Nobody has shown more reckless disregard for backward compatibility than Apple in the modern Jobs era.
Well, their record on backward compatibility is mixed -- Carbon, Classic, and Rosetta spring to mind -- but let's stipulate that the above is true. Apple has been able to make major changes to its platform because they're not beholden to any incumbent developers. Microsoft and Adobe have a certain amount of sway, but not enough to keep Apple from improving the platform.
Now they're trying to extend that independence into the iPhone/iPad era. What's dishonest about any of this?
So I'm supposed to believe that Apple was prepared to force all its developers to do two complete rewrites (os 9 -> os x, carbon -> cocoa) and port to a new ISA and break compatibilities across every one of its 10.x releases but they're just too polite to tell a bunch of Flash developers to get stuffed if their Flash app breaks in the next iPhone release. Remember, these will, by definition, be apps of inferior quality since they're not Obj-C so it's even less plausible that Apple will worry about breaking them, if you take them at their word.
Ask any developer of audio units, for example, how worried Apple is about forcing them to rewrite code every time there's a new Logic release.
just too polite to tell a bunch of Flash developers to get stuffed
Nobody said anything about politeness. Where is Apple pretending that this policy is about anything other than maintaining control of the platform?
The fear isn't that they'd have to be rude. The fear is that, if Flash apps for iPhone/iPad became a huge successful popular segment of the market and Flash didn't keep up with iPhone OS, users would have to choose between not upgrading and breaking their apps. Apple doesn't want that. Therefore, no Flash.
It's a policy that's better for some people (e.g. Cocoa Touch developers) and worse for other people (e.g. Flash developers). Some users will prefer it this way; other users would be happier the other way. But the decision is made by Apple, and Apple's making the decision based on its perception of its own interests, and no one is claiming any different.
It's fine for you to object to the policy, but I really don't understand the accusations of hypocrisy.
but they're just too polite to tell a bunch of Flash developers to get stuffed if their Flash app breaks in the next iPhone release.
They don't give a damn about most developers: what they don't want is a whole bunch of pissed-off customers whose games (and other apps) broke when they upgraded to iPhone OS 5.0, because Adobe didn't get around to it.
Well, their record on backward compatibility is mixed -- Carbon, Classic, and Rosetta spring to mind -- but let's stipulate that the above is true. Apple has been able to make major changes to its platform because they're not beholden to any incumbent developers. Microsoft and Adobe have a certain amount of sway, but not enough to keep Apple from improving the platform.
Now they're trying to extend that independence into the iPhone/iPad era. What's dishonest about any of this?