Hell freezes over

Wer hätte das gedacht: Apple machte gestern bekannt, daß sie von nun an doch cross-kompilierte Inhalte für iPhone und iPad zulassen werden -- dies hatte Apple vor einigen Monaten in einem ihrer SDK-Agreement-Updates blockiert:

"In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need."

Man darf gespannt sein, ob sich nun eine Flut von Flash-Apps anbahnt.

via FastCompany

Hell freezes over

Lo and behold! Apple announced just yesterday that they are going to relax their rules for cross-compiled content on iPhone and iPad:

"In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need."

It'll be exciting to see if there will be a flood of Flash-Apps and how this going to influence the future of HTML5

via FastCompany

Philippine sniper

Philippines bus siege police sniper. More at BBC.

Philippinischer Scharfschütze

Ein Philippinischer scharfschütze während des Geiseldramas. Mehr bei BBC.

Apple drops nuke on Adobe and developers

The day before yesterday, Daring Fireball's John Gruber was the first to point out that iPhone OS 4 SDK bans cross-compiled applications, promoted as a key-feature for Adobe's upcoming Flash CS5:

"Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

Flash evangelist Lee Brimelow weighed in at his TheFlashBlog:

"What they are saying is that they won’t allow applications onto their marketplace solely because of what language was originally used to create them. This is a frightening move that has no rational defense other than wanting tyrannical control over developers and more importantly, wanting to use developers as pawns in their crusade against Adobe. This does not just affect Adobe but also other technologies like Unity3D...

Speaking purely for myself, I would look to make it clear what is going through my mind at the moment. Go screw yourself Apple."

As the dust starts to settle, it does not seem to be clear though, if this was a move by Apple solely to kick Adobe in the sternum. AppleInsider reports today:

"But if Apple were simply trying to block Adobe from cross-compiling Flash to create iPhone apps, it could have added the changed text to its existing license agreement and spoiled Adobe's CS5 party immediately, rather than just threatening change that appears fated to kick in when Apple delivers iPhone 4.0 in June...

The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

'[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS,' wrote one reader under the name Ktappe."

Personally, I am more interested if Unity3D will be affected by this rule as well (as expressed by many other users in the Unity3D-Developers' Forum). In a posting at Unity's official blog, CEO and co-founder David Helgason points out today:

"Here at Unity, we are working hard on getting good information, and working to understand whether – or how – the new changes could affect the developer community and others. We have reached out to both official and unofficial contacts at Apple, we are talking to other companies in a similar situation to us, and we’ve been diligent in reading the ToS to get to the best legal (and business-wise) analysis of it.

We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, and we believe that with hundreds of titles (or probably over a thousand by now), including a significant proportion of the best selling ones, we’re adding so much value to the iPhone ecosystem that Apple can’t possibly want to shut that down.

Our current best guess is that we’ll be fine. But it would obviously be irresponsible to guarantee that. What I can guarantee is that we’ll continue to do everything in our power to make this work, and that we will be here to inform you when we know more – as soon as we know more."

It's hard to say how Unity3d might be affected; it produces Xcode and Objective-C source files more like a pre-processor rather than a cross-compiler. But then again, Unity-developers are coding in C-Sharp and Javascript, which seems to violate the point of "only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs." This might be an issue, but could probably be fixed with a Unity-update; Unity3D's team is known for such fixes, as Helgason points out:

"In the ancient days of the App Store (July 2008), Apple changed the kernel to disallow JIT (just-in-time) compilation. We worked around this by changing Mono to AOT (ahead of time) compile scripts instead (this is why some dynamic constructs in our JavaScript doesn’t work on the iPhone). It was a lot of work, but we made it work to enable all these amazing Unity games to be sold in the App Store..."

Apple torpediert Adobe und Entwickler

Vorgestern wurde bekannt, daß Apples neues iPhone OS 4 SDK cross-kompilierte Applikationen ausschließt; eines der langerwarteten Features von Adobes neuester Flash-Version CS5. Daring Fireballs John Gruber berichtete als erster darüber:

"Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

Flash-Guru Lee Brimelow zeigte sich in seinem Blog verärgert:

"What they are saying is that they won’t allow applications onto their marketplace solely because of what language was originally used to create them. This is a frightening move that has no rational defense other than wanting tyrannical control over developers and more importantly, wanting to use developers as pawns in their crusade against Adobe. This does not just affect Adobe but also other technologies like Unity3D...

Speaking purely for myself, I would look to make it clear what is going through my mind at the moment. Go screw yourself Apple."

Während sich die ersten Staubwolken legen, scheint es nicht völlig klar zu sein, ob es wirklich Apples Hauptintention war, Adobe in der verlängerten Rücken zu treten. AppleInsider berichtet:

"But if Apple were simply trying to block Adobe from cross-compiling Flash to create iPhone apps, it could have added the changed text to its existing license agreement and spoiled Adobe's CS5 party immediately, rather than just threatening change that appears fated to kick in when Apple delivers iPhone 4.0 in June...

The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

'[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS,' wrote one reader under the name Ktappe."

Ich bin persönlich eher daran interessiert, ob Unity3D ebenso von dieser Regelung betroffen sein wird (genau wie viele weitere Nutzer im Entwicklerforum). Heute reagierte CEO und Gründer David Helgason in Unitys offiziellem Blog:

"Here at Unity, we are working hard on getting good information, and working to understand whether – or how – the new changes could affect the developer community and others. We have reached out to both official and unofficial contacts at Apple, we are talking to other companies in a similar situation to us, and we’ve been diligent in reading the ToS to get to the best legal (and business-wise) analysis of it.

We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, and we believe that with hundreds of titles (or probably over a thousand by now), including a significant proportion of the best selling ones, we’re adding so much value to the iPhone ecosystem that Apple can’t possibly want to shut that down.

Our current best guess is that we’ll be fine. But it would obviously be irresponsible to guarantee that. What I can guarantee is that we’ll continue to do everything in our power to make this work, and that we will be here to inform you when we know more – as soon as we know more."

Es ist schwer abzuschätzen, inwiefern Unity betroffen sein wird. Unity erzeugt Xcode und Objective-C-Quelldateien und verhält sich eher wie ein Prä-Prozessor als ein Cross-Compiler. Andererseits schreiben Unity-Entwickler Code in C-Sharp und Javascript, was eventuell die Bedingung "only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs" betrifft. Dies könnte ein Problem darstellen, allerdings ließe sich das vermutlich in einem weiteren Unity-Update fixen. Das Unity-Team ist durchaus bekannt für solche Workarounds, wie David Helgason klarstellt:

"In the ancient days of the App Store (July 2008), Apple changed the kernel to disallow JIT (just-in-time) compilation. We worked around this by changing Mono to AOT (ahead of time) compile scripts instead (this is why some dynamic constructs in our JavaScript doesn’t work on the iPhone). It was a lot of work, but we made it work to enable all these amazing Unity games to be sold in the App Store..."

:) <- Lutz

Facebook silences Hong Kong Opposition

South China Morning Post yesterday broke news about how Facebook repeatedly deleted groups of political opposition in Hong Kong:

"A Facebook group with 84,298 members formed to oppose the pro-establishment DAB was deleted

Kelvin Sit Tak-O, who runs a discussion group that opposes the pro-establishment party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), said his group’s Facebook page was shut down without notice on Thursday. The group had 84,298 members and was aiming for 100,000... The closures could have been triggered by opponents flagging the group as “abusive” with Facebook administrators, Mr. Sit speculated. A spokesperson for Facebook was not immediately available for comment."

As blogger Joanne Ooi cites:

"'Apart from my own group, I've heard that other groups with an anti-DAB message have also been closed. We've written complaint letters, but we've only received standard replies about how [Facebook] is working on this case,' Sit said. ...

Kelvin told me that although the original page is still down, he relaunched a new page, which has already hit 50,000 members since it launched 3 days ago."

Hong Kong's DAB is a pro-Beijing political party. Party leader Ma Lik denies the Tiananmen massacre, as Wikipedia has it.

Hong Kongers have always seen themselves as China's last bastion of free speech -- it's sad to see how this is jeopardized by Facebook's supposed anticipatory obedience.

Facebook beschneidet Redefreiheit von Hong Konger Opposition

South China Morning Post berichtete gestern drüber, wie Facebook wiederholt Gruppen der politischen Opposition in Hong Kong gelöscht hat:

"A Facebook group with 84,298 members formed to oppose the pro-establishment DAB was deleted

Kelvin Sit Tak-O, who runs a discussion group that opposes the pro-establishment party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), said his group’s Facebook page was shut down without notice on Thursday. The group had 84,298 members and was aiming for 100,000... The closures could have been triggered by opponents flagging the group as “abusive” with Facebook administrators, Mr. Sit speculated. A spokesperson for Facebook was not immediately available for comment."

Blogger Joanne Ooi ergänzt:

"'Apart from my own group, I've heard that other groups with an anti-DAB message have also been closed. We've written complaint letters, but we've only received standard replies about how [Facebook] is working on this case,' Sit said. ...

Kelvin told me that although the original page is still down, he relaunched a new page, which has already hit 50,000 members since it launched 3 days ago."

Hong Kongs DAB ist eine pro-Peking Partei. Parteichef Ma Lik hat laut Wikipedia das Tiananmen-Massaker geleugnet.

Hong Konger sehen sich gerne als Chinas letzte Bastion der freien Meinung. Schade, wie das von Facebook (vermutlich in einem Akt von vorauseilendem Gehorsam) torpediert wird.

:P <- Lutz

If you write, you stay

Google reported cyber attacks to its network, originating from China and reportedly targeting email-accounts of Chinese human rights activists, as David Drummond, Google's Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer writes:

"In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google...

...we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists... Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves."

Drummond concludes that Google will react by not un-censoring all results on Google.cn from now on, which might even lead to shuttering their service in Mainland.

An impressive reaction -- with only a minor flaw. Google never had a substantial footing in China; according to various sources its market penetration is around 30%, whereas Baidu -- China's largest search-engine has a share of over 90%. I am guessing that their revenue from Mainland is insubstantial. I don't want to sound cynical, but it's a convenient moment to push human rights if it doesn't cost you anything. Google might even utilize this opportunity to exit the Mainland market without loosing their face before they fall flat like Facebook.

Wer schreibt der bleibt

Googles Netzwerke wurde von China aus attackiert, wie David Drummond, Googles Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer berichtet. Insbesondere wurden die Emailkonten von chinesischen Menschenrechtlern zum Ziel:

"In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google...

...we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists... Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves."

Drummond berichtet, daß Google als Reaktion die Zensorvorgaben für Google.cn von nun an nicht weiter befolgen wird -- was eventuell sogar zur Schließung der Google-Seite in China führen könnte.

Eine beeindruckende Reaktion, mit nur einem kleinen Schönheitsfehler: Google war nie ein größerer Erfolg in China beschieden. Die Marktdurchdringung von Google in China liegt -- laut verschiedenen Quellen -- bei etwa 30 Prozent, während der Anteil von Baidu, Chinas größter Suchmaschine, bei über 90% liegt. Ich vermute, daß Googles Geschäftseinnahmen in der Volksrepublik immateriell sind. Ohne zynisch erscheinen zu wollen, ist es ein bequemer Augenblick, für Menschenrechte einzutreten, wenn es einen nichts kostet. Google könnte diese Gelegenheit sogar beim Schopfe packen, um aus dem chinesischen Markt auszusteigen, bevor es sein Gesicht verliert und auf die Nase fällt -- wie bereits bei Facebook geschehen.

:) <- Lutz

Twitter: economy of the incommunicative friends?

I only use Twitter periodically, normally during business trips, to let my friends and colleagues know what I'm doing -- which was the primary reason for having a Twitter-account in the first place. My tweets are admittedly scarce and of no interest for people who do not know me (and even for them, well....) -- all the more noticeable, that I steadily gained a few more followers during the past year (whom I do not know and do not follow back). I wonder about the motivation behind that; do all these people bet on the horse of old-fashioned Twitter-etiquette, where you were supposed to follow somebody who follows you? Or is this some weird sort of competition to follow as many people as possible -- ideally those, who would tweet as little as possible?

Twitter: Ökonomie der schweigsamen Freunde?

I benutze Twitter nur zeitweilig, normalerweise nur während Geschäftsreisen, um meine Kollegen und Freunde über meine Aktivitäten auf dem Laufenden zu halten -- was übrigens der Grund für mich war, überhaupt ein Twitter-Konto zu haben. Meine Tweets sind selten und wohl ohne jede Bedeutung für alle, die mich nicht persönlich kennen (und selbst für diese, aber lassen wir das...) -- umso merkwürdiger, daß mein Konto während des letzten Jahres einige neue Follower gesammelt hat (die ich nicht kenne und denen ich selber nicht folge). Was ist die Motivation dafür, frage ich mich? Setzen diese Follower alle auf die aus der Mode gekommene Twitter-Etikette, daß man denen folgt, die einem auch folgen? Oder ist dies ein seltsamer Wettbewerb, die meisten Nutzer zu verfolgen, idealerweise natürlich denen, die möglichst wenig neue Tweets einstellen?

:P <- Lutz

Beware of Facebook's Privacy Changes

Since yesterday, Facebook has introduced a new transition-tool to change privacy settings, seemingly in an effort to create more public activity for itself; all users who have never changed the default settings (everything set to private) will now have all their stuff set to public by default, unless you use the transition tool and set all radio-buttons to "old settings".

Obacht bei Facebooks Datenschutz-Änderungen

Sei gestern hat Facebook ein neues Tool eingestellt, um seine neuen Datenschutzänderungen auf den Weg zu bringen -- offensichtlich, um mehr öffentliche Aktivitäten für FB zu erzeugen. Bei allen Nutzern, die zuvor die Default-Einstellungen verwendet haben (alles privat), werden nun alle Einträge als "öffentlich" eingestuft. Um dies zu vermeiden, sollte man das Transition-Tools verwenden und alle Radio-Buttons auf "Old settings" einstellen.

:P <- Lutz