At Apple’s request, we removed the ability to “Send” files to other services

http://www.panic.com/blog/transmit-ios-1-1-1/

by Mowsh • 12 years ago

245 98 12 years ago

api5• 12 years ago

I've never liked the idea of files "belonging" to apps, for numerous reasons. It strikes me as an irreversible institutionalization of the "WIMP" model -- "weakly interacting massive programs." It also makes me uneasy. What happens to my data if I uninstall an app? What happens if that app disappears?

A lot of the data handling choices in mobile and iOS in particular seem predicated on the hidden assumption that user data is not very valuable. Hell will freeze over before I use one of these platforms for anything I deeply care about.

... yet another reason mobile has a ways to go before it can "take over the world."

Logmix• 12 years ago

That's very well put. If you uninstall an app, all its data is gone. Unless you stored that data somewhere else of course, but the main thing is how Apple approaches data storage is not very professional or confidence inspiring.

For me this awkward storage makes it difficult to take the device seriously. I don't consider the iPad a work device, more of a device to surf the net on the couch. In Q4 2014, iPad sales were down year over year from 14M to 12M. Maybe other people are starting to think along the same lines?

The sad part is that this does not have to be that way. The iPad has more than enough resources to be a fully functional computing device.

But until Apple grows up and removes all those mandatory training wheels (can't develop equal citizen apps on the device itself and give it to anybody I like without Apple having the power to party pooping any of it), I don't consider iPad + iPhone real computers.

api5• 12 years ago

"The iPad has more than enough resources to be a fully functional computing device."

The thing preventing mobile "convergence" is not hardware capability and never really has been except at the high end. Mobile won't displace PC due to design choices that firmly exclude whole application categories. These include what we're discussing here, as well as jailed app stores and other policies.

A lot of people assume mobile is "the next platform," etc. based on what I consider to be faulty reasoning by analogy with the PC's displacement of mainframes and minis. The PC displaced mainframes and minis due to Moore's Law and economies of scale. Those same forces are in effect in mobile, sure, but there are other barriers in effect that are completely unrelated to CPU power or cost that will prevent this displacement from occurring.

Whenever I talk to valley people I feel like an atheist at a tent revival for questioning the idea that mobile is categorically "the future." It could be if it wanted to, but it'd have to fix some of its problems.

lochlainn• 12 years ago

I think a lot of it stems from an attempt at simplicity in design. At the time, Windows Mobile was offering a fully customizable filesystem, but Apple wanted to go the route of simplicity when they introduced Apps with iOS2. You tap on them and they work, delete them when you don't want them, etc. Everything is so isolated as a result, and combined with the lack of any sort of Downloads or file creation in the traditional sense, it sort of makes you feel like the data of your apps is stored in really remote, weird locations you can't ever access.

Simplicity like that was part of what made people think not just of productivity but also of fun when they looked at a smartphone imo. Still not very fun to deal with. (Never write a document on your phone. It's not worth it)

api5• 12 years ago

Makes me think of a quote from another recent HN front page article on Docker vs. CoreOS and the idea of "simplicity" in the enterprise. I think it's relevant here.

"You can't avoid complexity by pretending it doesn't exist."

There's a lot of complexity and nuance around the handling of files. Mobile likes to pretend it doesn't exist, and the result is file handling choices that treat user data contemptuously and do not allow any kind of workflow whatsoever.

This is one of several very significant reasons mobile in its present form will never displace PC except for low-end use cases.

userbinator• 12 years ago

A lot of the data handling choices in mobile and iOS in particular seem predicated on the hidden assumption that user data is not very valuable.

No, I think it's predicated on the assumption that user data is very valuable --- to the companies that inevitably try to mine and monetise it --- that freedom should be taken away from the users and the platform should provide developers with as much control over the users' data as possible. It's an ongoing movement to lock down devices against the user; to turn general-purpose computers into restricted environments for consumption and very little creation. No doubt the media companies' DRM interests are partially responsible for this.

Even the concept of a file as an application-neutral container for data is being slowly obfuscated away by this movement, as users are gradually conditioned to open apps first, and then open their data from them. I think one of my biggest surprises upon using an Android smartphone for the first time was discovering that it didn't even have a rudimentary text editor by default (something that I was accustomed to on every other OS), nor could the standard file manager view text files although it could view movies, pictures, and music. As I understand it, the iOS situation is even more restricted than that, with not even a file manager provided as part of the OS.

As another datapoint, I've encountered quite a few beginning computer science students who didn't really know what a file is, and were quite amazed that multiple applications could work with the same files.

api5• 12 years ago

"No doubt the media companies' DRM interests are partially responsible for this."

I think there's some truth in this, but you're wrong here. The problem isn't DRM, but what DRM is (impotently) reacting against.

This is the fault of the culture of "free." If people are not willing to pay for stuff, then the model must be turned around and the user monetized exactly as you describe. That's because nothing is actually free. Everything costs money and someone has to pay. If it's not users it must be advertisers, governments, etc.

Free "as in beer" is a socially destructive idea and is the enemy of free "as in freedom."

Edit: bring on the downvotes! Doesn't change the facts. If you don't pay, you are not a customer.

DiabloD32• 12 years ago

Honestly, this just further proves no one should develop for Apple, because Apple can just come in and shit all over your hard work.

Tranmit on OSX is an invaluable tool for people who don't understand how to use scp and sftp from the command line, and I've recommended it to many OSX users who were unwilling to learn how to use the command line.

Edit: I don't care if people downvote me, this is my opinion, and as a software developer, it is my opinion that governs if I write for iOS or not. As long as Apple continues to treat devs this way, I will continue to not care about iOS.

awolf2• 12 years ago

That Apple could come and shit all over your hard work is simply a risk factor to consider amongst all other factors a developer should be looking at when deciding what platform to develop for. All platforms have drawbacks and advantages. It's just a matter of picking your poison.

I'd be interested to hear why you think the cons outweigh the pros of developing for iOS. Universally, across the board for every software developer? Really?

zem• 12 years ago

because the emotional impact of "i had it working and apple fucked it up" is greater than, e.g. "i could have had it working but there's no linux driver". targeted malice/incompetence always feels worse than impersonal "lie of the land" obstacles.

threeseed• 12 years ago

Give us a break. Apple has clearly defined rules for what is allowed on the App Store.

If you can't be bothered to comply then don't act all surprised when your app gets rejected.

DiabloD32• 12 years ago

Read the linked blog entry. Apple cites rules that are vague, and then Apple gives no solution to app developers to block iDrive usage since the UX is controlled by iOS itself.

So, yes, Apple just doesn't care if they break apps by haphazard application of poorly written rules. And Transmit wasn't rejected, it was in the app store before this, and it is in the app store now.

If you're going to comment, at least read the link first.

bluedino• 12 years ago

Except, they just started to enforce this rule (or just recently created it)

lotsofmangos• 12 years ago

Apple has clearly defined rules for what is allowed on the App Store.

In that case, I'd like to challenge you to a game of Mornington Crescent.

topbanana• 12 years ago

It's useful for me too. I know perfectly well how to use the command line, I just prefer not to when using my iPad

realusername• 12 years ago

I also have the exact same opinion, unless the company is fixing their terrible policies, I just won't develop anything for the iphone, the risk is just too high to work on iOS.

milen5• 12 years ago

This is actually just one of the many ridiculous decisions taken by the App Store review team. The truth is that developers keep getting forced to remove functionality, sometimes the decisions are reversed but not always (and it might only work if you've got a large enough following).

I've had enough of this stuff and I've voted with my feet - I no longer develop for iOS and I'm back to the Mac, outside the MAS.

My absence won't make any difference to Apple but it makes a huge difference to my wellbeing and health by not having to deal with this stuff. It pains me so much to see fellow developers' efforts just thrown down the garbage bin. It's extremely demotivating to have your work crippled when you're striving to create the best software. The reason why this keeps happening and will continue is simple - there are hundreds of thousands of people developing for iOS, it's Apple's playground and their rules - if you don't like it, you can leave. If you're an indie, you have zero leverage, that's the reality. I honestly hope things improve in the future but until that happens, I'm done with it.

A few recent examples where the (Mac) App Store cripples apps:

- Drafts get asked to remove widget while other widgets to do the exact same http://www.macrumors.com/2014/12/02/apple-drafts-widget-remo...

- Rejected for slide to start, which is a gesture not even used anymore: http://mjtsai.com/blog/2014/11/25/racesplitter-rejected-for-...

- Sandbox forces feature removal http://mjtsai.com/blog/2014/12/02/garagepays-encryption-remo...

- Notification Center rejection http://www.macrumors.com/2014/11/18/apple-cracks-down-on-nea...

- PCalc got asked to remove calculator but then decision reversed http://www.macstories.net/ios/apple-asks-pcalc-developer-to-...

0x02• 12 years ago

Everyone should head over to https://www.apple.com/feedback/ and drop off a quick note about this. It seemed to help in getting the pcalc decision reversed.

eridius9• 12 years ago

Notification center rejection

Wait, that app had a fake keyboard inside a notification center widget? That's truly awful and roundly deserved to get rejected.

Sandbox forces feature removal

I don't see how this is relevant to your comment. This wasn't a decision by app store review, or anything like that at all. This appears to simply be that the app was using functionality that is not possible to do inside the sandbox. If he was shipping on the MAS before, he must have been using a temporary exemption and would have known that it would have to get removed once those temporary exemptions stopped being allowed. This is a purely technical limitation and has nothing to do with the sort of management issues you're complaining about.

Slide to start

That seems like a legit rejection to me as well. Looking at the actual screenshots, they tried to make their control look and feel pretty damn close to the official Apple control. This is a control that Apple spent years training people meant "unlock" (or more specifically, "unlock device"). So even though Apple isn't using it right now, they're still well within their rights to claim that it is too similar to Apple's own UI widget (especially for something that does completely different functionality).

I bet that if the slider didn't look so intentionally similar to Apple's own widget, he wouldn't have had an issue. But he deliberately aped Apple's UI, and should have expected this to eventually happen.

I'm also a bit irked that he's trying to play this up as a big "I got a bogus rejection!" thing and completely ignored the fact that Apple told him to remove or revise it. The issue is not that the act of sliding a finger across a screen to start the race is verboten. It's that his widget is too similar to Apple's UI. Note the actual quotes:

8.3: Apps that appear confusingly similar to an existing Apple product, interface, or advertising theme will be rejected

[emphasis mine]

The “slide to start the stopwatch” is similar to the “slide to unlock in iOS device”.
Thank you for your message. In order for the app to be reconsidered for the App Store, please remove or revise the Slide To Start feature. Have a good day.

[emphasis mine]

Specifically, the Slide to Start Race UI element is not appropriate and not in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines as it is too similar to the iOS Slide to Unlock UI.

[emphasis mine]

Instead of trying to stoke public outrage, he should just accept that his UI widget, which was very obviously based directly on the slide-to-unlock widget, should be altered to not look so similar.

Yes, there are bogus decisions. PCalc is a good example. But there are also plenty of valid rejections too (many orders of magnitude more). And it's a mistake to think that every publicized rejection is invalid.

awolf2• 12 years ago

Uh, fine. Sure, some of the rejections may be appropriate. But the situation with Drafts and PCalc are still very valid examples of problems with Apple's policies.

milen5• 12 years ago

Wait, that app had a fake keyboard inside a notification center widget? That's truly awful and roundly deserved to get rejected.

While the tastefulness of that solution might be questionable, I believe users should be able to decide for themselves whether it's acceptable or not. Of course, this is Apple's turf and they can make any decisions they like. Note that lots of users quite liked Neato - should we be making decisions for them?

The real question is: where do we draw the line? Different people will have different opinions but I think most people would agree that the Panic situation, Drafts getting asked to remove their widget while others had the exact same functionality is not acceptable.

The examples I listed demonstrate a problem that's endemic on the App Store - while we might disagree on particular rejections, it's quite obvious there are issues.

With regards to the sandboxing issue on the MAS, it's relevant because Apple are themselves exempt from the restriction to ship sandboxed apps - this is hypocritical. Moreover, it objectively leads to a worse experience for customers, which I feel is against both Apple's and developers objectives. It's an example how the MAS effectively cripples 3rd party apps without leaving them a choice, while 1st party apps enjoy special privileges. Again, there's nothing inherently wrong in Apple making the rules - it's their platform after all but developers need to be aware what they sign up for when they decide to distribute their software on the MAS.

---

Responding to your updated post:

... But there are also plenty of valid rejections too (many orders of magnitude more). And it's a mistake to think that every publicized rejection is invalid.

Of course, I totally agree with you. I don't think anyone is arguing that every publicised rejection is invalid - I was trying to make the point that we're seeing increasingly questionable rejections that a lot of people would agree are hurting the platform itself.

aniket_ray• 12 years ago

Personally, I think all of them are bogus decisions. Apple might be well within their rights to make bogus decisions but that does not automatically make them not bogus.

Note taking app should not have custom keyboard. Bogus. Apps are not allowed to have UX gesture similar to Apple because they become confusingly similar to Apple product. Bogus. It was a stopwatch for crying out load.

No matter how you try to spin it, these decisions is just Apple screwing over their app developers.

adl• 12 years ago

The fact that any rejection is 'valid' or that there is a process for rejections to begin with, is absurd. iOS is NOT developer friendly.

I wish iOS didn't have the market share it has, it is so depressing: you either are under Apple's boot or have to abstain from a large segment of the Mobile Market.

dmead• 12 years ago

why are you qualifying it as "the apple store review team"? it's just apple. maybe people have trouble associating this kind of bad behavior because the branding is so strong? are you mind controlled?

protomyth• 12 years ago

Let me get this straight. I can put any old file on iCloud via Finder on OS X or using iCloud for Windows, but somehow on iOS this is dangerous and not allowed?

noarchy• 12 years ago

Abstracting away the file system seems to be a "feature" of iOS.

emsy2• 12 years ago

I generally choose smartphones based on which gives me the least problems. In the past this was iOS, because the only problem I personally had was the restrictivness of their platform. But lately the OS quality went down the drain and they became even more erratic about their App Store rules. Anyone else here who can't really enjoy smartphones because of the deep flaws every OS seems to have?

edit: typo

JohnTHaller4• 12 years ago

An Android phone with a pure Google Android experience or very close to it is really the best smartphone experience. Sadly, this is a relatively small percentage of the smartphones available.

And no, rooting and adding a custom ROM doesn't really cut it. Even the world's most popular ROM (cyanogenmod) is still stuck on Android 4.3 Jellybean with 4.4 stuck in perpetual testing land even though it's over a year old and 5.0 has been released.

Fuzzwah• 12 years ago

Cyanogen M releases are now considered their stable releases. These have been on 4.4 for a long time.

fernandotakai• 12 years ago

nexus 5 still is a really good device, with stock android and it's sold with no contract.

moto x 2014 and moto g 2014 are also really really good devices, with almost stock android (motorola added only a couple of stuff to them -- so little that moto x already has jellybean) and are not that expensive (the official motorola store has the new moto g for $180).

Yhippa• 12 years ago

I seem to rotate between all of the platforms every year. I keep switching because there is some flaw that I just can't stand and I always seem to think the grass is greener on the other side.

kayoone• 12 years ago

And yet most iOS developers just swallow their anger and keep on developing for iOS which in turn enables Apple to keep on ridiculing their devs.

zmmmmm• 12 years ago

The saddest thing is how uncritical they try to be of Apple in these kind of posts. It's pretty clear that they fear retribution if they are seen as publicly complaining - which, along with the same approach to journalists, tells you a lot about Apple's attitude and culture. I wish Apple would see that in the long term, insulating themselves from criticism is not in their own interests.

DINKDINK2• 12 years ago

If things are really bad enough, why not create a federation of developers to build developer clout and threaten Apple with counter action based on Apple's action?

SiVal• 12 years ago

Apple is a single focus of power. Developers are numberless and spread all over the world. Your suggestion to try to combat that situation by concentrating, essentially "unionizing", developers, would fail for two reasons.

One, the developers are so numerous, diverse, and independent of one another that there would be an endless supply of developers willing to "cross union picket lines" and make more money with the competition reduced. In a sense, it's like a mine with a hundred times as many miners as it needs, most of whom are struggling to get more than an hour a month of paid work and would do anything to get more. Also, the most important "miners", Apple itself, Google and Facebook, have their own agendas and wouldn't care about any "developers' union", and if you combine the apps Apple, Google, and Facebook contribute to the iOS platform, the vast majority of the rest of the devs could disappear with almost no impact on Apple other than that Apple would stop announcing the number of apps in the app store during keynotes. They'll eventually stop that anyway.

Two, Apple makes very little of its money from app sales. The indie devs aren't the real miners. The miners are the actual employees of Apple and Foxconn. Apple sells hardware, and as long as they have their own apps, and apps from Google, Facebook, a couple of big game makers who are getting rich on iOS and aren't going to walk away from it, plus apps from a small percentage of the indie devs, consumers will keep buying Apple hardware. Again, the vast majority of iOS devs could "walk off the job" and the "mine" would keep operating as if nothing had happened, other than a bit of editing to the semi-annual PR message.

An "iOS developers' union" would have so little leverage over Apple that Apple probably wouldn't even "fire" developers who joined it (revoke their dev credentials). It could simply ignore them and go on with its business.

johnsea3• 12 years ago

They swallow their anger because they have no real alternative. It's the job of legislation to prevent such abbreations.

akerl_• 12 years ago

Whatever you think of the App Store's policy, users have freedom of choice in which mobile platform(s) they buy, and developers have freedom of choice in which mobile platform(s) they develop for.

Apple has made no secret of their desire to strictly control their platform. To prevent them from exercising control over their platform just because users continue to choose iOS devices and developers continue to dev for iOS devices is absurd.

We just had a post about whether or not open sourcing a repository conferred some responsibility on the releaser to maintain it and offer support. The situations are not dissimilar: putting into public a thing which becomes popular does not convey to the public control over how you shape your creation.

PythonicAlpha2• 12 years ago

That is just the reason, why I restrain to use Apple hardware.

Apple products are really very good and they have invented the smartphone it it's current functionality. But Apple has a very restrictive mindset. I as user, feel that it is like being in a nanny-state, where everything is controlled, what I am allowed to do.

I want to decide myself and not let Apple decide for me, what is good for me.

eridius9• 12 years ago

This particular issue is about Apple deciding that they don't want their software (iCloud Drive) being used in a particular way. It's not about deciding what's good for users.

PythonicAlpha2• 12 years ago

Might be. I am not enough inside this stuff to really distinguish. But there are other examples, where Apple decides, what is allowed to run on "their" hardware. I as user feel "overprotected" to say it very polite.

Also there are other companies that provide services, but don't force the users to use it in the way they think.

Thimothy• 12 years ago

Not true. Apple doesn't allow them to use ANY cloud-based sharing software becouse all share the same iOS API, so it's impossible to allow users to use dropbox and not iCloud.

pavlov2• 12 years ago

In the comments, Cabel from Panic explains in some more depth the interactions they've had with the App Store reviewers. The comment ends on a peculiar note:

"It’s hard to describe the legitimate emotional toll we feel when we’re angry or frustrated with a company we love so deeply. But then we realize it’s never Apple we’re frustrated with. It’s always the App Store."

I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not because it has a such a strange echo of both Kafka and Stalin. "It's never the Revolution we're frustrated with, just those over-enthusiastic types at Cheka..."

Karunamon2• 12 years ago

It is possible to hate a smaller part of a larger whole without hating the larger whole outright...

pavlov2• 12 years ago

But it doesn't usually make sense to claim to be completely pleased with the whole, while disliking a part. "This meal is perfect. It's just the sauce that's awful." Isn't that cognitive dissonance?

kenferry2• 12 years ago

It's not sarcasm, though you draw a very nice parallel.

Cabel is correctly observing that Apple is a collection of people, and those people frequently disagree with each other.

notjackma• 12 years ago

It's simple. Cabel is being diplomatic and doesn't want to burn any bridges. It's a reflection of how much power Apple has that developers are fearful of upsetting the mothership. I know a few former indie Mac and iOS developet who now work for Apple which explained why they were always shy to voice their true opinion publicly - they had a dream to work for Apple and didnt want to shoot themselves in the foot. Self censorship at its finest.

serve_yay• 12 years ago

You may have noticed a certain amount of Kremlinology at play when dealing with Apple. That quote is no different.

johnsea3• 12 years ago

This is wonderful.

Just one more example what happens if countries allow _closed_ app distribution systems. What a wonderful world with nice critical/ironical phone stories (http://phonestory.org/index.html... I wish the (at least European) politicans had the balls to shut down such closed ecosystems!

carlob• 12 years ago

I remember following molleindustria games back in the day when they were flash-based. Thanks for sharing this (but fix your link, so that it gets a wider audience).

markchristian• 12 years ago

Apple's App Review team has been merciless lately. They won't accept any further updates to my app, Timebar (http://whimsicalifornia.com), unless I get rid of its only feature (drawing a progress bar on your menu bar). Frustrating.

I think Apple could go a long way to locking down developer trust by just vowing to never reject updates for non-technical reasons, ever. If they have to make the initial review much more brutal, it would still be worth it.

hemancuso• 12 years ago

Didn't they deprecate custom stausitem views in 10.10?

Wevah• 12 years ago

Yes, they did.

driverdan• 12 years ago

Why don't you just take it out of the app store and sell it on your website like everyone did for many, many years?

0x02• 12 years ago

Probably because that's where the casual users market is.

krisdol• 12 years ago

I don't ever, ever use the Mac App Store for anything. I avoid apps that don't provide an alternative. Just put a download on your site and keep the old version on the store.

cageface2• 12 years ago

Over the last four years I've gotten pretty good at developing iOS and, more recently, Mac apps but I'm not going to invest any more time in a platform subject to this kind of arbitrary and dictatorial control. I'm shifting back to Rails and the open web. It's a much nicer developer ecosystem and potential client pool. And it's even a better business environment for all but the biggest players. In hindsight I regret investing so much time in Apple's walled garden.

Htsthbjig2• 12 years ago

There are fantastic products on iOS that suffer from this behavior.

For example Garageband for iOS is so good, but the fact that you can not share your work with others(or import it) easily makes the app almost useless.

chetanahuja3• 12 years ago

To me, the most telling part of the whole writeup is in the postscript:

This almost sounds like Stockholm syndrome to me. The whole completely controlled apple ecosystem is baffling to begin with. Add to that the capricious and high-handed way Apple treats app developers and it's incredible that developers like Panic not only keep developing for Apple platforms, they only develop for this platform. That pain felt when the hammer falls is the natural reaction when you realize that the emotional connection you've built with this company is mostly (or entirely) one-sided.

kenferry2• 12 years ago

This almost sounds like Stockholm syndrome to me.

I read that as more Cabel trying as hard as he can to keep cool and constructive.

He's trying to remember that it's all people, not monoliths, and is trying not be unfair to people uninvolved in this and related messes.

Which is admirable, but you can see why it's hard. This is incredibly frustrating.

chetanahuja3• 12 years ago

The Apple vs app store is a distinction without any difference though. The whole idea of controlling what users can run on their own hardware is 100% Apple through and through. If you remember the history of iPhone, even that was granted as a concession only after devs started jailbreaking and started developing native apps without Apple's permission.

Now, if with that history and culture, some app store middle manager makes an autocratic decision to remove core functionality from a beloved app, you can't just lay it on "one bad apple" so to speak. This is the culture the whole company is seeped in. This can't be a surprise to someone who has decided to "love so deeply" this entity for so many years.

josteink• 12 years ago

Which is admirable, but you can see why it's hard. This is incredibly frustrating.

So Stockholm it is then? It's incredibly frustrating because apple is mistreating the developers building the app ecosystem they themselves rely on.

There better be a shit-ton of money in this, because looking at this from the outside, it all looks like madness.

wanda2• 12 years ago

Unrelated: what monospace font is used in that GIF image?

http://www.panic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/delete-...

0xffff2• 12 years ago

I think it might be Input: http://input.fontbureau.com/

micampe• 12 years ago

I think it's Input: http://input.fontbureau.com

Note that some glyphs (g, l, i) can be customized and may look different from the screenshot in the default download.

wanda2• 12 years ago

Ah, yes, that's why I didn't recognise it. I've tried Input before but I customised it to more closely resemble Monaco; I had no recollection of how Input looked by default.

robmccoll• 12 years ago

Apple is so blase toward developers that it will cut them off at the knees on a whim usually to protect its own interests.

Microsoft will intentionally build in scary hacks to maintain backward compatibility and tries to build developer-friendly tools and environments but tends toward a mess.

Linux tends to maintain strong backward compatibility to the point that everything has incredible inertia, but in general doesn't too much care about developers one way or anothet.

Google moves so quickly and deprecates so hard that building software on their platforms is like building a house in a continuous earthquake but using better tools and materials each time.

Moral: nowhere is perfect, consider your trade-offs, then choose Linux (of course).

veidr• 12 years ago

It is painful to watch a company as awesome as Panic have to go through these contortions, and make these kinds of gobbledygook doublespeak statements.

It's quite similar to the feeling of having a friend or roommate in a dysfunctional relationship. You like your friend but... yuck, you really wish they would break up.

EDIT: Also, as a Transmit user, I'd just like to add my own fuck you, Apple for forcing the removal of a very useful feature.

mcherm• 12 years ago

It is precisely because of this that I refuse to build for the iOS platform (for my own projects) and avoid using it. Freedom matters.

general_failure• 12 years ago

This is a demand and not a request by apple. Big difference

jhund• 12 years ago

Reminds me of an article by Tim Bray from 2003 where he talks about sharecroppers: https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePl...

blueskin_• 12 years ago

Random policies just because they can. This is why Android will always beat Apple for market share.

At Apple’s request, we removed the ability to “Send” files to other services

Related Stories