vB Easy Archive - Steve Jobs announces 3rd Party Apps!!!!

Pages: 1

Steve Jobs announces 3rd Party Apps!!!!
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Let me just say it: We want native third party applications on the iPhone, and we plan to have an SDK in developers’ hands in February. We are excited about creating a vibrant third party developer community around the iPhone and enabling hundreds of new applications for our users. With our revolutionary multi-touch interface, powerful hardware and advanced software architecture, we believe we have created the best mobile platform ever for developers. It will take until February to release an SDK because we’re trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once—provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks, etc. This is no easy task. Some claim that viruses and malware are not a problem on mobile phones—this is simply not true. There have been serious viruses on other mobile phones already, including some that silently spread from phone to phone over the cell network. As our phones become more powerful, these malicious programs will become more dangerous. And since the iPhone is the most advanced phone ever, it will be a highly visible target. Some companies are already taking action. Nokia, for example, is not allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their newest phones unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to a known developer. While this makes such a phone less than “totally open,” we believe it is a step in the right direction. We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone’s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs. We think a few months of patience now will be rewarded by many years of great third party applications running on safe and reliable iPhones. Steve P.S.: The SDK will also allow developers to create applications for iPod touch.

Right from Apple's site!!!!
http://www.apple.com/startpage/

I am so glad I was wrong!

Posted by: Dammit2Hell

While I don't yet have an iPhone, (My wife is getting me one for Christmas) I have been reading and keeping up to date on a daily basis. I must say this is exciting news!

Posted by: chriswitt

Wow - nice find! I have to admit I'm super-surprised! And for it to be coming out in February... I guess pigs do fly.

Posted by: Shard

Oh dear lord yes.

Quote:

{snip}And since the iPhone is the most advanced phone ever

Arrogance like this annoys me about Apple.

Also, february? Sheesh.

Posted by: jhkaplan

Just in time for iPhone 2G?

Posted by: BethanyBoo

THIS IS SO GREAT! I'm really excited about this. It's just a shame we have to wait until February.

Posted by: Roy

Can anyone say "Menu->Settings->Allow unisgned apps"... or something along those lines...

anyways, they are "blaming it on nokia", cause they likely want to charge for all apps and make them available solely through itunes. i'm sure there will be ways for running unsigned apps tho, just like the nokias...

although if they did allow for a freeware application distribution through itunes, it'd be fine too... unlikely to happen though, cause apple would need to "certify" each app, and that is going to cost some money...they would want to recoup the certification costs on the software sales...

Posted by: mjohns2

Now I wonder if this was the plan all along or did the bad press make Apple give in.

So is Skype a likely app?

Posted by: BethanyBoo

You know what else is good about this news? It proves that apple DOES care about what its customers want. Maybe there will be more good news in the future.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

I really don't mind waiting until February as long as they get it right. I would rather wait and have something good than not and have a bunch of bugs.

Also, I am sure the delivery system will be iTunes, and I doubt there will be a "allow unsigned apps" option. I just hope they don't charge a ton for these apps.

@mjohns2: It is likely this was planned all along. Apple usually looks a few years out, literally. According to Steve Jobs, the Apple Stores were rolled out for the iPhone. They started increasing store numbers probably 3 or 4 years before the phone was released.

And it will be a cold day in hell before they allow VOIP.

Posted by: Angelo921

Do you guys think that these new 3rd party apps will be included in future updates and will be free?

Posted by: JerryNY

You might want to change the thread title to indicate it is confirmed from Apple/Steve. I was about to create a thread because I thought this one was another 3rd party app wish thread. All in all I'd say this is quite a nice development.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelo921

Do you guys think that these new 3rd party apps will be included in future updates and will be free?

No. Maybe some will be free, but that is totally up to the developer.

@JerryNY: Done.

Posted by: djdownhill

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

Right from Apple's site!!!!
http://www.apple.com/startpage/

I am so glad I was wrong!

This just in:

Quote:

Steve Jobs realized he forgot to take his cool-aid before that interview and retracted his comments. His response:

"My Bad"

J/K

Posted by: scolbert

I believe Apple intends to charge for these apps, and stage only approved apps on their site. I think that's OK, but all need to understand that this is not an open app environment. Apps will have to be both approved and signed by Apple in order to run on the iPhone. Certainly that will make for more secure apps (limiting viruses, etc.) but clearly filtered by Apple think is important and can make it money.

Posted by: kaplanfx

This was planned from the beginning. I have a buddy at Apple who is relatively well informed. He will never "leak" info to me, but he did continually emphasize that the iPhone is more Leopard than Tiger, and if there was ever an announcement for third party apps it would certainly be sometime after the Leopard release. Also Apple is very thorough with their developer API's, it takes a long time to get them built up nicely and with proper documentation, just look at x code for example.
I think Apple had to rush the iPhone to market due to contractual obligations with AT&T. They wanted to make sure the hardware and the core OS were ready. Now they are slowly adding the features they wanted, and building a true platform.

-kap

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by scolbert

I believe Apple intends to charge for these apps, and stage only approved apps on their site. I think that's OK, but all need to understand that this is not an open app environment. Apps will have to be both approved and signed by Apple in order to run on the iPhone. Certainly that will make for more secure apps (limiting viruses, etc.) but clearly filtered by Apple think is important and can make it money.

I don't disagree with you, but I think it is a little early to really know how opened or closed this system will be.

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

I am so glad I was wrong!

Well I have been saying for a while to give Apple a bit of time to get 10.5 done and they would free up some developers for iPhone stuff. The priority the last few months has to have been getting Leopard done. Now that it is shipping later this month they can reshuffle some people back onto the iPhone.

Posted by: HelioPause

This is great news, indeed. Maybe I won't jailbreak my iPhone after all. (Not that I could if I wanted to)

Posted by: teiresias

This is a welcome announcement so that we at least know an active and real effort is being made for an actual on-phone SDK (as opposed to that stupid, online-only app SDK crap). Still, given what I'm sure are rather stringent terms between Apple and AT&T I'm rather certain we won't be seeing things like VoIP or IM clients being approved as 3rd party apps.

Posted by: BIGMERF

great news

Posted by: GeeK.dLL

This is great news to all iPhone users even the ones who don't have one yet.

Posted by: Mark Booth

I paid for lots of different apps on my old Palm unit so I don't see any big deal with paying for safe, tested apps for my iPhone! And installing them through the iTunes store is simply the perfect way to do it!

You know who I feel sorry for? All of the schmucks that sold their Apple stock at $168! This 3rd-party application news will sell a crap-load more iPhones and iPod Touches this Holiday season. Look for the stock price to be over $200 come January!

Mark

P.S. All of a sudden, 8GB doesn't seem like quite enough!

I bet we see a 16GB or even 32GB iPhone at MacWorld Expo!

Posted by: BeyondTheTech

Quote:

Originally Posted by BethanyBoo

You know what else is good about this news? It proves that apple DOES care about what its customers want. Maybe there will be more good news in the future.

Don't be so naive. Apple "cares" because of all the bad flak they've been getting as being so close-minded about their device and that it would possibly affect their bottom line and their 10-million target by the end of 2008. They finally caved into the pressures of all the other manufacturers having the upper hand by being developer-friendly.

Think about it. What about that firm stance of "no SDK required" and "develop web apps" two announcements ago? They wouldn't have backpedaled so much had it not been for articles such as "The Best Mobile Development Platform for Hobbyist Programmer" where the iPhone is immediately dismissed, and MSNBC's "iRegret" article, not to mention the countless other blogs and discussions finally going mainstream. The more it seeps from the blogs into the press, it's obvious that buyers are going from an "ooh, I want it now" to "well, let me think about it" and that has obviously affected sales. Don't forget about all the people who have given up and moved off the iPhone, canceling their service as well. Yes, I'm one of those people, and will remain cautious even after February before I pounce on another Apple product or refresh or software update again like I did with the iPhone.

What about the companies who said, "Ok, let's go with web apps and see what we can develop?" All that time and R&D now goes out the window when native applications would have made it easier and more profitable.

I still believe they could have had even more of a kick-*** start if they announced the iPhone with an SDK to boot, but even though we barely waited patiently from January to June, we all know that the final product was still rushed to market with an incomplete feature set, which is why they're just fumbling on their own feet, fumbling on their own words, and just trying to get in-tuned to a new market they've entered.

Let's be honest, they've made a number of mistakes from the getgo, too many to count, but they could still redeem themselves even before February.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Booth

P.S. All of a sudden, 8GB doesn't seem like quite enough!

I bet we see a 16GB or even 32GB iPhone at MacWorld Expo!

True. Although what I remember from my Windows Mobile devices was that most apps were around a meg or two, many times less. I think most apps will be rather small, and should not effect space too much. Unless you install dozens.

Posted by: bitslap47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Booth

I paid for lots of different apps on my old Palm unit so I don't see any big deal with paying for safe, tested apps for my iPhone! And installing them through the iTunes store is simply the perfect way to do it!

You know who I feel sorry for? All of the schmucks that sold their Apple stock at $168! This 3rd-party application news will sell a crap-load more iPhones and iPod Touches this Holiday season. Look for the stock price to be over $200 come January!

Mark

P.S. All of a sudden, 8GB doesn't seem like quite enough!

I bet we see a 16GB or even 32GB iPhone at MacWorld Expo!

Crap... I was going to release a free version of a Sirius Radio application for the iPhone and Touch... but if you guys are going to insist on paying for stuff... I'll just %$*& can the project.

Posted by: ViperrepiV

Do you think a jailbroken 1.1.1 phone (but not unlocked) will be able to upgrade to a new firmware that allows this?

Posted by: Aurora

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shard

Oh dear lord yes.

Arrogance like this annoys me about Apple.

Also, february? Sheesh.

Ever heard of marketing and hype?

Business 101, my friend.

Posted by: Aurora

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViperrepiV

Do you think a jailbroken 1.1.1 phone (but not unlocked) will be able to upgrade to a new firmware that allows this?

Asking questions like yours this early in the game is pointless. No one knows.

Posted by: cowboy1964

Quote:

Originally Posted by scolbert

I believe Apple intends to charge for these apps, and stage only approved apps on their site.

Unless Apple is going to work out some kind of revenue sharing I don't see how anyone besides Apple would develop any apps then.

I think the SDK will be truly open to anyone (at least I hope so). They may go the Nokia route and require digital signing, which wouldn't be the end of the world, but we'll see won't we?

Posted by: payroll

This is cool, but I wish it would happen before February... I really just want AIM already.

Posted by: motormouth2416

Febuary can't come too soon!

Posted by: coomac

So apple finally woke up and smelled the coffee. The fact that they're announcing this now and pushing it out next year just shows they had no intention of allowing 3rd party apps. They just recently started working on an sdk because of all the bad press they've gotten... and let's not forget the new nokia ads. Can't allow that shiny apple reputation to get tarnished any more than it already is. Better late than never I suppose.

Posted by: digital-flex

This is so great. Now developers don't need to go in a around about way to create applications.

Nice one apple.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjohns2

Now I wonder if this was the plan all along or did the bad press make Apple give in.

Obviously NOT planned.

It's just like the rebates. Jobs really wanted a locked down platform, but customer (and internet) pressure works. That's all there is to it.

That, and the fact that other phones are catching up quickly with their UIs. Apple has got to be running a little worried right now. They can't match dozens of UNLOCKED touch models competing with them.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by coomac

So apple finally woke up and smelled the coffee. The fact that they're announcing this now and pushing it out next year just shows they had no intention of allowing 3rd party apps. They just recently started working on an sdk because of all the bad press they've gotten... and let's not forget the new nokia ads. Can't allow that shiny apple reputation to get tarnished any more than it already is. Better late than never I suppose.

I disagree. Apple usually thinks way in advance. Likely they had this decided all along, but could not spare the man power due to Leopard. Plus, I think everyone agrees that iPhone was rushed to market, the difference between 1.0.x and 1.1.1 show that 1.1.1 is the software they really wanted to ship.

I highly doubt they spent the 2 or 3 years (can't remember what Jobs said) developing the phone and then all of a sudden they decide to slap together an SDK. They had this planned.

**EDIT** Look at the Intel switch as an example. They had OS X running on Intel since it's creation, way before they ever made the move. Another is the Apple Stores, which according to Jobs were created to sell iPhone. They started that years before iPhone was even announced.

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowboy1964

Unless Apple is going to work out some kind of revenue sharing I don't see how anyone besides Apple would develop any apps then.

Actually, the precedent is already there with the iPod Video. There are already games you can download for that today, which were not (as far as I can tell) developed for Apple. I bought a Texas Hold 'Em game for my iPod Video to keep me occupied on long flights (when my fiancee wouldn't share her PSP). I think I paid $5 for it, through iTunes. I bet Apple made a buck, and the developer made $4...

It's been done before. I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out next year!

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeyondTheTech

Yes Apple doesn't care about customers but they do care about a blog no one reads and MSNBC articles? Be realistic, Apple tried pushing the web app angle because they knew there was no way they were going to have an SDK ready anytime this fall. It was too early to announce the SDK but they wanted to at least push the idea of 3rd party something on their phone. It is still a little early but I figure they want a little more hype this fall for the holiday buying season which is traditionally the strongest by far for iPods and with all the new markets the iPhone is moving into it should increase sales quite a bit moving in 2008.

Posted by: PDR447

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

yes ok, apple looks way in advance but I highly doubt that a SDK was in the works the whole time. if it was, why didn't they say "we have an sdk coming" back in june? instead they took a hard stance that there was no need for native apps and that web apps were great and all we need.

Posted by: JerryNY

I think the SDK was planned but there was no way they could free up people from Leopard until it was done. This fact along with the big issue of signed apps which the 1.0 iPhone OS wouldn't handle well means they got stuck shipping the iPhone knowing a future SDK was going to need a revised iPhone OS to work the way they wanted. We now have a revised OS that is probably far more the way they need it to lock down an SDK. We still might see a significant OS update again before the SDK is released. People who talk about the bad press about being locked etc. like most people really care, they don't.

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

Plus, I think everyone agrees that iPhone was rushed to market, the difference between 1.0.x and 1.1.1 show that 1.1.1 is the software they really wanted to ship.

I'd definitely agree -- there was a day, some time long ago in Cupertino, that a bunch of iPhone engineers sat staring at a blank white board with nothing written on the top but "LAUNCH: 1ST HALF, 2007" and then two columns below that, for "IN" and "OUT"... and then the engineers and developers had to figure out what they could safely fit into the "IN" bucket in order to meet that date.

Obviously, the IN's were the obvious things like the MultiTouch interface, the new iPod interface, camera, CoverFlow, etc. Then, some others like YouTube, Stocks, Weather thrown in for good measure.

What ended up in the "OUT" bucket was MMS, video recording, fully-documented SDK, etc....

This is what boggles my mind about some of the "OMGZ! They crippled the iFone on purpose!!!1!!one!1!1" posts I read around here. Anyone who has spent a few years in corporate America, especially working for any corporation that develops and sells consumer products, can understand this process. But I keep forgetting, many HoFo members aren't even old enough to vote, much less know what typically goes on in corporate product development.

I believe that Apple planned the development environment all along (after all, they clearly already had one for the iPod Video, since I can buy games for that) and in typical Apple fashion - does not announce things until they are ready to. I think they might have gotten nudged into announcing this a bit sooner than they'd planned to -- but I do believe it was in their planned lifecycle for the iPhone all along.

Posted by: KDarling

Oh give me a break.

I've been around corporate software for thirty years.

Apple clearly did NOT plan a public SDK all along. If they had, they would've simply announced it ahead of time, just as they pre-announced the iPhone way ahead of time... and avoided months of bad press.

But now the Apple apologists will come out in force, and try to pull the usual 1984 doublespeak history swap.

Posted by: rprata

Wow, Steve finally pulled his head out of his posterior. Good going. Now, if they had just said this in the beginning, it would have saved everyone a lot of headaches. Way to go Steve.

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

Oh give me a break.

Um, they are announcing the SDK ahead of time unless your calander shows it is Feb already

Get your facts right. They HAD to announce the iPhone early as it was about to go the the FCC for cert and they would no longer be able to keep it under wraps. Who is apologizing for anyone? I have been saying Apple would release an SDK for months, sometime after Leopard was released. They are now announcing the SDK almost as far in advance as they announced the iPhone. Stop your trolling.

Posted by: harveybirdman

Meh. Why do I suspect that this digital signature "protection" will end up also "protecting" us from anything that might cut into their bottom line?

There are tons of apps with zero security issues that will never get approved. Here are a just a few:
barebones mp3 player/ogg support (no risk)
alternative video player/divx/xvid support (no risk)
Voip/skype (slight security risk)
Ringtone app which lets you use any sound file (no risk)
bit torrent or any other media download program (ok, this one is risky)

Crossing my fingers that they let full tilt poker write an iphone app (FTP has the best mac poker program by far) but I'm not holding my breath.

The one silver lining is that maybe, just maybe, RIM or the MS mac business unit will come out with a true push email solution. I think apple might even allow a third party mail client to supersede the default mail app, since it would allow them to keep it simple, and leave the advanced features to the power users.

Posted by: dupontdupont

Does this mean that I can delete just one entry of a phone call or will i still have to delete all.

Posted by: turbo-sc

hell to the yes. It's over

all the other carriers should just give up now.

Posted by: KeanosMagicHat

So what is Apple is basically saying is stuff all the early adopters we bricked your phones because we could ..... meh !!!

We'll open it up when WE want to and even then only to approved developers so we get a share of the revenue.

Sounds a bit like MS to me.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryNY

They HAD to announce the iPhone early as it was about to go the the FCC for cert and they would no longer be able to keep it under wraps.

Quote:

Who is apologizing for anyone? I have been saying Apple would release an SDK for months, sometime after Leopard was released. They are now announcing the SDK almost as far in advance as they announced the iPhone. Stop your trolling.

And I'm countering by saying that I don't think there would be an SDK without public pressure. But you're right, I shouldn't say "apologists", if that's inflammatory.

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

Oh give me a break.

I've been around corporate software for thirty years.

Apple clearly did NOT plan a public SDK all along.

To be fair, I think you'll admit (as do I) that you have no more means to prove your point, than I have to say that Apple did plan to release a SDK all along. Unless one of us happens to live in Cupertino and is not telling ...

I expected this model since before the iPhone was launched (anyone who is really bored could go through my post history and see me discuss how they'd likely want a closed/delivery-via-iTunes model like the iPod Video). To me, it makes sense, because it opens up an additional revenue stream for Apple that they wouldn't otherwise have available. They don't have the resources to write every app in the world that smartphone owners would want ... so why wouldn't they want a system like this?

As to why they didn't announce that, I'm not even going to bother with that argument. Why didn't they announce ringtones on launch day? Why didn't they announce the iTunes WiFi Store on launch day? Personally, I don't believe that Apple whipped those two up in just a couple months, they were (IMO) planned all along ... but Apple likes to release announcements when they feel it best fits their schedule.

Personally, I believe the SDK was a known all along, but they've been a bit pressured into announcing it earlier than they wanted to.

Interestingly enough, does this announcement now officially (to those that thought otherwise) make the iPhone a "smartphone"??

Posted by: aristoBrat

Quote:

Originally Posted by harveybirdman

Meh. Why do I suspect that this digital signature "protection" will end up also "protecting" us from anything that might cut into their bottom line?

Who knows?

IIRC, RIM requires that all BlackBerry apps need to be digitally signed, and this hasn't prevented decent, free third-party applications.

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

No, that's incorrect. I've done FCC certs and you can hide it right up to the last minute, if you want to. But instead Jobs felt the need to pre-announce the phone for a bunch of reasons, including giving people enough warning not to renew their contracts with non-ATT carriers.

And I'm countering by saying that I don't think there would be an SDK without public pressure. But you're right, I shouldn't say "apologists", if that's inflammatory.

You also know then that you can request that the FCC not release info to the public but it is still just a request which means if they screw up it's too bad. I totally agree with you that it was a good move to allow for people to consider their current contracts etc. There is no one outside Apple who really knows what their true plans were so we all are just speculating anyway. There are two ways to look at it though: One where they release a product where the public outcry for 3rd party apps is more a factor of people loving the thing and wanting to make it that much better. The second more negative way to look at it is that the product was criticized and doing badly so they had to make changes. Considering sales are doing well and they are opening up new markets with service providers falling all over each other to get the product I tend to be more in the first camp. I am sure public pressure helped somewhat to grease the wheels but I don't think we were going to see an SDK before 2008 no matter what. This move also lets Apple paint the 3rd party apps currently being hacked and unlockers as a security threat with their talk of signed apps etc.

Posted by: aristoBrat

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanosMagicHat

We'll open it up when WE want to and even then only to approved developers so we get a share of the revenue.

How did you get that out of requiring digital signatures to track back where applications came from?

Posted by: ViperrepiV

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurora

Originally Posted by ViperrepiV
Do you think a jailbroken 1.1.1 phone (but not unlocked) will be able to upgrade to a new firmware that allows this?

Asking questions like yours this early in the game is pointless. No one knows.

well, i guess as long as you can resotore, you're fine right? And you can restore a 1.1.1 jailbreaked phone...(right?)

Posted by: KeanosMagicHat

Quote:

Originally Posted by aristoBrat

How did you get that out of requiring digital signatures to track back where applications came from?

No I am suggesting that to become an approved software developer you can guarantee that at the very least there will be some kind of fee or, if this new Apple think they can get away with it, a revenue sharing agreement like they have with the mobile (cell) operators.

Posted by: aristoBrat

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanosMagicHat

No I am suggesting that to become an approved software developer you can guarantee that at the very least there will be some kind of fee.

Who knows what Apple will charge for it, but RIM (the BlackBerry folks), the fee is $100.00

I'm sure a decent, free third-party app could make that $$ back in PayPal donations in a day or two at the most...

Posted by: xcharliemx

Quote:

Originally Posted by dupontdupont

Does this mean that I can delete just one entry of a phone call or will i still have to delete all.

Well now with the SDK.....................wait, what?

Posted by: LoganKI

iTunes app store here we come!!!

Posted by: bootycancer

This could be really great news for the business and Windows users.
Hopefully Apple doesn't make developers jump though too many hoops and scare them away.

Personally, I didn't want to sink any more money into the phone. I hope Apple isn't pushing off the their lack of core development to 3rd party.

Posted by: bootycancer

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoganKI

iTunes app store here we come!!!

you know, with me coming from a WM device, that never crossed my mind.

there goes all my excitement

Posted by: KeanosMagicHat

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoganKI

iTunes app store here we come!!!

Good point ... yet another way for Apple to get their hands on more revenue (in addition to those discussed above).... hadn't thought of the iTunes / iApps angle.

Posted by: JerryNY

The whole iPod games angle has been discussed before with Apple selling them on iTunes. The major difference with this being the SDK looks to be much more available, iPod games have been developed but it isn't clear how much Apple helped or even if they gave a private SDK to do them etc. Just because apps may only be available on iTunes doesn't mean there won't be shareware, freeware etc. Remember there are crazy amounts of free stuff to download from the iTunes store right now, think podcasts. Only time will tell though.

Posted by: cowboy1964

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanosMagicHat

Frankly I'd prefer Apple charge developers if it means that 13-year script kiddies won't be able to write virii and worms for the iPhone.

Posted by: jzderf

If they charge for these apps.....ugh

Posted by: bryanc

Quote:

Originally Posted by jzderf

If they charge for these apps.....ugh

thats just dumb if they do, they have enough of our money already! hah!!!

Posted by: Airkat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shard

Oh dear lord yes.

Arrogance like this annoys me about Apple.

Also, february? Sheesh.

Haha, I was thinking the same. The reason this phone is under so much fire is because of how Apple markets it to be the best thing since sliced bread (and don't forget the fanboys backing it up). I think the opposite is true though, it's the SIMPLEST phone out -- thus the appeal.

Regarding the announcement... **** YEAH!

Posted by: psxrulez

This is a great move, and I can't wait.

BTW, even if someone wrote a Skype app, is EDGE fast enough to handle it? I know EVDO can, but not sure about EDGE.

Posted by: mjohns2

If someone did write a Skype app the primary place I'd use it would be at home through my Wi-Fi.

Posted by: coomac

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

I highly doubt they spent the 2 or 3 years (can't remember what Jobs said) developing the phone and then all of a sudden they decide to slap together an SDK. They had this planned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

**EDIT** Look at the Intel switch as an example. They had OS X running on Intel since it's creation, way before they ever made the move. Another is the Apple Stores, which according to Jobs were created to sell iPhone. They started that years before iPhone was even announced.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by they had OS X running on intel before the switch. OS X did not ship immediately with intel hardware... macintels were pushed out much later. You still can't run bootcamp/windows on pre-intel (ie ppc) hardware.

And of course apple won't come out and say "gosh darn, we expanded our stores just in time. Who woulda thunk they'd be so useful in selling the iphone".

Apple is nowhere near as infallible as you seem to think. They make mistakes just like every other company and they made several with the iphone which they're trying to rectify.

Posted by: msk

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryanc

thats just dumb if they do, they have enough of our money already! hah!!!

of course they'll charge for some apps, they charge $.99 (or whatever it is) to make a ringtone out of a song you already own. apple will probably charge the developers a royalty or something so that developers can sell their apps through the apple site.

Posted by: plasm0

Quote:

Originally Posted by msk

I totally agree.
The concept of "charging for ringtones" (esp for your own music) really pisses me off, and i'm suprised more people haven't complained en masse about this to Apple.

I compose/write my own music, and I can't even use the music I make to use as a ringtone! (yes, without a 3rd party hack....it's just the concept of charging that bothers me)

The more people complain, Apple usually gives in (eg. $100 rebates, now 3rd party apps)...

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by coomac

One thing I always respected about apple is if they announce it, it's usually ready to ship/download within the day or the week (not including behemoth projects like the OS of course and the iphone for obvious reasons). If the sdk was planned the entire time, the announcement today would be saying the sdk is available for devs, not that it's coming in 4.5 months. SDKs are not operating systems... they don't take years to put together. Heck they already have SDKs for OSX on the pc which can probably be stripped and tweaked for the phone. Maybe they started from scratch, but it's obvious they just started working on it.

It's highly coincidental that they started on an sdk after they got a lot of dissatisfied customers... and after nokia put pressure on them. Yeah... coincidences don't happen in the business world.

Besides, they had several chances to announce an sdk in the works but never did. Example - when the phone was announced, when they revealed webapps, when the phone was hacked, when third party apps started popping up all over, when they released 1.1.1 and finally, when they reinforced their webapps feature a week ago.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by they had OS X running on intel before the switch. OS X did not ship immediately with intel hardware... macintels were pushed out much later. You still can't run bootcamp/windows on pre-intel (ie ppc) hardware.

And of course apple won't come out and say "gosh darn, we expanded our stores just in time. Who woulda thunk they'd be so useful in selling the iphone".

Apple is nowhere near as infallible as you seem to think. They make mistakes just like every other company and they made several with the iphone which they're trying to rectify.

I never said Apple was infallible. It only took 6 months by the way from the day the switch to Intel was announced until the first Intel Macs were ready. Also, why would Boot Camp run on PPC?

I am not a software engineer, and I do not really know what goes into making a public SDK, but I gotta believe it takes longer than 3 months to make one. I also don't think that it is a coincidence that this was announced a day after the Leopard's ship date was announced.

I think it is very naive to think a few thousand users that compromise a very small percentage of users had enough effect on Apple to force them to completely reverse their policy on third party apps in a matter of a couple of months.

**EDIT** As for Apple being able to release things the day they announce them, that is not really true anymore. Apple TV, iPhone, MacBook Pro, AirPort Extreme Base Staion, all of them were released a month or more after the day they were announced.

Posted by: ubercool

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeanosMagicHat

Good point ... yet another way for Apple to get their hands on more revenue (in addition to those discussed above).... hadn't thought of the iTunes / iApps angle.

First you carp about not having apps. Now that you have apps, you whine that you may have to pay for them. You just can't win, can you?

Posted by: bootycancer

I'll have to wait and see just how powerful these apps can be, before I go complaining about paying for them. From what I've seen so far, I'm not convinced that there would be any app that I would pay for. It would be like paying for a web gadget or sidebar gadget. I might would throw 5 bucks at a GPS app, though. Or a browser that was flash enabled with copy/paste functrionality.

Surely Apple won't micro-manage 3rd party apps through ITunes store? Surely you can pay and download the apps from the vendors themselves, and just use ITunes to install them?

But maybe with these apps out of the way, Apple can concentrate on finishing the phone.

Posted by: Angelo921

Do you think they will charge a one time fee for the apps of a recurring monthly fee?

Posted by: jzderf

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubercool

First you carp about not having apps. Now that you have apps, you whine that you may have to pay for them. You just can't win, can you?

Maybe because there are tons of apps out there for symbian/ppc/blackberry/etcetc which are totally free? And we expected our apple smartphone to be the same as well?

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by jzderf

Maybe because there are tons of apps out there for symbian/ppc/blackberry/etcetc which are totally free? And we expected our apple smartphone to be the same as well?

I have never use BB or Symbian, so I can't speak for them, but I have used WM. Any program actually worth using cost money. All of the free ones usually suffered from a lot of bugs and terrible UI. So yes the free options are out there, but there aren't as many as you say, and the ones that are there usually are not very usable.

Posted by: JerryNY

How the whole 3rd party development and distribution is going to work is not known at this point but one thing to keep in mind is that we aren't just talking iPhone here. The iPod touch is not a the meat of the iPod lineup right now but within a year or two most iPods are going to be OSX based just like the iPhone and touch. With those kind of sales numbers there is going to be much interest in developing for them high and low.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

I think it is very naive to think a few thousand users that compromise a very small percentage of users had enough effect on Apple to force them to completely reverse their policy on third party apps in a matter of a couple of months.

I think it's very naive to believe Apple had the SDK planned. Jobs went through huge contortions and endured lots of silent looks trying to push web apps on developers. Then they deliberately broke third party apps (from a software standpoint this is clear) with the last update.

When he announced the SDK, you'll note that he did NOT say "oh we've had this planned for a year". Moreover, the fact that they still haven't figured out how the development efforts will be put under their control, shows they're just starting to think about the whole thing.

This is clear to anyone with experience in the field.

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

Then they deliberately broke third party apps (from a software standpoint this is clear) with the last update.
...

This is clear to anyone with experience in the field.

??? You claim to have software experience yet you fail to see why those 3rd party hacks were broken? They changed around the entire security model and underlying frameworks which of course would hurt 3rd party hacks, "apps" is not entirely correct considering you have to hack the phone to get them on there and were never supported. Apple didn't even deliberately brick phones that were unlocked which is clear, otherwise ALL the unlocks would have resulted in bricking not just one of them. Major updates to the OS, 1.1.1, made to secure it in preparation for 3rd party apps guaranteed things would break, which at this point was released almost a month ago. Wether or not Apple planned the SDK from the beginning is debatable of course, that they would have the resources to work on one before they got Leopard out the door is the key issue.

Posted by: aristoBrat

Didn't a lot of the third-party apps break on 1.1.1 because the frameworks they were using got updated in 1.1.1?

Edit: didn't see that Jerry had already posted the same statement

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

Steve Jobs at the D conference on May 30 answering a question about the iPhone being a closed platform:

Quote:

This is an important tradeoff between security and openness. We want both. We're working through a way... we'll find a way to let 3rd parties write apps and still preserve security on the iPhone. But until we find that way we can't compromise the security of the phone.

I've used 3rd party apps... the more you add, the more your phone crashes. No one's perfect, and we'd sure like our phone not to crash once a day. If you can just be a little more patient with us I think everyone can get what they want.

Granted, this is before WWDC and it is possible that he was referring to their web app idea, but he just as likely if not more likely was referring to the upcoming SDK. It is likely that they just came up with the idea of how to actually go about all of this, but had planned an SDK of some sort all along.

Either way, it is true, we will never know when Apple decided to make the SDK public. So go ahead and believe that an extremely small percentage of users swayed Apple to change the phone if it makes you feel better. I will continue to believe that a multi-billion dollar corporation with an extremely successful product had planned it from the start. Just as they planned the WiFi store from the start and said nothing.

Another thing about the time it will take to release this. You must understand that this is a company that just finished several huge undertakings: Intel switch, Leopard, iPhone, new iPods across the board. They have not had the resources for this until now.

Posted by: aristoBrat

Steve's quote below (from a month ago, during the Q&A part of the London iPhone announcement) seems to indicate that they were thinking about native applications then too.

Quote:

10:37 - Q: Have you thought about opening the iPhone to 3rd parties?

Steve: "Yes, we've already done that with Web 2.0. We're looking at more intimate apps."

http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/18/...vent-in-london/

Posted by: BIGMERF

i am not as computer savy as the rest of you..can you explain in noob terms what this means for the common iphone owner? what will i be able to take advantage of?

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGMERF

i am not as computer savy as the rest of you..can you explain in noob terms what this means for the common iphone owner? what will i be able to take advantage of?

Are you asking what it means to have 3rd party apps with the SDK as compared to just web apps or hacked 3rd party apps?

Posted by: BIGMERF

my iphone is unhacked. explain the sdk term? and what it means to me and my iphone..3rd party apps? do you mean flash? give me other exapmles.. thanks

Posted by: toomer

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

When he announced the SDK, you'll note that he did NOT say "oh we've had this planned for a year".

Yet another logic fault. Just because he didn't say it (why would he need to?) doesn't mean it didn't take place.

And the way I am reading the many examples shown in this thread - it seems obvious they knew they wanted to do this from the start ... but in a very controlled structure (i.e.: Sidekick, iPod).

Posted by: bootycancer

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGMERF

my iphone is unhacked. explain the sdk term? and what it means to me and my iphone..3rd party apps? do you mean flash? give me other exapmles.. thanks

SDK is software development kit. It's used to help programmers program for a specific structure.

flash is just web code....alot of pop-ups are flash...
the big box at the top of this page that is animated is flash
http://www.bang-olufsen.com/page.asp

3rd party means that more programs are on the way. As all kinds of vendors will aquire this SDK and start writing programs for the Iphone. With the news from Jobs, means that you won't need to hack your phone to have these applications

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGMERF

my iphone is unhacked. explain the sdk term? and what it means to me and my iphone..3rd party apps? do you mean flash? give me other exapmles.. thanks

SDK stands for Software Development Kit. All that means is tools, documentation and sometimes even utilities which help to build apps. Apple probably has these tools internally to build Safari, the Photo app or any other app that comes with the phone. The problem is that internally it is probably a mess and not a nice tidy package that could be released to devs outside Apple to make apps easily. With the SDK Apple is releasing a means for developers to make native running apps that can do things beyond what can be done in Safari. Hackers who have made apps are pretty much flying blind and without the SDK they have no way of knowing if what they are using to build apps is going to change in 1.1.2 or is set in stone. One big reason the SDK couldn't be released when the phone was is that Apple obviously had plans to rework some things. If they had released an SDK early on chances are they would have had to release a new SDK with the updated frameworks which creates a bad situation in the dev community. This actually happened in the early days of OSX on the Mac. Many things changed in 10.0->10.2 even and apps had to be recompiled to work on the newer versions of the OS. Since then Apple has locked down many things in OSX to prevent as many problems as the early days but things can still break.

Until Apple allows 3rd party apps on their phone, with the soon to be released SDK, the only way to get apps on there is to hack the phone. Native apps are generally considered more desirable than web apps because they lack the limits imposed by being run within Safari. Native apps also have other system resources at their disposal, things like mutlitouch inputs beyond what safari offers. All the hackers in the world would not mean that any respectable company would ever release software on a platform without the true blessing of the platforms maker. It doesn't make sense to invest in development if you can't guarantee your software will work in the future. Any company that makes software can make it for the iPhone if they see something they want to do. Games, productivity apps, medical notes, or anything you think of could be developed. You mention flash which is tricky though. Flash is an Adobe plugin for most browsers, Apple may or may not include as part of the SDK a means for development of browser plugins. This is not to say something like Firefox couldn't be developed and a flash plugin be made for it but Flash on Safari is going to most likely come down to what Adobe and Apple wants it to be, or not to be, on the iPhone.

Sorry for my long winded plodding post, I hope I answered some of your questions though. If I wasn't clear or you have something more specific I'd be happy to answer.

Posted by: chinese_fury

Basically means 3rd party apps that you can run without have to unlock / hack / mod your iphone.

But for the others we already have plenty of 3rd party apps installed and running currently on our beloved iphones. It's one of the reasons why I will not update my firmware. I can do so many more things and customise my iphone the way I want it.
Google is your friend...

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

... I will continue to believe that a multi-billion dollar corporation with an extremely successful product had planned it from the start.

and

Quote:

Another thing about the time it will take to release this. You must understand that this is a company that just finished several huge undertakings: Intel switch, Leopard, iPhone, new iPods across the board. They have not had the resources for this until now.

We can't have it both ways.

Either they're a multi-billion dollar corporation that is capable of supposedly amazing planning, or a multi-billion dollar corporation that failed to plan enough resources to handle the entire last year. Apparently the latter.

Btw, I don't know how many resources y'all think are needed to complete an SDK. They clearly already had the majority of it done, for their own use in programming the current apps.

Funny how quickly people forget stuff. Like how much effort they wasted on Safari for Windows. That's when they should've been working on iPhone third party integration, instead of attempting to shore up the weak concept of iPhone web-based apps.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelo921

Do you think they will charge a one time fee for the apps of a recurring monthly fee?

Apple already charges iPhone users a monthly fee via the carrier, that they claimed would go towards updates and new applications... distributed for "free".

Non-Apple applications will probably cost per app, with a piece going to Apple if they keep up their usual business model.

Posted by: Mark Booth

Now that Apple has announced the forthcoming release of an SDK and 3rd-party apps on the iphone, now some of you are complaining about whether it was planned or not?

What a bunch of whinners!

As for buying apps, everyone need only look as far as games on the iPod via iTunes. There's your apps right there! I'm betting that's EXACTLY how Apple handles it with 3rd-party apps for the iPhone. But that's not to say they won't offer SOME apps for FREE. Probably ones written by Apple.

Mark

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by toomer

Yet another logic fault. Just because he didn't say it (why would he need to?) doesn't mean it didn't take place.

It's not meant to be logical. But it's historical and within his persona. If you go back and read all of Jobs' transcripts starting with the original iPhone announcement, you'll find no hint until quite recently that they ever intended to allow third party native apps. It's very clear that he really wanted it to be a closed, simple device. If I were him, I would've too.

One of the many odd things I have done in the past thirty working years (besides military espionage, starting a multimedia computer company back in the 80s, and yes, writing several SDKs) is forensic engineering. I can take apart software and tell you how many people worked on the code, and where each one did. I can also tell you how many people worked on a major project. I can tell you a lot about its planning and economics. I can determine when major decisions were made.

I could, of course, also be wrong. My opinion here is free

But for people to come up with the idea that Apple somehow always planned that they'd use a big convention to push web apps (which pissed everyone off, recall)... but not save a real SDK announcement for a similar venue... is so far fetched, it's fantastic.

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

and

We can't have it both ways.

Either they're a multi-billion dollar corporation that is capable of supposedly amazing planning, or a multi-billion dollar corporation that failed to plan enough resources to handle the entire last year. Apparently the latter.

Btw, I don't know how many resources y'all think are needed to complete an SDK. They clearly already had the majority of it done, for their own use in programming the current apps.

Wow, you impugn your self described credibly with each new post. If all it takes is multi billion dollar corporations throwing enough resources at a problem Microsoft would have released Vista 3 years ago. This from the largest and most resource rich software developer on the planet. You claim to know about development in SDK's and yet say they are easy to make? Wow, you know nothing then. An internal SDK is far far different from something that is releasable to the general dev community. You know so much about SDK's but you fail to relize that Apple was changing so much of the OS that their own internal SDK had to have been completely re-worked as well. How could they release one when they themselves couldn't even depend on things not changing, which did happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

One of the many odd things I have done in the past thirty working years (besides military espionage, starting a multimedia computer company back in the 80s, and yes, writing several SDKs) is forensic engineering. I can take apart software and tell you how many people worked on the code, and where each one did. I can also tell you how many people worked on a major project. I can tell you a lot about its planning and economics. I can determine when major decisions were made.

...

But for people to come up with the idea that Apple somehow always planned that they'd use a big convention to push web apps (which pissed everyone off, recall)... but not save a real SDK announcement for a similar venue... is so far fetched, it's fantastic.

Wow, you are really just full of yourself. I don't judge people's posts by what they claim to have as far as credentials go but instead by the argument they make. A test you fail miserably. Credentials can be made up and or exaggerated but an argument has to stand on its own merits. The fact that Apple pushed the web apps means all they had at the time to push were web apps. They weren't ready to announce their plans so they pushed the only thing they had. Business 101, sell what you have not what you might have in the future. Maybe you should stick to military espionage because you seem to really lack an understanding of software development.

Posted by: peestandingup

Oh lets not kiss Apple's *** too much here. If an SDK was such a big part of their master plan, they would have released it at the same time as the iPhone. Especially if we are led to believe that this phone was in development for years & years. Sorry, I dont buy it. OS X hasnt changed THAT much under the hood from Tiger to Leopard. Especially for a phone OS.

I've followed Apple for a long time now & sometimes they just do things to keep them on the back burner "just in case" (hello, project Marklar). I believe they had started to develop an SDK before launch, but didnt put many resources into it & wanted to play the "wait & see" game. If people would have been perfectly happy with web apps & hackers never cracked the phone for 3rd parties, I dont think they would have bothered with it. At least not now.

And then to announce an SDK more than 4 months EARLY is something Apple almost NEVER does. I think they are just stroking us all so people dont get pissed off & leave for another phone maker. All this just days after Nokia shows off their new S60 force feedback touch interface. Hmmm. If they had it planned all along, they would have told us back when the iPhone was first announced. And they sure as hell wouldnt have told all the developers at WWDC that web apps were all they were getting.

The whole iPhone thing has been a pretty big blunder, at least the way it has all been executed by Apple. Seriously, just look back whats happened in just a few months since this phones been out. Its clear they are playing it by ear. Rightfully so, its all new business to them. But still, that sucks for the early adopters because they are essentially guinea pigs.

Posted by: bootycancer

I think it's pretty dumb that the two of you are even arguing the point.

But my .02 would be that they purposely never shut down the idea of 3rd party, to feel out the customer's feedback. But I do not believe that they had it up their sleeves the entire time. The Apple programmers SHOULD have a very decent foundation of a SDK as they have been working on production for a couple of years now. My belief is that they are in fact worried about how to micro-manage the 3rd party to produce solid apps. Not like the core code is very solid from the amounts of freezes and crashes I've seen..*caugh* Safari. *caugh*

The other part of me wants to say that they are taking so long, because they need to figure out a way to do this so that they make money as well.*caugh* ringtones*caugh. Then next, they need to figure out how infringing on 3rd party profit will fly with the 3rd party developers.

I hate to sound so bias, but Apple hasn't quite turned me into the freak'ish Apple fan-boy just yet. To be honest, I haven't ever been so blown away by a phone, but yet, been so disappointed at the same time. IMO, there is alot that Apple could do themselves, before turning to 3rd party. Why they aren't doing it, blows my mind. I really wish that the complaining pushed Apple to make their decision for 3rd party, it would only make them look good, as that would mean that they are starting to listen to the consumers, in which would result in a better product.

Posted by: KDarling

I'm also a little surprised that none of the bloggers or posters caught the subtle irony in Jobs' mention of Nokia's "open" software:

Quote:

Nokia, for example, is not allowing any applications to be loaded onto some of their newest phones unless they have a digital signature that can be traced back to a known developer. While this makes such a phone less than “totally open,” we believe it is a step in the right direction.

That was a direct dig at Nokia's "We believe in open development" anti-iPhone campaign. It wasn't praise, as so many reporters commented.

As for security schemes, Apple has the huge advantage of being able to look at years of other phone policies, and to see what works and doesn't work.

The big question is still whether or not free software will be possible. If they continue their current history, they'll say no at first... and then bend to pressure six months later. Everything depends on sales, of course. Income is clearly priority number one with the iPhone.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

The big question is still whether or not free software will be possible. If they continue their current history, they'll say no at first... and then bend to pressure six months later. Everything depends on sales, of course. Income is clearly priority number one with the iPhone.

It will be interesting to see what they do with that. It's possible they will be free, it all depends on Apple's cost of distributing over iTunes. I also doubt they will take much of a cut from devs for the programs, and honestly there is no basis to say they will. If you look at music sales, about 70 cents goes directly to the label. After credit card fees, market costs, and bandwidth, Apple probably makes at most 1 or 2 cents per song, and actually is likely only breaking even on most songs. iTunes does not exist to make Apple money, it exists to sell iPods, although with the move to DRM free that may have to change.

One quick thing about the ringtones comment. Apple is not making anything on ringtones, the record companies are.

And another...Of course income is priority number one! Why else would they sell it? For the good of mankind?

Posted by: xcharliemx

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

And another...Of course income is priority number one! Why else would they sell it? For the good of mankind?

Because they care about customer satisfaction

Ok, sorry, I couldn't say that with a straight face

Posted by: Punkrox

Quote:

Originally Posted by peestandingup

Oh lets not kiss Apple's *** too much here. If an SDK was such a big part of their master plan, they would have released it at the same time as the iPhone. Especially if we are led to believe that this phone was in development for years & years. Sorry, I dont buy it. OS X hasnt changed THAT much under the hood from Tiger to Leopard. Especially for a phone OS.

I've followed Apple for a long time now & sometimes they just do things to keep them on the back burner "just in case" (hello, project Marklar). I believe they had started to develop an SDK before launch, but didnt put many resources into it & wanted to play the "wait & see" game. If people would have been perfectly happy with web apps & hackers never cracked the phone for 3rd parties, I dont think they would have bothered with it. At least not now.

And then to announce an SDK more than 4 months EARLY is something Apple almost NEVER does. I think they are just stroking us all so people dont get pissed off & leave for another phone maker. All this just days after Nokia shows off their new S60 force feedback touch interface. Hmmm. If they had it planned all along, they would have told us back when the iPhone was first announced. And they sure as hell wouldnt have told all the developers at WWDC that web apps were all they were getting.

The whole iPhone thing has been a pretty big blunder, at least the way it has all been executed by Apple. Seriously, just look back whats happened in just a few months since this phones been out. Its clear they are playing it by ear. Rightfully so, its all new business to them. But still, that sucks for the early adopters because they are essentially guinea pigs.

Early adopters are ALWAYS guinea pigs, that's partially what defines an early adopter. I read your whole rant but don't see any real point... Wouldn't you be happy that Apple is listening to the early adopters feedback unlike MANY (if not most) companies.

Posted by: JerryNY

There isn't really enough info from Apple at this point to argue anything about how distribution will be handled and how much apps will cost or even if there will be free stuff or shareware etc. There is just too much up in the air at this point. Keep in mind however that just because stuff is available for download on iTunes it doesn't necessarily mean it will all have to cost money for consumers, there are many podcasts you can download for free so the issue isn't cut and dry.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

And another...Of course income is priority number one! Why else would they sell it? For the good of mankind?

Since the topic is whether or not they'll charge for allowing and/or distributing third party software, then I assume your question is:

What's a reason for Apple to not charge a programmer/user fee for software downloads from third parties?

To get more apps and thus sell more phones, of course.

However, the argument has been made that the only quality apps for phones, are ones that cost. Okay, I know I've paid for good ones myself.

So a followup question is: are a lot of iPhone owners likely to pay for apps, as they do for music? Or will any kind of charge lead to a continuation of jailbreak attempts, partially defeating the idea of controlled installation?

Posted by: JerryNY

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

So a followup question is: are a lot of iPhone owners likely to pay for apps, as they do for music? Or will any kind of charge lead to a continuation of jailbreak attempts, partially defeating the idea of controlled installation?

I would say iPhone owners are more likely to pay for stuff than just about any other cell phone user. Remember iPhone means iTunes. They already have your credit card and have an account set up for you. Obviously price is a consideration but how many times have you come across an impulse purchase online on some site and the moment you think of buying it you just get lazy and decide you don't want to fill out the account info. iTunes doesn't have this problem, you see something you want and you say what the hell and buy it. In the end it all depends on what ends up getting made for the iPhone by real software companies. A killer app here and there and people may grow to just accept paying for apps, if there is nothing of note people won't buy anything. Another angle is that if Apple does go iTunes model with the 3rd party apps even those hackers might decide to go through Apple anyway so they can at least make some money. If they are actually making money on apps future development and improvements are more likely to happen. I can't see doing all the work they do in the hopes that some people donate to their cause.

Posted by: flyingdutchman

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

I was actually referring to your comment that with the iPhone, income is priority number one. Which is of course true of any product.

And I don't think Apple will gouge the programmers by taking a large percentage of the sale price, mainly because their track record suggests they won't.

And I don't think most iPhone owners are interested in 3rd party software, free or not. We are not talking about the same kind of crowd as WM, Blackberry, or Symbian. These are mainly people who had feature phones before such as the RAZR or Chocolate, or a SE Walkman phone, etc. They don't care for tinkering usually. Now if Apple uses iTunes, then maybe they can get people into apps because it is easy to use, but I don't think going into it most of them are that interested in apps.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by flyingdutchman

And I don't think most iPhone owners are interested in 3rd party software, free or not.

Possible.

I wonder what percentage of other smartphone owners add programs.

Posted by: KDarling

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryNY

That's a good point. Easy impulse buying is a big deal. I know I love Amazon one-click checkout, for instance

I can visulaize that there'll be limited-time demos available, perhaps even with automatic payment after a week or two if you DON'T explicitly go back and stop it.

Posted by: cowboy1964

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelo921

Do you think they will charge a one time fee for the apps of a recurring monthly fee?

No way there will be a recurring fee. Personally I don't believe Apple is going to charge anything for people to develop and distribute apps. on their own. They may sell their own apps. or put some up on iTunes for a small free though.

Posted by: cowboy1964

Quote:

Originally Posted by KDarling

I'm also a little surprised that none of the bloggers or posters caught the subtle irony in Jobs' mention of Nokia's "open" software:

That was a direct dig at Nokia's "We believe in open development" anti-iPhone campaign. It wasn't praise, as so many reporters commented.

I don't think requiring a digital signature makes a platform less "open". "Open" vs. "closed" refers to whether or not you can access functionality. Requiring a digital signature is no different than requiring a certain development environment, for example.

Will be interesting to see how truly "open" the iPhone's SDK will be.

Posted by: callmegromit

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitslap47

Crap... I was going to release a free version of a Sirius Radio application for the iPhone and Touch... but if you guys are going to insist on paying for stuff... I'll just %$*& can the project.

If you can get me Stern, alt nation, and the big 80s on my iphone, you would be my personal hero, without running parallels and orb on my imac