldnt understand the things that
are missing. The things that are missing, will be developed with
Apple or without Apples blessing.

No ring tones? No problem, now there is a hack to add them.

No SDK? There is no problem there either, an SDK is almost done.

Contrary to some views here, Not everything apple does, is golden and
should be use as a rule.

Giovanni

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:05 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:05:22 -0700)
From: Giovanni
thats true, but Free with contract is better then $600.00 with contract.

:)

On Jul 24, 2007, at 2:51 PM, Terry Ford wrote:
>>
> Nothing in life is "Free". One always pays one way or another
> otherwise those so called "free" things wouldn't exist.
>
> That is, unless the provider is using it as a tax write-off so other
> taxpayers take up the slack. :)
>
> Terry
>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:05 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:05:59 -0700)
From: Giovanni
by the way, apple recommends to think outside the box, and the
suggestions are just that.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 2:35 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:

> The point is not what I think; it is to understand what Apple thinks.
>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> So you think that Apples not delivering a SDK to developers is of
>> best interest to the user?
>>
>> On Jul 24, 2007, at 1:11 PM, Charles Yeomans wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> In recent years, Apple and Steve Jobs have proved to be pretty smart
>>> about these decisions. Perhaps the time of those on the list
>>> claiming
>>> to be CEOs and owners of companies might be better spent pondering
>>> why these appear to be good decisions.
>>>
>>> Charles Yeomans
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:40 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:40:47 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 4:05 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> thats true, but Free with contract is better then $600.00 with
> contract.
>
> :)

You really need to go price out the various contracts that are
available and check it.
Turns out others have done this and the iPhone + contract is not much
more than another smart phone with a similar plan.

They're not as expensive as you assume ..... kind of like a Mac :)
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:43 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:43:26 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 4:04 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> Contrary to some views here, Not everything apple does, is golden and
> should be use as a rule.

Apple has done their share of stupid things

No one has said they have not
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:48 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:48:37 -0700)
From: Giovanni
:)

I know, and so have I, if there is anything to learn is that no
matter how bad you mess up, you can always make it better.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:43 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

>
> On 24-Jul-07, at 4:04 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> Contrary to some views here, Not everything apple does, is golden and
>> should be use as a rule.
>
> Apple has done their share of stupid things
>
> No one has said they have not
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:50 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:50:52 -0700)
From: Giovanni
My HP phone ended up costing me about $1200. With the extra battery.

and your right, the other PDA's do cost alot which is why Steve was
overshooting when he thought that people where just going to forkout
$800 for a phone.


On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:40 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

>
> On 24-Jul-07, at 4:05 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> thats true, but Free with contract is better then $600.00 with
>> contract.
>>
>> :)
>
> You really need to go price out the various contracts that are
> available and check it.
> Turns out others have done this and the iPhone + contract is not much
> more than another smart phone with a similar plan.
>
> They're not as expensive as you assume ..... kind of like a Mac :)
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:53 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:53:43 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 4:40 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

>
> On 24-Jul-07, at 4:05 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> thats true, but Free with contract is better then $600.00 with
>> contract.
>>
>> :)
>
> You really need to go price out the various contracts that are
> available and check it.
> Turns out others have done this and the iPhone + contract is not much
> more than another smart phone with a similar plan.
>
> They're not as expensive as you assume ..... kind of like a Mac :)

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/26/how-does-the-iphone-stack-up-in-
total-cost/

note that Engadget compares other devices and similar plans (data etc)
If you don't need or want that kind of plan then you can certainly
get a cheaper phone + plan

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:59 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:59:02 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 4:50 PM, Giovanni wrote:

> My HP phone ended up costing me about $1200. With the extra battery.
>
> and your right, the other PDA's do cost alot which is why Steve was
> overshooting when he thought that people where just going to forkout
> $800 for a phone.

I really think we'll see some big discounts on iPhones soon

To expect that people will just willing expect that a phone/ipod
should cost the same as a phone + ipod is seriously flawed
Early adopters maybe but long term no way

Based on what other places have figured out it costs I think we'll
see them come down to 25 - 30% margi ranges which means more in the
$300 - $400 range (I think)

This is seriously off topic though

Maybe if the hackers get enough of the API etc figured out Apple will
be pressed to release an SDK and then we can bug REAL for a version
of RB that can make iPhone apps
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 00:04 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:04:49 -0700)
From: Giovanni
I agree.


> This is seriously off topic though
>
> Maybe if the hackers get enough of the API etc figured out Apple will
> be pressed to release an SDK and then we can bug REAL for a version
> of RB that can make iPhone apps
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:26 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:26:00 -0700)
From: Tim Jones
On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:14 AM, Giovanni wrote:

> A few thoughts:
>
> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
> iPhone.

A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast? I'll
bet Jobs is running around screaming at anyone he can find now that
this bit of non-distorted reality has hit the streets ... and I
suspect that a good sized chunk of that 146K are Apple captive since
I understand that all apple employees are reported to have received
an iPhone.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070724/apple_iphone.html?.v
BTW - AAPL's down 8.81%...

Tim

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:31 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:31:08 -0700)
From: Giovanni
It may have to do with the price tag.

$600.00 Plus penalties($235)=$835.00 Phone.

On Jul 24, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Tim Jones wrote:

> On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:14 AM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> A few thoughts:
>>
>> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
>> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
>> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
>> iPhone.
>
> A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
> announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
> in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast? I'll
> bet Jobs is running around screaming at anyone he can find now that
> this bit of non-distorted reality has hit the streets ... and I
> suspect that a good sized chunk of that 146K are Apple captive since
> I understand that all apple employees are reported to have received
> an iPhone.
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070724/apple_iphone.html?.v >
> BTW - AAPL's down 8.81%...
>
> Tim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Giovanni
<email address removed>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 23:46 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:46:49 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 4:26 PM, Tim Jones wrote:

> On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:14 AM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> A few thoughts:
>>
>> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
>> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
>> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
>> iPhone.
>
> A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
> announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
> in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast?

Gotta love the stock market
Some analyst takes a wild guess at how many will sell and when the
actual numbers are lower crush the stock
Apple and AT&T never gave estimates but analysts did

> BTW - AAPL's down 8.81%...
Down $8.81 or 6.13%
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 00:12 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:12:28 -0400)
From: Chris Little
on 7/24/07 6:46 PM, Norman Palardy at <email address removed>
wrote:

>
> On 24-Jul-07, at 4:26 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
>
>> On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:14 AM, Giovanni wrote:
>>
>>> A few thoughts:
>>>
>>> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
>>> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
>>> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design of the
>>> iPhone.
>>
>> A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
>> announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
>> in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast?
>
> Gotta love the stock market
> Some analyst takes a wild guess at how many will sell and when the
> actual numbers are lower crush the stock
> Apple and AT&T never gave estimates but analysts did
>
>> BTW - AAPL's down 8.81%...
> Down $8.81 or 6.13%

Of course it is all silly since all AT&T reported was the number of phones
activated in the second quarter. I.e. Those phones activated on the Friday
and Saturday. Any phone activated on the Sunday wasn't included in the
count. No one will know how many phones were sold over that weekend until
AT&T announces their third quarter numbers. The problem with people
investing (or recommending for that matter) on emotion is that big price
changes happen without any change in the fundamentals.

Chris

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 00:24 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:24:08 -0400)
From: Charles Yeomans

On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:12 PM, Chris Little wrote:

> on 7/24/07 6:46 PM, Norman Palardy at npalardy@great-white-
> software.com
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 24-Jul-07, at 4:26 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:14 AM, Giovanni wrote:
>>>
>>>> A few thoughts:
>>>>
>>>> I have had my iPhone for almost 2 weeks now. Having used and done
>>>> some development for other PDA phones in the past, Windows Mobile,
>>>> Palm and Blackberry, none compare to the simplicity and design
>>>> of the
>>>> iPhone.
>>>
>>> A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
>>> announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been
>>> activated
>>> in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast?
>>
>> Gotta love the stock market
>> Some analyst takes a wild guess at how many will sell and when the
>> actual numbers are lower crush the stock
>> Apple and AT&T never gave estimates but analysts did
>>
>>> BTW - AAPL's down 8.81%...
>> Down $8.81 or 6.13%
>
> Of course it is all silly since all AT&T reported was the number of
> phones
> activated in the second quarter. I.e. Those phones activated on the
> Friday
> and Saturday. Any phone activated on the Sunday wasn't included in the
> count. No one will know how many phones were sold over that weekend
> until
> AT&T announces their third quarter numbers. The problem with people
> investing (or recommending for that matter) on emotion is that big
> price
> changes happen without any change in the fundamentals.

This, of course, is how value investors make money.

Charles Yeomans
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 00:36 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:36:11 -0700)
From: Tim Jones
On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Chris Little wrote:

> Of course it is all silly since all AT&T reported was the number of
> phones
> activated in the second quarter. I.e. Those phones activated on the
> Friday
> and Saturday. Any phone activated on the Sunday wasn't included in the
> count.

But, as stated in the reports, 500K were "expected" to be sold over
that weekend. Also, if you trace further AT&T output on the Apple/
AT&T relationship, it's looking pretty ugly.

> No one will know how many phones were sold over that weekend until
> AT&T announces their third quarter numbers.

Of course, the fact that AT&T announced their Buy one, get three free
BlackBerry promotion that following week... sounds like AT&T isn't
putting a lot of faith in the up-side of the Apple deal.

> The problem with people
> investing (or recommending for that matter) on emotion is that big
> price
> changes happen without any change in the fundamentals.

So true. I warn my employees that if they're not willing to lose the
value of a new Toyota Corolla on a bad swing to stay away :-).

Tim

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 02:01 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:01:33 -0400)
From: Chris Little
on 7/24/07 7:36 PM, Tim Jones at <email address removed> wrote:

> On Jul 24, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Chris Little wrote:
>
>> Of course it is all silly since all AT&T reported was the number of
>> phones
>> activated in the second quarter. I.e. Those phones activated on the
>> Friday
>> and Saturday. Any phone activated on the Sunday wasn't included in the
>> count.
>
> But, as stated in the reports, 500K were "expected" to be sold over
> that weekend. Also, if you trace further AT&T output on the Apple/
> AT&T relationship, it's looking pretty ugly.

They may have. If you ordered online it would count as an order but not be
activated. All those people buying a second phone to sell to someone else
wouldn't have activated it either. We may learn more during Apple's earning
call. I'm sure someone is going to ask for a better number.

>> No one will know how many phones were sold over that weekend until
>> AT&T announces their third quarter numbers.
>
> Of course, the fact that AT&T announced their Buy one, get three free
> BlackBerry promotion that following week... sounds like AT&T isn't
> putting a lot of faith in the up-side of the Apple deal.

Why would any company bet the farm on a single product? The iPhone isn't the
phone for everyone. AT&T needs to sell products to all of their customers. A
Blackberry is still the best phone for a corporate user or anyone who needs
push email.

Chris

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 00:34 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:34:38 -0400)
From: Thom McGrath
Yeah, but what I haven't seen anybody mention is online orders. Those
who ordered iPhones over the internet wouldn't have them until Monday
- falling right outside the time frame. So while many more were
*sold* during the quarter, a large chunk were activated later due to
simple shipping matters.

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 02:22 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 18:22:17 -0700)
From: Joe Huber
At 3:26 PM -0700 7/24/07, Tim Jones wrote:
>A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
>announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
>in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast?

The 146k number is AT&T activations in the FIRST 30 HOURS, which is
when they were having a huge number of problems with their overloaded
activation servers and difficulty converting accounts. (Not including
Sunday)

The 500k number was not a forecast, but an analyst's GUESS at the
total number sold OVER THE ENTIRE WEEKEND. (Including Sunday)

Comparing these numbers is irrelevant; the time periods don't match
and one is activations and the other is sales.

And none of these numbers are from Apple. Fud Fud Fud.

Regards,
Joe Huber
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 04:18 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:18:50 -0600)
From: Norman Palardy

On 24-Jul-07, at 7:22 PM, Joe Huber wrote:

> At 3:26 PM -0700 7/24/07, Tim Jones wrote:
>> A bit further off-topic on the iPhone - has anyone seen the AT&T
>> announcement about the fact that only 146K iPhones had been activated
>> in the first two days of sales compared to the 500K forecast?
>
> The 146k number is AT&T activations in the FIRST 30 HOURS, which is
> when they were having a huge number of problems with their overloaded
> activation servers and difficulty converting accounts. (Not including
> Sunday)
>
> The 500k number was not a forecast, but an analyst's GUESS at the
> total number sold OVER THE ENTIRE WEEKEND. (Including Sunday)
>
> Comparing these numbers is irrelevant; the time periods don't match
> and one is activations and the other is sales.
>
> And none of these numbers are from Apple. Fud Fud Fud.

You betcha
Since Apple DID say they had sold out of their initial runs of iPhone
(some 700,000 units) I'm not too worried

Earnings reports should be fine esp since Apple also seems to have
shipped more Macs this period (again)
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:38 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:38:47 +0200)
From: Robert and Sigrid
Did you guys see this <http://developer.apple.com/adcnews/
index.html>. I haven't had the time to go through the details, but
from first glance it seems promising.

Cheers,
Robert

On 24 Jul, 2007, at 22:49:00 +1000, Tom Benson <<email address removed>>
wrote:

> ...
> Until Apple release an official system level SDK (expect this about a
> week after the first hacked together system level apps emerge) then
> for RS to even consider supporting an ARM target is a waste of their
> development time.
>
> - Tom
>
> On 24/07/2007, at 9:14 PM, Giovanni wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Creating an app for the iPhone using RB should not be a major deal
>> and it could benefit RB in a big way, that is, if they are willing to
>> be market leaders rather then reactors.
>> ...
>> Giovanni

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 15:26 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 08:26:03 -0600)
From: joe strout.net
On Jul 24, 2007, at 13:38 UTC, Robert and Sigrid wrote:

> Did you guys see this
> <http://developer.apple.com/adcnews/index.html>. I haven't had the
> time to go through the details, but from first glance it seems
> promising.

I haven't looked into it much, but it appears to me that what they're
describing here is how to make a web app that, when a user connects to
it from an iPhone, will place nice and look good for that user.

If this is the case, then you could indeed create such apps (really web
apps, but call them iPhone apps if you like) in RB today. I've made
so-called "web 2.0" apps in REALbasic before; it would just be a matter
of following their guidelines to make them iPhone-savvy.

An application framework or other support code to make following these
guidelines easier might be a sensible community project.

Best,
- Joe

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 15:29 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 07:29:26 -0700)
From: Sam DeVore
On Jul 24, 2007, at 7:26 AM, <email address removed> wrote:

> On Jul 24, 2007, at 13:38 UTC, Robert and Sigrid wrote:
>
>> Did you guys see this
>> <http://developer.apple.com/adcnews/index.html>. I haven't had the
>> time to go through the details, but from first glance it seems
>> promising.
>
> I haven't looked into it much, but it appears to me that what they're
> describing here is how to make a web app that, when a user connects to
> it from an iPhone, will place nice and look good for that user.
>
> If this is the case, then you could indeed create such apps (really
> web
> apps, but call them iPhone apps if you like) in RB today. I've made
> so-called "web 2.0" apps in REALbasic before; it would just be a
> matter
> of following their guidelines to make them iPhone-savvy.
>
> An application framework or other support code to make following these
> guidelines easier might be a sensible community project.

there is a good starting point of ui elements and code in the iUI kit

http://www.joehewitt.com/blog/introducing_iui.php

Sam D
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 24.07.07 14:42 (Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:42:30 +0200)
From: Emile Schwarz
Think at that:

The good people from REAL Software (Geoff being there) told us somany
years ago that they would love to have a Palm target (be able to
generate applications for the Palm PDA).

I would too.

And, because I never get (buy) a Palm PDA (nor any other), I never rant
on that thing not done, and stay with "I love to have that". My sleeping
was good not to have this (not promised) done at all.

So, for the iPhone and the current situation (Apple, and REAL Software),
I do not expect anything (related to the iPhone nor the AppleTV) built
in a near future version of REALbasic.

And for the future, who knows how it will be?

Not me :)

Cheers,

Emile

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

Re: OTHER: iPhone and RB
Date: 25.07.07 10:04 (Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:04:41 +0200)
From: Thorsten Hohage
Hi,

want to mention one more topic in this discussion, obviously everyone
is missing.

It's not only about Apple <> Developer, but it's Developer <>
Carrier, too. I know it sure for Germany / Europe, that there are
several limits for an application. If this application want to access
user data, then the user must allow. For further functionality i.e.
producing coasts there must be an authorization, too. BUT if you want
to go further, these apps must be signed / checked by the carrier.
Furthermore some (some more) functions are cut i.e in J2ME to not be
able to access all communictation hardware directly.

This all is because of "network security" of the carrier. In contrast
to the Internet or other infrastructures these networks are simply
open if you're in and it should be really easy to misuse it for virus
attacks, phishing, ...

So it might not be the fact, that Apple doesn't allow to distribute /
develop apps, but the Carriers don't allow Apple to allow.

ciao

Thorsten Hohage