Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Tue 16th Dec 2008 07:02 UTC, submitted by stonyandcher
Apple Microsoft's first-ever iPhone application is a slick photo viewer with a browsing capability that handles a large number of photos on a mobile device screen. The Seadragon mobile application is free through Apple's application store. It a product of Microsoft's Live Labs division, which focuses on developing Web-based technology and applications. Seadragon incorporates the Deep Zoom feature, which is also integrated into Silverlight 2, Microsoft's multimedia tool. It allows a user to quickly magnify a particular area of a photo, regardless of its size.
Thread beginning with comment 340493
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: And Apple Allowed it!?!?
by Laurence on Tue 16th Dec 2008 17:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: And Apple Allowed it!?!?"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

You really hate Apple don't you?

I stated that Apple software is available for Windows and x86 *nix and then followed to back that up with examples.

So what if Safari uses webkit. So does Google Crome and Konqurer - all of which are massively different from each other and from Safari.

And so what if Apple only reluctantly ported iTunes and quicktime player. They still ported it (or licenced 3rd party developers to port Apple's software)

And so what if my examples were free products, they're still owned by Apple.

All of your replies have been nothing more than dancing around the fact I stated earlier that Apple software does run on "normal" x86 platforms.
Whether they ported it themselves, programmed the original technology or whatever is completely irrelevent to the point I made.

Reply Parent Score: 4

dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

It shows that they are not the one who are responsible for the port. Meaningless for you , surely , but not for me and others. it also show that Apple is not really sharing it's own software but improving those made by others , unless they are forced to do so. If they did port there entire catalog and allowed other to work on it , nobody would have anything to say about that point. You also tried to use the minority to show as a majority and made a false point.

Apple forked KHTML for their Safari browser so WebKit was born. They are responsible for the port, they are sharing the code, and they own WebKit. Even OS X's core is open source, you can go and build your own Darwin distribution if you want.

And Apple doesn't owe other platform users anything. Just like Microsoft has the right to keep their software on their own OS (e.g. Media Player, Media Center, Windows Live Essentials), so does Apple.
Of course they will port their software if that gets them money. They are a company, not a charity and they follow their own interests.

That's where your the most wrong. Apple Branding is not equal to full ownership.

He's not:
Apple purchased NeXT => NeXTStep is owned by Apple => OS X is born, and surprise, it's Apple's property
Apple purchased touch company => IP owned by Apple
Apple purchased CUPS => CUPS is owned by Apple. License doesn't matter.
[and so on...]

Edited 2008-12-16 19:16 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3