Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
I don't doubt Adobe was in contact with Apple during the process of developing CS5, but in big companies like that it's easy to have one part happily answering questions one way right up until the day Jobs walks on stage and announces the EULA change.
|
Exactly. I'm just wondering at what point, or if at all, Adobe was made aware of Apple's plans to block their product. The wording of the clause in the SDK seems specifically reverse engineered for blocking cross-compilers. It's not one of those typical lawyer cover your ass phrases ( like "we will not be held liable for any loses encountered when using our product"). So at some point some engineers and lawyers got together and decided on the best way to block Flash -- either Apple was trying to block Adobe specifically and other cross-compilers were collateral damage or Flash was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back in regards to Apple not like cross-compiling in general.
What I'm trying to get at is that if Apple knowingly let Adobe continue developing a product that they knew they were going to render useless before it even saw the light of day when Adobe could have instead invested the same resources on competing with Apple, perhaps that will be part of the arguments Adobe brings against Apple in a lawsuit. And again, that's why whether Apple has a monopoly on the mobile app market is important -- because without a monopoly the product is not effectively useless; with a monopoly it is.
Again, I'm no lawyer, so I don't even know if that can be argued as a savy (albeit it ruthless) business strategy or anti-competitive.