It appears as though Felipe has provided a complete set of bindings for doing Cocoa development. Is it possible to cross-compile against these to create an app for the iPhone and iPod Touch? I don't believe the version of OS X on those devices includes the Carbon framework, so it'll have to be Cocoa.

It would seem like this is a burgeoning development area that's too big to ignore:

http://legacy.macnn.com/articles/08/12/04/iphone.overtakes.win.mo/

http://blogs.oreilly.com/iphone/2008/11/turning-ideas-into- application.html

Thanks.

-Phil

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20081204/067603ab/attachment.html

2008/12/4 Mac Programmer :

It appears as though Felipe has provided a complete set of bindings for doing Cocoa development.

Yes, that is correct, althougth I would call it complete at the moment. It has the potential to be complete. If you need any specific classes added to the bindings just ask.

Is it possible to cross-compile against these to create an app for the iPhone and iPod Touch?

No, because the compiler doesn't support this target. Support for a target includes knowing how to operate the (cross)assembler, linker, having a RTL, etc. I beliave that Jonas was working on it, you can contact him in the mac-pascal or free pascal mailling lists.

I don't believe the version of OS X on those devices includes the Carbon framework, so it'll have to be Cocoa.

Indeed it doesn't it.

I don't believe the version of OS X on those devices includes the Carbon framework, so it'll have to be Cocoa.

actually it does provide some (i.e. CFString api, and other some other Core Foundations) as well as some of POSIX functions. But generally it would be impossible to create applications for these devices, using MacOSAll unit only :)

Felipe have you updated the objcparser to support ObjC 2.0?

UIKit framework is ObjC 2.0 based. Without using UIKit, it's impossible to create iPhone applications as well.

Afaik there are still NDA issues.

http://legacy.macnn.com/articles/08/12/04/iphone.overtakes.win.mo/ http://blogs.oreilly.com/iphone/2008/11/turning-ideas-into-application.html

I don't think that the iphone is a threat to WM. It is a treat to Nokia or Motorola which produce mobiles for people who don't install applications on their phone. Or does anybody expect any serius application development for the iphone as long as apple controls if you are allowed(!) to distribute your application or not?

The QuickTime classes would be useful :-)

Geoffrey

Hi Florian,

As much as I dislike the idea of making software to be sold only through a channel controled by Apple, the sales seem to be doing pretty well.
See http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/10/21/iphone_app_store_continues_to_exceed_itunes_song_sales_growth.html and http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/09/12/iphone-apps-store-growing-twice-as-fast-as-itunes-music/ Seen from that prism, serious maybe be defined by "can be sold" + "low starting investment" + "sales".

Regards,

Gerard

dmitry boyarintsev wrote

Felipe have you updated the objcparser to support ObjC 2.0?

No, but this is very easy to do. Only a couple of routines changed from the ones I use.

I didn't do it because I only have a 10.4 system which uses Objective-C 1.0

No, but this is very easy to do. Only a couple of routines changed from the ones I use.

Not so easy :)
there's property parsing is missing. There's 3 different type of properties, so different pascal code should be created in each case.

Since, there's no Objc 2.0 headers for Mac OS X used, i've stopped developing the parser...
IIRC, i've implemented C function parsing, but have not commited it.

Dmitry

Maybe Florian could elaborate a bit on where the NDA issues lie. With developing a compiler, the run-time, the apps themselves?

Sure it's a controlled environment. Welcome to the 21st century. Many of us develop software for organizations with extreme restrictions on what users can do with their computers. Apple's "review" process seems fairly tame by comparison.

I was just seeing if anyone else was interested in joining the party.

http://www.ipodnn.com/articles/08/12/05/300m.app.store.downloads/

It's not like we're getting married to the iPhone apps we develop. I think the idea is that you spend maybe a month doing it, then you submit it and wait and see if anyone likes it. Apple is assuming all of the marketing, credit card processing, currency exchange, hosting, etc. as well as a lot of responsibility that you don't have to worry about. For that they take 30% and transmit the other 70% into your bank account. You can also post free apps and Apple assumes the cost of distributing those for free.

One of nice things about an open source project is that it's like running a company where you don't have to worry about running a business. And posting new versions is like running a store where you don't have to worry about whether customers actually buy anything. This seems like something kind of in the middle that should have quite a bit of appeal to a lot of developers. I predict it's the way a lot of software will be developed and marketed in the future.

Thanks.

-Phil

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20081205/5dd8f9c3/attachment.html

Maybe Florian could elaborate a bit on where the NDA issues lie. With developing a compiler, the run-time, the apps themselves?

It seems that this is not the problem anymore however, testing the port doesn't seem to be possible so far.

Anyways, I wonder if it is even allowed/possible to run/publish (L)GPL software on the iPhone. Apple has to accept the (L)GPL to propagate the software through iTunes. However, the (L)GPL prohibits means to prevent the user to install modified version of the software.

Compared to whom? Windows Mobile? Linux?

First, you pay $99/year to be able to develop applications for the iPhone/iPod. But if this is no problem, maybe we should change the license of FPC ;)

You can also post free apps and Apple assumes the cost of distributing those for free.

... and if Apple doesn't like your application, they kick it, see the PodCaster case.

Florian,

Thanks for the insightful comments.

Don't some of the game platforms have NDA's, developer fees, and restrictions on distributing apps to those platforms? Do those platforms present the same challenges that the iPhone does, or has Apple introduced new challenges?

In the space of about two years, Apple has engineered an enormous new "ecosystem" and they're obviously going to protect it fiercely. Some of it I imagine just has to do with ensuring that the iPhone is never associated with viruses and malware. Some probably is just Apple's normal secrecy and paranoia (although just because you're paranoid doesn't mean somebody's not after you).

I wish Windows Mobile and Linux the best, if only to keep Apple honest.

Thanks.

-Phil

Don't some of the game platforms have NDA's, developer fees, and restrictions on distributing apps to those platforms? Do those platforms present the same challenges that the iPhone does, or has Apple introduced new challenges?

AFAIK, Sony have similiar restrictions for developers on their PSP, PS3 consoles. It would be nice to see freepascal based PlayStation games one day :)