You do realize that Windows Mobile 7 has similar policies as the iPhone. Apps need to be written in Silverlight (a Flash competitor), XNA (games), or .NET. I'm not sure if Adobe can manage yet another cross-compiler (if that's how CS5 works). Also, Microsoft will approve each and every app, and I don't think that side-loading is allowed either. Now, I don't think that Microsoft will care as much about the cross-compiling, but if the Apple camp is to be believed that multi-tasking support is the technical reason for the ban, you might be surprised by Microsoft's support too.
>ou do realize that Windows Mobile 7 has similar policies as the iPhone. Apps need to be written in Silverlight (a Flash competitor), XNA (games), or .NET. I'm not sure if Adobe can manage yet another cross-compiler (if that's how CS5 works).
You're confusing two different types of restrictions.
The restriction on using silverlight/.net stems from the how the platform was designed.
If you were to write, say, a compiler that takes O'Caml code and spits out .NET IL instructions, then you could use that to write your apps.
Apple is saying you have to use whatever higher level languages they approve of regardless of what the final binaries look like.
And Android requires thing to be written in Dalvik/java. Apple requires thing to be compiled with their tool chain, which means that you needed to compile to C or objective c first.
Each of the platforms has their preferred languages.
With android, you can just include a jar for your language (jython, scala, etc). But it has to be supported by the dvm. Same with .NET IL.
My point being, that if your language isn't the main one, you'll be a second class citizen. Now, if accept the current apple line (not that I do), that the restriction is because of their multitasking requirements, you can see how either Microsoft of Android could implement similar restrictions. Not that they would... Because they are vm machines, they don't have the same restrictions that Apple does (dealing with straight c code).
Given that Adobe are working with MS to get Flash on WP7 - proper Flash, not cross-compiled Flash, your comment is... to be diplomatic, wishful thinking. If Adobe can generate working SL apps then MS wont be bothered how they did it.
As for the multi-tasking 'technical reason' - well, people need something to believe in I guess.
Now just because Microsoft worked with Adobe on getting Flash to work in the web browser doesn't meant that they will be as helpful when moving developers away from their tool chain and towards flash for their main app development.
I'm not saying that I believe the Apple party line, but I can see how Apple is at a disadvantage in program inspection to Android and Microsoft in that their dev language isn't vm based.
Really, if Adobe wants to remain relevant, I think they have only one option...go html5 and go all in.
So... I guess Adobe can target Android.
Ref: http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/03/wi...