Maybe after they open source Swift they'll have some free time to work on Steve Jobs' announcement that FaceTime would be an open video calling standard.
Swift is not open source. It might be in the future, and if they do follow through, the release is slated for "later this year." I hope they do, but I also can't blame anyone who decides to wait and see.
I have also heard that the first time the FaceTime engineers found out the protocol was going to be open sourced was when Steve announced it live on stage to the world.
I'm not happy with what happened to FaceTime but I don't think Swift is in the same boat. It seems to have the backing of all the relevant parties and shouldn't face any hurdles like the patent stuff that sank FaceTime. And they gave a hard deadline for themselves to stick to. I'm pretty optimistic about it happening.
By now, 99% of people have forgotten that FaceTime was ever supposed to be more than video calls between Apple devices. I'd hope they won't try and pull the same thing on the developer community who tend to be more in the loop.
FaceTime was prevented from being open sourced by a patent troll. Continuing to repeat misinformation about this in threads like this is not a reflection on Apple, and is clearly irrelevant to whether Swift will be open sourced.
Pay attention to Chris Lattner and his track record if you want a realistic view of whether the open source promise is likely to be kept for Swift.
And whose fault is that? I think is both sides. The patent troll for obvious reasons but also Apple (or Steve Jobs) for announcing something that they cannot achieve.
That is why people have a hard time believing any Open Source promises made by Apple. And yes I know they have some open source projects available right now.
No, anyone who promises things he cannot fulfill may have his trust in doubt. It doesn't matter if the problem was internal or external.
What would you think if Apple went to announce next Wednesday that the new iPhone will have a sapphire screen, but on launch (after a bunch of people preoder the phone) they announce it's normal glass because a provider couldn't deliver.
Whose fault would that be, the provider's? Apple's? Both?
Comments
Swift isn't actually open-source yet, is it?
Once it is, I think the reasons explained in this article for using Swift as an introductory language make sense.
Maybe after they open source Swift they'll have some free time to work on Steve Jobs' announcement that FaceTime would be an open video calling standard.
Swift is not open source. It might be in the future, and if they do follow through, the release is slated for "later this year." I hope they do, but I also can't blame anyone who decides to wait and see.
That's a fair point. IIRC, FaceTime actually ran into patent trouble that kept it from being a P2P protocol, so they couldn't really open it up.
I have also heard that the first time the FaceTime engineers found out the protocol was going to be open sourced was when Steve announced it live on stage to the world.
I'm not happy with what happened to FaceTime but I don't think Swift is in the same boat. It seems to have the backing of all the relevant parties and shouldn't face any hurdles like the patent stuff that sank FaceTime. And they gave a hard deadline for themselves to stick to. I'm pretty optimistic about it happening.
A source on that: http://appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/07/apple_announces_op...
By now, 99% of people have forgotten that FaceTime was ever supposed to be more than video calls between Apple devices. I'd hope they won't try and pull the same thing on the developer community who tend to be more in the loop.
FaceTime was prevented from being open sourced by a patent troll. Continuing to repeat misinformation about this in threads like this is not a reflection on Apple, and is clearly irrelevant to whether Swift will be open sourced.
Pay attention to Chris Lattner and his track record if you want a realistic view of whether the open source promise is likely to be kept for Swift.
And whose fault is that? I think is both sides. The patent troll for obvious reasons but also Apple (or Steve Jobs) for announcing something that they cannot achieve.
That is why people have a hard time believing any Open Source promises made by Apple. And yes I know they have some open source projects available right now.
By your logic, anyone who ever runs into trouble with a patent troll should never be trusted again. Clearly this is absurd.
No, anyone who promises things he cannot fulfill may have his trust in doubt. It doesn't matter if the problem was internal or external.
What would you think if Apple went to announce next Wednesday that the new iPhone will have a sapphire screen, but on launch (after a bunch of people preoder the phone) they announce it's normal glass because a provider couldn't deliver.
Whose fault would that be, the provider's? Apple's? Both?
[citation needed]
Citation: http://bfy.tw/1Vpt