Go & iPad... Actorios' review

[kirkmc]

I'll say it again: it's about development tools used to create apps, it's not about allowing either Java or Flash to run on iOS.

[PYves]

I'm not a programmer, but couldn't a third party make a development kit that allows you to port a java based program to ios in the same way that adobe made a development kit that allows you to make iphone programs in flash and then port them over?

[kirkmc]

I'm not a programmer, but couldn't a third party make a development kit that allows you to port a java based program to ios in the same way that adobe made a development kit that allows you to make iphone programs in flash and then port them over?

Not that would be interactive, as far as I understand, in the way that CGoban needs to be.

[RazorBrain]

Apple loosening the belt of it's fortress, maybe a good sign for getting kgs working on ipads? maybe not too? not much info yet, we'll see.

If and when this happens, I will no longer be able to resist an iPad. Actually, I'm looking for an excuse. So, anyone wanting to develop something for KGS on the iPad, if you could time it for the release of the 2G iPad, that would be perfect

[hyperpape]

I'd give it 90% or more odds that KGS will never be on the iPad. WMS is very clear that there will never be non-Java clients for KGS, because he doesn't want to support a variety of clients while Apple is clear that they don't want non-native runtimes (i.e. Java) on the iPad.

The only reason to hedge on that 10% is if sometime in the future, iPad-like devices have a big enough market share, and they typically lack java, or if Apple decides that the iPad should have different rules than the iPhone.

[kirkmc]

I'd give it 90% or more odds that KGS will never be on the iPad. WMS is very clear that there will never be non-Java clients for KGS, because he doesn't want to support a variety of clients while Apple is clear that they don't want non-native runtimes (i.e. Java) on the iPad.

The only reason to hedge on that 10% is if sometime in the future, iPad-like devices have a big enough market share, and they typically lack java, or if Apple decides that the iPad should have different rules than the iPhone.

To be honest, there aren't that many Java apps out there, at least not that grab my attention in this industry. Sure, there's Open/Neo/Free Office or whatever it's called, which is a dog, and there are the occasional Java apps for configuring hardware. But the only Java app I've ever seriously needed to use is CGoban, and this in nearly twenty years of working with personal computers.

Am I missing anything? Is there Java stuff that's under the radar, or that Windows users work with?

[oren]

Am I missing anything? Is there Java stuff that's under the radar, or that Windows users work with?

I used to play Puzzle Pirates which is a fun game. For cross platform games, Java is a great choice.

gGo is also a pretty solid IGS client I like.

[wms]

Yeah, this is a good development, but it's still a long ways until KGS can be ported to the iPad.

And yes, Java isn't too common these days in user interface coding. It had a chance to be what flash is today, but Sun screwed things up pretty badly so Flash ended up the much better choice for apps that run in web pages. So now Java is mostly a server side technology, with Android, and MIDP being some noticeable exceptions.

Anyway, I've read conflicting things on whether this change from Apple would make it acceptable to Apple for Java apps to get into their market. But even if it were OK with Apple, somebody would still need to write a Java library for apps to work with an iPhone/iPad UI. Will anybody ever do that? Maybe, maybe not. But if you are waiting only for KGS to buy your iPad, I'd advise you not to place the order just yet.

[kirkmc]

Yeah, this is a good development, but it's still a long ways until KGS can be ported to the iPad.

And yes, Java isn't too common these days in user interface coding. It had a chance to be what flash is today, but Sun screwed things up pretty badly so Flash ended up the much better choice for apps that run in web pages. So now Java is mostly a server side technology, with Android, and MIDP being some noticeable exceptions.

Anyway, I've read conflicting things on whether this change from Apple would make it acceptable to Apple for Java apps to get into their market. But even if it were OK with Apple, somebody would still need to write a Java library for apps to work with an iPhone/iPad UI. Will anybody ever do that? Maybe, maybe not. But if you are waiting only for KGS to buy your iPad, I'd advise you not to place the order just yet.

Well, don't trust everything you read. I've been discussing this with my colleagues at Macworld, and it is very clear - and, in fact, if you read Apple' document it's clear - that this is not in any way opening the iOS to running Flash or Java. It is only, I repeat, only, for development tools. As far as I know, this does work with Flash for a limited number of apps (ones that are not very interactive; it especially lends itself to magazines, which is why I think Apple made the change) but it wouldn't work with Java, because of the interactivity required for most Java apps.

[PYves]

I didn't expect kgs to be available on iPad soon, but it is still a step in the direction of making it possible.

[Shedal]

Well, there's still a chance for java runtime to be developed for iOS. It can then be distributed in ways other than the AppStore. Cydia, for example.
That would certainly be a way to launch CGoban on iPad.

[hyperpape]

Saying that Cydia apps are for the iPad is a bit like saying Windows apps are for the Mac because of boot camp. It's the hardware, but...

[kirkmc]

Yea, I don't think jailbreaking is really a good option. It opens up the device to security risks, and instability.

[hyperpape]

I agree with you kirkmc, but that wasn't actually my point. Even if jailbreaking is a fantastic idea, it's an extensive modification to the software of iOS devices, and so it's odd to call software that requires jailbreaking "software for iOS." Of course, it's literally true: you're using a modified form of iOS, but it's misleading in a way.

[kirkmc]

I agree with you kirkmc, but that wasn't actually my point. Even if jailbreaking is a fantastic idea, it's an extensive modification to the software of iOS devices, and so it's odd to call software that requires jailbreaking "software for iOS." Of course, it's literally true: you're using a modified form of iOS, but it's misleading in a way.

Agreed.