PDA

View Full Version : iPhone 'Hello World' Application




maknik
Jul 19, 2007, 10:30 PM
The folks over at the iPhone hacking wiki seem to be announcing a working toolchain and a "hello world" app running on the iPhone, thanks to the work of Patrick Walton aka Nightwatch. You can head over there if you have the url for more details, but so far there doesn't seem to be a screen shot or source code, though they do give some instructions.



mcdj
Jul 20, 2007, 07:31 AM
It's exciting, sort of, but it's also kinda sad. Had Apple designed the thing to run 3rd party apps to begin with, all this programming effort could have been spent on developing real apps instead of 320x480 web pages. And I, as I'm sure is true for others, won't be installing any hacks/apps until my warranty is up.

MacRumors
Jul 20, 2007, 09:10 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

iPhone hacking efforts have been ongoing, but early efforts have provided only a few practical uses (custom ringtones (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/13/how-to-add-a-custom-ringtone-on-the-iphone/)), but one big news item from the community is the first proof-of-concept "Hello World" application has been compiled and launched on the iPhone.
After many, many hours of intense work from "Nightwatch", the first independent "Hello World"* application has been compiled and launched on the iPhone. This was made possible using the "ARM/Mach-O Toolchain", Nightwatch's "special project", that he has been working on so carefully over the past few weeks. Certain parts of the toolchain (such as the assembler) are being refined and tested and these will be released as soon as possible.

No sample code or development tools are yet available, but this may pave the way to future 3rd party iPhone applications. There has been some hope/rumors that Apple may eventually launch their own official SDK, but for now, Apple is sticking to the Web 2.0 development plan and hosting iPhone Tech Talks (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/18/apple-holding-tech-talks-for-iphone-developers/) in major cities to help developers with their iPhone web-applications.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/20/iphone-hello-world-application/)

AidenShaw
Jul 20, 2007, 09:14 AM
I wonder when Apple will provide a real SDK, and open it up?

http://www.freetheiphone.org/

I liked one commentator who said that Apple's become the fifth orifice due to the policies on locking up the Iphone!

Matteh117
Jul 20, 2007, 09:15 AM
Hopefuly they get apps working fully before European launch. ;p

kingtj
Jul 20, 2007, 09:25 AM
This is great news, but it just illustrates the folly of thinking ANYONE can prevent a product from performing some of the functions inherent to the device, by employing artificial restrictions.

I see the guys over at the "doom9" forums just broke the DRM used in Windows media files *again*, and you can bet it won't be the last time it happens either.

Basically, a company like Apple has two choices. Open a computing device (which an iPhone is, at the core of it) so that anyone can program it, or put up barriers that frustrated/devoted enough individuals will keep knocking down - wasting Apple's time and energy to put up firmware updates to fix, over and over - until somebody gets tired of the "cat and mouse game".

kainjow
Jul 20, 2007, 09:26 AM
I wonder when Apple will provide a real SDK, and open it up?

WWDC 08 ;)

firsttube
Jul 20, 2007, 09:30 AM
I have a T-Mobile sim card just itching to get into a hacked iPhone. Keep the good news a-comin!

Clive At Five
Jul 20, 2007, 09:34 AM
Apple will either take the "no action" route or the "in your face" route.

The "no action" is a classic Apple move, but do you all remember when people were trying to dual-boot windows on the first Intel Macs? The week after it was cracked Apple came out with Boot Camp. "IN YOUR FACE!"

-Clive

DaveGee
Jul 20, 2007, 09:38 AM
I see the guys over at the "doom9" forums just broke the DRM used in Windows media files *again*, and you can bet it won't be the last time it happens either.

Thats CLASSIC!!! Score one for the good guys... DRM is IMnsHO the devil spawn pure and simple...

Hmm we should come up with an alternate acronym for DRM....

Hows about, Doesn't Really Matter :D

Dave

pacohaas
Jul 20, 2007, 09:41 AM
how can you score this as negative, hahahahaha

Clive At Five
Jul 20, 2007, 09:49 AM
how can you score this as negative, hahahahaha

Please.

People rated the "Apple releases iPhone" article as Negative.

-Clive

mhannis
Jul 20, 2007, 09:51 AM
Here is a link that explains how to get the complier set up...

http://getitnext.typepad.com/weblog/2007/07/attention-gee-1.html

:)

joshysquashy
Jul 20, 2007, 10:10 AM
surely apple will just disable this hack with the next update?

we need to wait until apple allows 3rd party apps otherwise it will be a constant battle.

i also read that the iphone can now be used with other networks, but this will surely be deactivated in an update too?

Wayfarer
Jul 20, 2007, 10:10 AM
I vote "negative" just so you nerds have something to bitch about.

*GASP* OMG! :eek:

Scan-DUH-lous! :rolleyes:

mozmac
Jul 20, 2007, 10:14 AM
With a kit like this, you really are saying hello to the world. If you can get compiled apps running on the iPhone, you have the Apple world's attention.

kalisphoenix
Jul 20, 2007, 10:15 AM
Hopefully this will force Apple into releasing the SDK. I suspect they'll have to have a better solution (and perhaps one honest-to-god app) before it happens, though.

michelle21
Jul 20, 2007, 10:16 AM
surely apple will just disable this hack with the next update?

we need to wait until apple allows 3rd party apps otherwise it will be a constant battle.

i also read that the iphone can now be used with other networks, but this will surely be deactivated in an update too?

Maybe not, I suspect they might take the approach they take with appletv or tivo takes.

As long as the hack doesn't allow the pirating of service (unlocking too) allow it, if it does allow for some kind of pirating of service that "fix' it with an update.

Then there IS the sony approach, of chasing your tail and releasing one fix after another (aka psp).

w00master
Jul 20, 2007, 10:16 AM
surely apple will just disable this hack with the next update?

we need to wait until apple allows 3rd party apps otherwise it will be a constant battle.

i also read that the iphone can now be used with other networks, but this will surely be deactivated in an update too?

I'm sure Apple could, but it's a losing battle for them. The hackers would probably quickly come up with another hack to either reverse or re-enable what they have set-up. Just take a look at all of the firmware updates that Sony has for the PSP, much of those updates were to stop the hacking on the PSP, but often hours later hackers come up with something to reverse/re-enable what the update did.

Personally for me, I think this news is wonderful and hopefully will prove to those naysayers that 3rd party apps can't crash an entire wireless network.

w00master

joshysquashy
Jul 20, 2007, 10:26 AM
the real question is - how easy/risky is it to add 3rd party apps?

if its a drag and drop or installer solution then it will catch on, otherwise it will be for a select few.

PubGuy
Jul 20, 2007, 10:38 AM
YEAH -- give me some way to manage my passwords on the iPhone. Right now I'm using a neat app called SplashID that is a Mac app and a matching Palm app that syncs between my Palm phone and the Mac -- no way I want a web-based app to store all my passwords. I need a native iPhone app that can sync with the Mac to keep my passwords up to date, no matter which device I'm using. Another reason to have it as a local iPhone app is that if you are inside a building with no cell phone coverage and need to look-up a password to access specific sites on your desktop computer, it sure would be handy to have that data local on your iPhone.

Maybe somebody will even come up with a ToDo app for the iPhone that syncs with the ToDo's in iCal -- what a novel idea, eh?

Or, how about an expense report app to keep track of your daily expenses while traveling (even to places without AT&T coverage).

And the list goes on and on of practical LOCAL applications that would be extremely useful on the iPhone to personalize it to a perfect PERSONAL information manager.
:rolleyes:

Dermot
Jul 20, 2007, 10:41 AM
WWDC 08 ;)

by then original iphone will be a faint memory

:(

Snowy_River
Jul 20, 2007, 10:43 AM
From everything that I've read, the iPhone has some problems with applications. If Apple can't even manage to get their own apps to function without crashes, I really wouldn't want to see how unstable third party apps would make the iPhone. That being said, this is iPhone OS X 1.0. I'm sure that Apple is working on a way to have a better protected app space, so apps can be sandboxed. Once they have that and it's been debugged, I'm sure that Apple will release an official SDK. In the interim, Apple has pointed to Web 2.0, so that they don't look like they're shutting developers out entirely. After all, we all know that Apple doesn't comment on future products... until it does.

Anyone remember what Apple had to say about dual booting Windows on the early Intel Macs, right up until they released BootCamp beta?

ImageWrangler
Jul 20, 2007, 10:53 AM
how can you score this as negative, hahahahaha

Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

All you people whining for third party apps will then be the same ones who complain when the iPhone becomes an unstable platform, blaming Apple instead of the developers who make crappy applications that make the iPhone unstable.

It's the clueless leading the clueless here sometimes I swear.

w00master
Jul 20, 2007, 10:56 AM
Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

All you people whining for third party apps will then be the same ones who complain when the iPhone becomes an unstable platform, blaming Apple instead of the developers who make crappy applications that make the iPhone unstable.

It's the clueless leading the clueless here sometimes I swear.

Funny cause the iPhone crashes with 1st party apps.

w00master

EagerDragon
Jul 20, 2007, 11:03 AM
This is irrelevant, hacking the iPhone to put applications is only a temporary measure that may add instability to the iPhone.

The press is picking this up and plastering it all over the place, I hear a lot of un-informed people saying that iPhones are not any good because they are being hacked all the time. That they do not need their information stolen and viruses running on their iPhone.

To a lot of people a hacker is a bad guy, to a lot of people a hack is a bad thing. People don't understand the difference.

Apple provided developers with a temporary answer (web 2.0) and stated that they were coming with a better solution as soon as the security concerns can be addressed.

Have a little patience, this is giving Apple a bad rap.

vga4life
Jul 20, 2007, 11:08 AM
Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

Nope. My Treo's not crash prone and I use at least 4 third-party apps every day (Handmark Scrabble, Google Maps, pssh, Chatter Email). The crappy first-party browser (Blazer) is the main thing that crashes on me. It's the third-party apps that make my Treo useful (and let me avoid the crappy built-in browser.)

All you people whining for third party apps will then be the same ones who complain when the iPhone becomes an unstable platform, blaming Apple instead of the developers who make crappy applications that make the iPhone unstable.

No, we won't. We people whining for third-party apps might be willing to buy an iPhone then. Right now, we're sensibly waiting.

It's the clueless leading the clueless here sometimes I swear.

You calling yourself a leader?

Fanboys, I swear...

joshysquashy
Jul 20, 2007, 11:22 AM
Apple provided developers with a temporary answer (web 2.0) and stated that they were coming with a better solution as soon as the security concerns can be addressed.

Have a little patience, this is giving Apple a bad rap.

Did they really say they were coming up with a better solution? i didn't hear that, I thought they said Web 2.0 was the solution.

I would like to see Apple add 3rd party support, but I don't think they have announced anything yet.

slughead
Jul 20, 2007, 11:37 AM
for now, Apple is sticking to the Web 2.0 development plan and hosting iPhone Tech Talks (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/18/apple-holding-tech-talks-for-iphone-developers/) in major cities to help developers with their iPhone web-applications.

It made me laugh so hard when the guy at macworld said "Yeah we're gonna have third party apps, they'll be web 2.0 apps!"

What a cop-out. The only reason they aren't releasing an SDK is because the first thing to come out would be AIM which would circumvent text messaging (which they make MASSIVE AMOUNTS of money on).

You can also send SMS for free online using callwave (though the recipient is charged).

I still can't believe they charge for SMS, it's literally just a handful of bytes of data. They're just ripping people off.

Anyways, if there are 3rd party apps, you can bet Apple and ATT will keep them limited to games and other non-internet stuff that would compete with their offerings.

I'm glad for Apple: congrats on getting people to pay gobs of money for something they could get for nothing or next to nothing. Hopefully they'll use that money as R&D to make something useful (*cough* leopard).

ckinyc
Jul 20, 2007, 11:57 AM
Well said!
I was going to try the ringtone hack but... it is not something I can live w/o. I rather have the expense report app and to do list etc. Now I won't mind hacking for those apps. :cool:


YEAH -- give me some way to manage my passwords on the iPhone. Right now I'm using a neat app called SplashID that is a Mac app and a matching Palm app that syncs between my Palm phone and the Mac -- no way I want a web-based app to store all my passwords. I need a native iPhone app that can sync with the Mac to keep my passwords up to date, no matter which device I'm using. Another reason to have it as a local iPhone app is that if you are inside a building with no cell phone coverage and need to look-up a password to access specific sites on your desktop computer, it sure would be handy to have that data local on your iPhone.

Maybe somebody will even come up with a ToDo app for the iPhone that syncs with the ToDo's in iCal -- what a novel idea, eh?

Or, how about an expense report app to keep track of your daily expenses while traveling (even to places without AT&T coverage).

And the list goes on and on of practical LOCAL applications that would be extremely useful on the iPhone to personalize it to a perfect PERSONAL information manager.
:rolleyes:

ClimbingTheLog
Jul 20, 2007, 12:00 PM
I wonder when Apple will provide a real SDK, and open it up?

When they figure out how to prevent Skype from working. AT&T must have this as a stipulated contract term.

As long as the hack doesn't allow the pirating of service (unlocking too) allow it, if it does allow for some kind of pirating of service that "fix' it with an update.

I'm sure AT&T would see VOIP as stealing. Write your congressmen if you want to see a fair competitive phone/network field. I'm sure Apple would embrace it.

Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

Nope, it's because the OS sucks. A decent OS has memory protection, like MacOS X so an app can't crash the OS. PalmOS doesn't. Don't know really about the RIM OS, but nothing they do is right, so I'm guessing it's similar.

The next Treo will be running Linux. You might be able to crash the Palm5 emulator, but any native apps will keep on working. That's where all of us will be going who need real 3rd party apps and/or CDMA. Apple is already in the process of acquiring Palm, so there's still hope.

whateverandever
Jul 20, 2007, 12:01 PM
Funny cause the iPhone crashes with 1st party apps.

w00master

I second that. My iPhone crashes frequently when even hanging up a phone call using the off button. My Treo crashes maybe weekly... my iPhone daily.

johnee
Jul 20, 2007, 12:05 PM
I guarantee the reason apple is pushing web apps so hard is because AT&T forced it. I'm thinking people might not buy/use web services if they had standalone apps.

am i wrong in that you wouldn't need the unlimited data package if you had standalone apps and your home wifi connection?

suppose you would be limited when you're not at home, but that alone might not prod someone into paying $40 a month (or whatever the price) for data package.

Jona7
Jul 20, 2007, 12:08 PM
JOBS LET DEVELOPERS MAKE THIRD PARTY APPS!! or widgets or whatever

MhzDoesMatter
Jul 20, 2007, 12:14 PM
Who said anything about DRM on the phone? This isn't even about DRM. Go read a book or something.

These endeavors are almost purely academic. I hope no 3rd party developer I support would try to release an app based on almost/essentially reverse-engineered developer tools. I dont like that the iPhone has no true 3rd party development. Thats why I dont have one. But anyone who uses "hacked applications" on theirs is taking quite the risk.

And yes, Apple may fight this. Not because they're some dumb company who think they can outsmart all the nerds out there. But because they may have to. Just like they had to put up some measure of protection that would atleast provide a considerable hurdle. Cause only nerds on message boards would ever figure out how to beat it and while it may hurt your feelings, the truth is, Apple doesn't really care what nerds do. You are not the target audience. And you're not really that big enough to make a difference. The minute anything reaches any mass market level, however, expect a swift reply.

Native 3rd party development on the iPhone will come.

I'll wait till it does.

dude, seriously...webapps are so freakin gay....if i were developer, i would think twice about making a gay 'webapp' ffs :mad:

What are you, six?

zorinlynx
Jul 20, 2007, 12:30 PM
I believe we'll do the same thing that we do with badly written PalmOS apps that crash the Treo:

REMOVE THE BAD APP!

Like, duhh. And if someone wants a more stable phone, they can refrain from installing 3rd party apps.

Not rocket science folks.



Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

All you people whining for third party apps will then be the same ones who complain when the iPhone becomes an unstable platform, blaming Apple instead of the developers who make crappy applications that make the iPhone unstable.

It's the clueless leading the clueless here sometimes I swear.

pacohaas
Jul 20, 2007, 12:37 PM
Please.

People rated the "Apple releases iPhone" article as Negative.

-Clive
see, but that makes sense to me. People might be hoping apple sticks to updating it's current lineup instead of stretching even thinner with a new product. I think it's more of a problem when people rate without saying why. The 3rd party app crashing argument is one to think about, and we'll see how that plays out. I do agree that if an app seems to be causing problems, you simply remove it. Once the Apple released apps become more stable, I see no reason why they shouldn't open an SDK for creating apps.

notsofatjames
Jul 20, 2007, 12:39 PM
Please.

People rated the "Apple releases iPhone" article as Negative.

-Clive

maybe becuase they didn't like the idea of apple branching into different areas other than computing and mp3 players. It not my opinion, but everyone's entitled to one.

I think 3rd party developmnt is quite important, but not as important as everyone makes out. The iPod doesnt support 3rd party applications, if you except games, and thats one of the biggest things to hit consumer electronics in the last 10years!

pixlnet
Jul 20, 2007, 01:04 PM
Enough of the iPhone SDK garbage. What kind of apps do you want to run on iPhone...that you can't do with a web app? This thing is a phone...not a computer. If you want to play dope wars....load the thing up from your bookmarks.

Opening up the thing to 3rd parties is exactly what SHOULD NOT happen. If there is demand for a certain feature, etc. Apple will include the thing.

It seems as though everyone who wants 3rd party apps want AIM or Skype. Don't blast Apple or Cingular for you wanting to blow up their business model.

BTW, if you want to text someone for free just email to SMS. All the big cellco's offer this. For example if I want to text myself reminders, I send something to 1234508615@messaging.sprintpcs.com Lookup your carriers domain and enter your phone number before it. Add that to a contact in Mail on your iPhone and you're all set.

Seriously though....this phone is successful because it's trying to do a few things and do them well. Let's not ruin a good think OK?

If it's that important to you go web app. It's really a great solution to this problem.

Roy Hobbs
Jul 20, 2007, 01:17 PM
Enough of the iPhone SDK garbage. What kind of apps do you want to run on iPhone...that you can't do with a web app? This thing is a phone...not a computer. If you want to play dope wars....load the thing up from your bookmarks.

Opening up the thing to 3rd parties is exactly what SHOULD NOT happen. If there is demand for a certain feature, etc. Apple will include the thing.

It seems as though everyone who wants 3rd party apps want AIM or Skype. Don't blast Apple or Cingular for you wanting to blow up their business model.

BTW, if you want to text someone for free just email to SMS. All the big cellco's offer this. For example if I want to text myself reminders, I send something to 1234508615@messaging.sprintpcs.com Lookup your carriers domain and enter your phone number before it. Add that to a contact in Mail on your iPhone and you're all set.

Seriously though....this phone is successful because it's trying to do a few things and do them well. Let's not ruin a good think OK?

If it's that important to you go web app. It's really a great solution to this problem.

For starters EDGE is slow, I want my apps to open and function as fast as the other apps on the iPhone. Reason 2 is that calls go to VM when using EDGE, I should not have to miss calls becuase I need to use an app.

MhzDoesMatter
Jul 20, 2007, 01:20 PM
Please don't be a hater. The world is big enough for all opinions.

:(

Sorry, but with global warming raising seas and eroding beaches and with the burgeoning human population surging out of control, I respectfully assert that the world is NOT big enough for opinions as worthless ass as "web apps are gay."



Hertz

elppa
Jul 20, 2007, 01:33 PM
I don't see much point, because when Apple release a full SDK (which they will eventually remember the first Mac didn't have a SDK to begin with) it will blow their efforts out the water.

I think it will just be a lot of wasted programming hours.

glennyboiwpg
Jul 20, 2007, 01:49 PM
dude, seriously...webapps are so freakin gay...i hate it...especially over edge..if i were developer, i would think twice about making a gay 'webapp' ffs :mad:


JOBS LET DEVELOPERS MAKE THIRD PARTY APPS!! or widgets or whatever


I don't mean to be a nag, but i'm kinda offended by your comment. "webapps are so freeking gay"...

Homophobic comments should not be torrerated anymore then negitive comments made towards african americans, jewish people, woman, etc.

I have seen people stick up for other nationalities/races before on macrumors.

Please don't put up with this either.

Lets keep macrumors friendly for all of the visitors.

pixlnet
Jul 20, 2007, 01:51 PM
I really think Apple and AT&T went with EDGE to limit bandwidth on the unlimited packages. I don't see other 3g phones having crap battery life. I think it's something Apple will definitely include in future versions...but I think it has to do more with network prices than it does battery life/size.

The problem with opening the iPhone up this this: It it designed to do a few things and do them well. Great iPod, easy to use phone, easy to use device, and full internet capabilities.

When you take something that is designed so well to work together (navigation, transitions, etc) and you throw in a bunch of junk (yea i said it...add your crap icons and the thing will look like a sanyo) then the problem you tried to solve isn't solved....and you have more problems.

So I think a great workaround for this is the Web Apps. Theyre off in the cloud...theres no installing/uninstalling/software updating so it can't break what the iPhone is trying to do. It's a great user experience they created and honestly, adding some toy app that developers want to make can only take away from that.

Tadalist is probably the best iPhone webapp I've come across. It's served much better on the web also. Like I said no need to update/uninstall/etc. Move the 3rd party apps to the edges (no pun intended).

There will no doubt be 3g added eventually. So for now your apps may have a slight lag....but it's much better than having my iPod crash or my phone stuck in a restart loop. Most people here are computer savvy...now imagine joe schmoe with these problems. I don't want to hear about them and nobody wants to deal with them. An SDK can only cause problems.

pacohaas
Jul 20, 2007, 01:53 PM
If it's that important to you go web app. It's really a great solution to this problem.I fail to see how it's "really a great solution", even for games. On my current phone, I like to play sudoku, backgammon, tetris, etc to pass the time....but wait before you say "there are web versions of those", because the times when I play them the most are when I'm on a plane in airplane mode. Correct me if I'm wrong(I hope so), but even if you have these games bookmarked, you're not going to be able to play them without internet access, which makes no sense for a single-player game. I'm sure people can come up with arguments for useful apps besides games, but that's the one that would affect my cell phone usage. If/when I get an iPhone, I don't also want to carry my ROKR along just so I can play games while outside of service areas.

As stated before, as long as the OS is coded correctly(I believe OS-X has proved this), an unstable app cannot bring down your entire system, the app itself will simply crash. So the point about causing instability is not valid, and if you encounter such an app you would simple remove it.

pixlnet
Jul 20, 2007, 02:18 PM
You have a very valid point. When I responded...I didn't really have those widget type games in mind since Apple sells them for iPod. I'd imagine they'll offer those soon for the iPhone as well.

OS X crashes differently. Sometimes Finder won't restart when it's supposed to and sometimes Flash will crash Safari to a point where the system is unresponsive so you have to hold power. Most of the time Force Quit works.

I never want to see a Force Quit option on the iPhone.

Snowy_River
Jul 20, 2007, 02:34 PM
I really think Apple and AT&T went with EDGE to limit bandwidth on the unlimited packages. I don't see other 3g phones having crap battery life. I think it's something Apple will definitely include in future versions...but I think it has to do more with network prices than it does battery life/size.

Well, according to this (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2007/07/17/iphone-3g-size-and-battery-life-analysis/) size and battery draw would seem to be major issues.

Web apps just don't cut it because there are too many places where you won't have service (and therefore no access to these apps), and there are things that you might like to do, like keeping track of finances, that you wouldn't want to be broadcasting over the net. Much safer to keep that kind of information strictly in a local app.

An SDK can only cause problems.

I'm going to echo what others have said and disagree. A well designed SDK on a well designed OS shouldn't be problematic at all.

brepublican
Jul 20, 2007, 03:01 PM
maybe becuase they didn't like the idea of apple branching into different areas other than computing and mp3 players. It not my opinion, but everyone's entitled to one.



I'm very quickly getting tired of all the iPhone news, not to mention the non-news. Maybe its because I dont have one??

*sigh* :rolleyes:

EDIT: No, seriously, I'm friggin tired of reading about the friggin iPhone :mad:

offwidafairies
Jul 20, 2007, 03:10 PM
i hate iphone rumors. who cares?

rjstanford
Jul 20, 2007, 03:11 PM
Please don't be a hater. The world is big enough for all opinions.

:(

The world? Yes. This thread? Not so much. That's why we have "Topics." Which this is off. So...

I'm looking forward to being able to write fully native loaded applications for the iPhone. Having said that, I'm more inclined to write webapps just like I'm more inclined to write them now - ease of deployment. The only problem (and it really is the only problem) right now is that they won't work on an airplane. That, and some of the fancier input controls aren't really usable (but I'm still learning how best to craft webapps for iPhone usage anyway).

w00master
Jul 20, 2007, 03:19 PM
I guarantee the reason apple is pushing web apps so hard is because AT&T forced it. I'm thinking people might not buy/use web services if they had standalone apps.

am i wrong in that you wouldn't need the unlimited data package if you had standalone apps and your home wifi connection?

suppose you would be limited when you're not at home, but that alone might not prod someone into paying $40 a month (or whatever the price) for data package.

I don't buy this at all. Why? B/c AT&T sells *many* other Smartphones, all of which allow 3rd party apps. So, I *highly* doubt it's AT&T at all. I'm believe (well, I *hope*) that Apple simply did not have an SDK ready yet.

Frankly, I'm tired of hearing the argument "3rd party apps causes phones to crash!" Well, yeah, but so do the 1st party apps (I'm looking at you iPhone). So, imho, this argument is *way* past it's prime. All apps will crash, no matter *how well they are designed.* It's the nature of the beast.

Second, the IM argument not giving money to Apple & AT&T. Why this makes sense is beyond me. Multiple phones in AT&T offer IM, and all of which can be incorporated into either a messaging plan *or* the data plan. I firmly believe it's simply b/c Apple did not have iChat for iPhone ready yet. I'm hoping that it comes soon.

w00master

inkswamp
Jul 20, 2007, 03:37 PM
This is great news, but it just illustrates the folly of thinking ANYONE can prevent a product from performing some of the functions inherent to the device, by employing artificial restrictions.

I see the guys over at the "doom9" forums just broke the DRM used in Windows media files *again*, and you can bet it won't be the last time it happens either.

Basically, a company like Apple has two choices. Open a computing device (which an iPhone is, at the core of it) so that anyone can program it, or put up barriers that frustrated/devoted enough individuals will keep knocking down - wasting Apple's time and energy to put up firmware updates to fix, over and over - until somebody gets tired of the "cat and mouse game".

It's all about hackers stickin' it to da man, huh? :rolleyes:

Remember when people kept whining about Apple not allowing Windows to run on the new Intel Macs at first and then hacker groups went all out and figured it out and people sat around carping about how evil Apple was for not doing this from the start and how it was all part of some Massive Steve Jobs Conspiracy to Control The World? That wasn't so long ago. Sound familiar at all?

Apple has pretty clearly articulated what's going on with the iPhone. Like the Windows-on-Mac scenario, I think they underestimated the level of interest and didn't make it a priority, but it's very likely on its way. Plus, in this situation, they have security and stability issues to consider so it's a little more complicated (I would imagine.)

I would suggest that instead of insinuating that Apple is intentionally keeping people locked out of the iPhone, that we all sit back and be patient. Apple just released a product that likely took a great deal of R&D time and money, and just because they didn't have have a dev kit ready on day one doesn't mean they're holding it back for some nefarious purposes.

aLoC
Jul 20, 2007, 04:21 PM
I don't think Apple should allow 3rd party local apps on the iPhone.

There's a lot you can do these days in the browser, it's not just a hypertext display any more, it's a network apps client. And network apps are fine for a lot of things. They're not great, but they're fine. The only things you really want a local app for are things with big data or big processing, and those apps really belong on a desktop computer anyway.

What they could do is provide some local web services that the web apps could use. For example a web app running on the iPhone could call http://localhost/sendSMS?ph=1234&message=Hi! to send an SMS.

pubwvj
Jul 20, 2007, 04:23 PM
The iPhone is not interesting unless Apple fully enables it. I want to be able to run my MacOS X applications and write applications just like on the Mac. The OS is there. The hardware is there. Let us at it.

Cheers

-Walter
Sugar Mountain Farm
in the mountains of Vermont
http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/
http://HollyGraphicArt.com/
http://NoNAIS.org

w00master
Jul 20, 2007, 04:42 PM
I don't think Apple should allow 3rd party local apps on the iPhone.

There's a lot you can do these days in the browser, it's not just a hypertext display any more, it's a network apps client. And network apps are fine for a lot of things. They're not great, but they're fine. The only things you really want a local app for are things with big data or big processing, and those apps really belong on a desktop computer anyway.

What they could do is provide some local web services that the web apps could use. For example a web app running on the iPhone could call http://localhost/sendSMS?ph=1234&message=Hi! to send an SMS.

So, what if you're on the plane? What if you're in a area with no wifi *or* edge access? Guess your outta luck?

And what about the "great UI" of Apple? Is it good UI design for someone to open up safari --> Go to bookmarks --> tap on webapp bookmark? That's good design?

I can understand the "no 3rd party app" argument for the iPod, but not for a "supposed" smartphone. These two things are very different animals.

w00master

mixel
Jul 20, 2007, 04:59 PM
I'm happy this is happening and hopefully it'll put some pressure on apple to open the iPhone somewhat.. Good apps don't make a system unreliable..

Strikes me the iphone is considerably beefier than most smartphones, and if they properly enabled it for gaming and some other apps it could be great.. There are already pretty impressive java-based 3D games.. The iphone could do totally amazing stuff if they let the developers in! No java support could be a *good* thing if they let game devs code for it directly, as the standard for iphone games could be bumped even further above the average phone..

The people saying theres no need for apps.. I don't get that at all. The iphone doesnt do everything everyone might want it to.. My Palm has some really good note-taking/drawing apps which would be nice on an iphone too. Likewise, my palm has a very good multi-network IM client and IRC client.. That'd be sweet over wifi on an iphone.. It goes on, there are so many apps which people would download and use on such a device.. They already download and use the equivelents for non-apple hardware, so there is demand!

joeconvert
Jul 20, 2007, 06:39 PM
Funny cause the iPhone crashes with 1st party apps.

w00master

Not for me.... Apps crash, but I have yet needed to reset the phone from an app issue. YMMV

rockosmodurnlif
Jul 20, 2007, 07:20 PM
When they figure out how to prevent Skype from working. AT&T must have this as a stipulated contract term.

I'm sure AT&T would see VOIP as stealing. Write your congressmen if you want to see a fair competitive phone/network field. I'm sure Apple would embrace it.

I guarantee the reason apple is pushing web apps so hard is because AT&T forced it.


That's why I love forums, the certainty of the conspiracy.

The next Treo will be running Linux. You might be able to crash the Palm5 emulator, but any native apps will keep on working. That's where all of us will be going who need real 3rd party apps and/or CDMA. Apple is already in the process of acquiring Palm, so there's still hope.

Where do you get your information from? The web? Bloggers? Rumor sites? Why would Apple acquire Palm? They've already entered Palm's most successful market without their help, why buy them now?

And who's the hope for? Third party apps developed for Palm OS aren't magically going to work on an iPhone. Palm's third party app friendly attitude isn't magically going to transfer over to Apple or should I say Steve.

You're never going to get third party apps. The iPod isn't open, Apple TV isn't, Apple won't even license their DRM (even though its been compromised by DVD Jon and Real), they locked down OS X to Intel hardware of their choosing and you expect the iPhone to open up?

Give up and build your web app in Safari.

candide
Jul 20, 2007, 07:27 PM
i'm guessing here, but wouldn't it totally :apple: to issue an SDK, but only allow distribution through itunes? given all iphone third party apps are properly checked for stability with the iphone manufacturer itself, the quality of user experience would remain assured. and also, apple would venture into another new market.

AidenShaw
Jul 20, 2007, 08:14 PM
Nope, it's because the OS sucks. A decent OS has memory protection, like MacOS X so an app can't crash the OS.

But, the OS must have hardware memory protection support in order to implement protected memory.

ARM processors have not had protected memory until recent versions, and even so it is an optional component!

http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/ARM_Cortex-M3.html

Don't be so quick to say the OS is crap, when it may be running on hardware that cannot support protected memory.
__________________

Also, note that preemptive multitasking is another useful feature of the OS, Palm has cooperative multitasking - and we all know how much Mac OS sucked because of that.

NicP
Jul 20, 2007, 08:30 PM
Hahhaaanothing... all you guys are clueless. The reason why Treos and Blackberrys tend to be so crash-prone, as other phones with third party apps is... wait for it, wait for it... BECAUSE OF THIRD PARTY APPS!!!

All you people whining for third party apps will then be the same ones who complain when the iPhone becomes an unstable platform, blaming Apple instead of the developers who make crappy applications that make the iPhone unstable.

It's the clueless leading the clueless here sometimes I swear.

If 3rd party applications crash on my mac, it doesnt make the whole system unstable. Given that the iPhone is running stripped down OSX, I'm sure something similar could be done.

cmoney
Jul 20, 2007, 09:43 PM
Homophobic comments should not be torrerated anymore then negitive comments made towards african americans, jewish people, woman, etc.

Oh but you can make fun of Chinese people? :)

cisco1138
Jul 20, 2007, 09:45 PM
Funny cause the iPhone crashes with 1st party apps.

w00master

Maps crashes on me a lot, Safari crashes once in a while. I even have a song in my library that takes the iPhone completly down every time...

...No the song is not called "Crash Into Me!"

-=cisco=-

cmoney
Jul 20, 2007, 09:47 PM
i'm guessing here, but wouldn't it totally :apple: to issue an SDK, but only allow distribution through itunes? given all iphone third party apps are properly checked for stability with the iphone manufacturer itself, the quality of user experience would remain assured. and also, apple would venture into another new market.

Actually I've been thinking that's the route they're gonna pursue since the whole web app "solution" was announced.

And what got me thinking this way is cause it's not a completely new market: they already sell iPod games/apps through iTunes so it's a proven infrastructure.

cmoney
Jul 20, 2007, 09:53 PM
I don't think Apple should allow 3rd party local apps on the iPhone.

There's a lot you can do these days in the browser, it's not just a hypertext display any more, it's a network apps client. And network apps are fine for a lot of things. They're not great, but they're fine. The only things you really want a local app for are things with big data or big processing, and those apps really belong on a desktop computer anyway.

They also aren't good for storing private info like password managers, don't work when there's no network support (planes, spotty AT&T coverage), or for highly animated games (no Flash support). I also hate having to login to different webapps multiple times. Like if you have to use an expense report webapp, you login there. Then another word processing web app, you log in there. etc etc. If they were native apps, you just launch them and have instant access to your personal info.

Sorry I'm not buying into the web app thing.

mickhyperion
Jul 20, 2007, 10:16 PM
What is a Hello World application?

cmoney
Jul 20, 2007, 10:25 PM
It's typically the first program written when learning a new language or new system. It's basically proof that you can get the system to do the most minimal of tasks, outputting some text to the screen.

Genghis Khan
Jul 21, 2007, 05:51 AM
please keep the iPhone rumors in the iPhone forums

too many people care too much about it all, and all i've seen here is everyone spouting one of two opinions
1)iPhone should be open to everyone to do whatever they want with it...these people praise the hackers but depise apple
2)those who beleive the above ****...we already know how you feel so stop opening more threads about it


really there are so many here who are sick of hearing the same thing over and over again

VaDor
Jul 21, 2007, 09:37 AM
surely apple will just disable this hack with the next update?

we need to wait until apple allows 3rd party apps otherwise it will be a constant battle.

i also read that the iphone can now be used with other networks, but this will surely be deactivated in an update too?

That's absolutly true I'm in Portugal and I know two people that have a Iphone working in the TMN network (portuguese network).

They didn't buy the iphone.. it was enterprise agreement for the company they work.. so technically the iphone is from the company and they are unlocked so employees can use it in this case in Portugal :D

savar
Jul 21, 2007, 11:33 AM
This is great news, but it just illustrates the folly of thinking ANYONE can prevent a product from performing some of the functions inherent to the device, by employing artificial restrictions.

I see the guys over at the "doom9" forums just broke the DRM used in Windows media files *again*, and you can bet it won't be the last time it happens either.

Basically, a company like Apple has two choices. Open a computing device (which an iPhone is, at the core of it) so that anyone can program it, or put up barriers that frustrated/devoted enough individuals will keep knocking down - wasting Apple's time and energy to put up firmware updates to fix, over and over - until somebody gets tired of the "cat and mouse game".

But at least when the platform is officially "closed", then they can disavow any rogue app which causes problems. If they encourage developers by offering a real SDK, they are taking responsibility for that public API being secure.

They can also prosecute people who are doing dangerous things with their private API.

bellicelli
Jul 21, 2007, 11:48 AM
Wouldn't a good in-between solution be for Apple to enable disk use so that web apps could be stored and accessed locally?

candide
Jul 21, 2007, 11:55 AM
Actually I've been thinking that's the route they're gonna pursue since the whole web app "solution" was announced.

And what got me thinking this way is cause it's not a completely new market: they already sell iPod games/apps through iTunes so it's a proven infrastructure.

that's what i meant: the infrastructure is there, so why not use it to center all digital sales in it? i could very well see :apple: selling ALL digital content through itunes, i.e. os x updates, as well as mac software, as well as games and anything you can use on any apple product. wouldn't be surprised if the itunes store once becomes the "apple media store"

bellicelli
Jul 21, 2007, 12:04 PM
iTunes is already becoming the Finder. With Cover Flow and Quick Look added to the Finder in Leopard, it seems to me like Apple is positioning iTunes (or at least the iTunes interface) as the new default file system interface.

cmoney
Jul 21, 2007, 06:57 PM
that's what i meant: the infrastructure is there, so why not use it to center all digital sales in it? i could very well see :apple: selling ALL digital content through itunes, i.e. os x updates, as well as mac software, as well as games and anything you can use on any apple product. wouldn't be surprised if the itunes store once becomes the "apple media store"

haha they could rename it iStore!

goosnarrggh
Jul 22, 2007, 09:14 AM
But, the OS must have hardware memory protection support in order to implement protected memory.

ARM processors have not had protected memory until recent versions, and even so it is an optional component!

That depends on your definition of "Recent". Sure, MMUs are optional on just about the entire family. But there have been variants including an MMU since at least the introduction of the ARM7 generation in 1994. That's when Linux was ported to the ARM. (The real Linux kernel, mind you, not the uCLinux branch that works without memory protection.)

Don't be so quick to say the OS is crap, when it may be running on hardware that cannot support protected memory.
__________________

Also, note that preemptive multitasking is another useful feature of the OS, Palm has cooperative multitasking - and we all know how much Mac OS sucked because of that.
And even Palm's cooperative multitasking isn't officially supported for 3rd-party developers - IIRC it has to do with the licensing terms under which Palm originally acquired its OS's kernel.

When one application is displayed on the screen, all other applications are effectively put to sleep and shut down. That counts as single-tasking in my books.

Commercial media players like RealPlayer have been granted a special licensing exception allowing them to operate in the background and continue playing music while another application is on the screen. Other programs use unofficial hacks to do it.

twoodcc
Jul 22, 2007, 12:18 PM
well you knew this would come eventually

AJsAWiz
Jul 24, 2007, 04:38 PM
What is a Hello World application?

I was thinking the same thing . . . working my way back in posts to see ;)

Fairly
Jul 31, 2007, 01:50 AM
TUAW got a good article up by Erica and Rixstep mirrored the code. Don't have the URLs right now but they're not hard to find. I'm especially impressed by how Erica got her own iPhone programmed with SSH or whatever. She built her own toolchain, got advice in IRC, and went for it. WTG! :D

Kawasaki
Aug 8, 2007, 10:10 PM
I do my homework before I use any programs. It really is very easy to find reviews if a app is any good, i.e. 3rd party apps can be just as good a 1st.