iPhone SDK Reactions and Ongoing Questions

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

The release (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/03/06/apple-releases-iphone-sdk-demos-spore-instant-messaging/) of the iPhone SDK provided a lot of answers, but has also raised a number of questions, many of which will not be answerable until the iTunes App Store launches in June 2008.

The general sentiment, however, has been quite positive with most expectations being exceeded. The addition of numerous enterprise features (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/03/06/iphone-enterprise-features-activesync-exchange-wpa2-push-services/) has removed many hurdles for corporate iPhone adoption, though it may still be an uphill battle (http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/03/07/iphone-v-blackberry-a-battle-for-hearts-and-minds-of-developers/) against RIM which many businesses have already heavily invested in both servers and training.

The significance of a native iPhone version of Epocrates (http://www.epocrates.com/) for health care professionals can not be overstated. In my experience, it alone has been significant driver in Palm sales amongst physicians, and its absence on the iPhone has been a significant hurdle for physician adoption of Apple's phone.

Developer reaction has also been generally positive. Despite lengthy debates about the 70%/30% fee structure of the iTunes App Store, public developer response has been generally accepting. A notable comment (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2008/03/07/idsoftwares-john-carmack-on-iphone-app-distribution/) by id Software's John Carmack suggests that the "iTunes distribution channel is really a more important aspect than a lot of people understand".

As expected, Apple is exerting editorial control on applications that appear on the iTunes App Store. Explicit restrictions are quite reasonable with limitations on illegal, abusive and offensive applications. Some are concerned, however, that Apple may have other restrictions that are not as clear-cut. Still, that hasn't prevented some from predicting (http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/900-iphone-sdk-apples-touch-platform-and-the-next-two-decades) that this marks the beginning of an enormous opportunity for Apple with the belief that "what Microsoft and Windows was to the desktop, Apple and Touch will be to mobile."



Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/03/07/iphone-sdk-reactions-and-ongoing-questions/)

[umairjaanu]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

[ben5959]

Well put withthat final sentence

[RollTide]

June is a long time to wait, but let's hoe they get stuff right and make the ipod touch/iphone even more usable. Any idea on how much these fees are? Are all of them monthly?

[AoWolf]

"what Microsoft and Windows was to the desktop, Apple and Touch will be to mobile."

I think so, but I wonder if AT&T will be the biggest road block.I can't wait for June. I think as time goes by we will cell the big cell companies fade with the focus being on the consumer buying data plans not hardware. Perhaps focus will shift more to the iPod touch as wifi becomes more available.

[EagerDragon]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

No, the SDK is available now, for people to become familiar with it, and start writting and testing applications.

What comes in June is the ability to move the applications to the application store to sell them there and the ability of developers being able to test with their iPhone instead of the emulator.

Not sure why people has so little patience. People need time to get used to the SDK and learn what they can do with it. After that they can create even greater apps as the SDK and its API are powerful.

[atlendor]

This is my thought too. If they add a microphone the Touch will essentially become a 'pseudo-iPhone' with something like Sype installed

[alywa]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

I imagine that they needed more time to get the SDK / App Store to really work well. The 3 month intro time will get more developers on board, and make the promise of a "Full Store" available at launch.

Patience. It is hard, but it will be worth it.

[pdjudd]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June.

He did say it. The SDK is available for download. Jobs never said or promised anything about application availability or anything related to distribution by any date before yesterday. All that was promised was an SDK. He delivered it.

[Popeye206]

People are funny here... June is NOT a long time to wait... developers have something now.. this is good. And anyone that thinks the 70/30 split for world-wide distribution through iTunes is too much has no idea of distribution models for software.... this is very fair and reasonable.

The SDK and the program Apple has put together is great... it's going to change the value proposition for the iPhone and for the iPod Touch too... this is big.

[Peace]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

How is he making developers wait until June? Do you mean he's making them wait until June to sell their apps ?


If so. That's no big deal. It just gives developers some breathing room to make their app good.

I've been playing around with the SDK a bit now and I can tell you a couple of those sample apps use some CPU time. If this translates onto the ARM I can see why Apple doesn't want the Dev apps to use background processes as it would eventually make the iPhone crash.

Now the Silverthorne chipset would be able to handle this quit nicely.

[aardwolf]

He's making developers wait until June because that's when the new iPhone will come out... Duh...

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

To me this is all positive. I can't wait to see what's in store as far as apps are concerned. With iTunes being the distribution platform it opens the doorway for smaller developers to release really good applications.

[Thataboy]

Is there NO ONE in the mainstream or internet media who can ask Apple about Lotus/Domino efforts??? I mean, if Apple says no, they say no, but can someone at least ASK?

Thank you :)

[dicklacara]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

I just posted this to roughlydrafted, but it applies here, too.

All this talk of the iPhone SDK delays... 1st: never; then: use web apps; then: in Feb; then: in June...

I am reminded of an old "IBM Salesman" joke from the days when it took months or years to deliver/install a Maimframe (pun intended) computer-- all the while the IBM salesman had to keep the, increasingly distraught, customer happy.

Here goes the 2008 version:

Have you heard the one about the girl that was married 3 times, but, is still a virgin?

The 1st time she married her high-school sweetheart, but he choked on a piece of wedding cake and died at the reception.

The 2nd time she married an octogenarian who died of a stroke while undressing for their wedding night.

The 3rd time she married Phil Schiller....

...every night, he would stand at the foot of the bed and tell her how good it was going to be when she finally got it!

[ruckus]

I'm very excited about the capabilities of the SDK and have a few ideas for some good apps. The iPhone is going to be a huge platform for development, and the iPhone in its current state is still in its infancy. Our world (concerning the iphone) is going to change so much in the next few months, its all very exciting.

[gkarris]

Still, that hasn't prevented some from predicting (http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/900-iphone-sdk-apples-touch-platform-and-the-next-two-decades) that this marks the beginning of an enormous opportunity for Apple with the belief that "what Microsoft and Windows was to the desktop, Apple and Touch will be to mobile."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oGaZIKYvo

Ballmer,
Ballmer,
Ballmer....

:p

[stompy]

They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

It's not clear what you're trying to say. You sound as if you believe the software development kit IS the iPhone 2.0 firmware update. It is not.

Yes, some developers will have access to the iPhone 2.0 update, however, developers routinely have access to pre-release software from Apple. All OS X major and point releases are available to developers prior to general release. It's part of something called a software development cycle.

[fastbite]

I really think this is going to be huge, and not just with the iPhone /Touch as we know it. Nobody is going to want the older take on ipods etc. this will be the perfect mobile gadget, for work, play and media.

[macintel4me]

Best distribution model....ever....

[yoman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I wonder if apple will require a certain amount of optimization of apps before final approval.

[sebastianlewis]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I wonder if apple will require a certain amount of optimization of apps before final approval.

Just enough to where it's not 1) a bandwidth hog or 2) a battery murderer.

Sebastian

[Kageden]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

[OS X Dude]

I'm 16 and iPhone/iPod Touch will be my first foray into software engineering, and what has seemed a lil unfair is the price of all this.

OK, so it's £50 ish pounds per year to get the dev certificate you need, then they get 30% of your proceeds. So, in a year (with programs priced at £5 and an average of 150 downloads), thats £1825 gross to you every year (£152/month). Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee (£1,775) and Apple takes 30% of the remaining figure (so that's you £532.50 out of pocket) finally leaving you with £1,242.50 take home in a year (£103.54/month).

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P

[dicklacara]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I wonder if apple will require a certain amount of optimization of apps before final approval.

Mmmm... business opportunity...

Apple, or 3rd parties could offer an optimization service.

[AlphaAnt]

I just posted this to roughlydrafted, but it applies here, too.

All this talk of the iPhone SDK delays... 1st: never; then: use web apps; then: in Feb; then: in June...

June? The SDK is out as originally promised, I downloaded it last night. It was a few days later than they originally said (late February) but my calendar says March, not June. He never said the App Store was coming out in February or March, after all. You can't even make that assumption based on any of their announcements so many months ago.

I really don't have a problem with the delay between SDK and the App Store. Do people really think that the apps are going to write themselves? Application development takes time. Sure they cranked out several applications in a few days, but these are people that have already had the SDK and know how to program in Cocoa. If I want to write even the simplest app I've got to spend several days learning the basics of Cocoa (which, incidentally, I've started already), flesh out a GUI in Illustrator so I know what I want to create, write the code, test it thoroughly. Then, if I want to sell it, I have to get the app out there faster than anyone else with the same idea, so testing might be rushed just so I can say "First". With the June release of the App store, now I have 3-3.5 months to actually test the app so I can release a quality product.

[HaGG]

Not too long to wait really :rolleyes:

[OS X Dude]

While I'm here, would Firefox ever be compiled for the iPhone, or even a Linux distro???

[sebastianlewis]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

While this wasn't mentioned at the Keynote, and it might not even be in the plans yet, I suspect Apple will allow businesses to setup an Intranet App Store for companies to post custom apps to when on the corporate WiFi network, I also suspect the same for Universities as well.

Sebastian

[Kageden]

Never mind. I answered my own question when I went to register for the beta. One option for usage is:

Enterprise (In-House) Applications

Good to know.

[scottybe]

It's a win-win-win: Apple, developers, and me. I have a Windows Mobile Cingular 8125. Do you know how hard it is to find, buy, and install a new app on this thing? I'm sure others have figured out how to do it, but as a casual user who has downloaded only 3-4 apps over the last two years, each time is an ordeal.

Exchange integration was the only thing keeping me from jumping to the iPhone. I can't wait for June!

[deathshrub]

"what Microsoft and Windows was to the desktop, Apple and Touch will be to mobile."


is that a JOKE? microsoft bastardized the entire pc industry with its substandard software.

[t^3]

The significance of a native iPhone version of Epocrates (http://www.epocrates.com/) for health care professionals can not be overstated. In my experience, it alone has been significant driver in Palm sales amongst physicians, and its absence on the iPhone has been a significant hurdle for physician adoption of Apple's phone.

No doubt about this. As a pharmacy student, I got a Palm primarily because our school provides a free subscription to a drug database similar to Epocrates, and it is one of the two main reasons that has prevented me from getting an iPhone (the other being cost). The Palm platform is a dying one, and I am eager to jump ship. I think come this June, we'll start seeing a lot of healthcare professionals carrying around iPhone's/iPod touch's.

[JoeBruin]

Upon being forced to watch the EPocrates portion of the Town Hall presentation, my wife (physician) just said "Wow. I need to get an iPhone now. I won't need my Palm anymore. When is our TMobile contract up?"

I'm so proud. :D

The quality of the product with hi-res images of pills, being able to ID pills by patients' descriptions (the guy was dead-on when he described a medication by "orange and 3-sided"), having the drug side-affect checker, and being able to consolidate another device will make this a deal breaker for the medical field.

Our Sys Admin (Apple-phobic) was having some serious inner-conflict about Exchange support, Cisco VPN support, music, video, ... Both our WinMo Treos will probably be retired about the same time (late June).

Now I'm just hoping 3G comes along with v.2.0.

Buy AAPL now since they'll definitely be hitting to 10M mark by Q4 2008.

[AlphaAnt]

I'm 16 and iPhone/iPod Touch will be my first foray into software engineering, and what has seemed a lil unfair is the price of all this.

OK, so it's £50 ish pounds per year to get the dev certificate you need, then they get 30% of your proceeds. So, in a year (with programs priced at £5 and an average of 150 downloads), thats £1825 gross to you every year (£152/month). Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee (£1,775) and Apple takes 30% of the remaining figure (so that's you £532.50 out of pocket) finally leaving you with £1,242.50 take home in a year (£103.54/month).

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P

I wold say that this is closer to the norm. There's no charge for writing apps for yourself and some friends, you just push the app through the SDK. Look at the App Store this way: If there was no App Store, how would you advertise/host/sell your app? On your own server? That'll cost a lot more than 99 dollars + 30% of sales?

With the App Store, anyone with an iPhone or iTouch can easily get access to your app. You'll likely find that sales that way will end up being a lot higher than they would if you had to do it yourself.

For large development companies, the 99 dollars becomes nominal and the 30% is no more than they would have to pay in overhead anyway.

[Virgil-TB2]

... All this talk of the iPhone SDK delays... 1st: never; then: use web apps; then: in Feb; then: in June... Just because I see this all the time, I would like someone to refer for once to the actual announcement where Jobs/Apple said that there would "never be third party development on the iPhone."

Most articles about the SDK reference this belief (that Apple had "refused" to allow third party development and now has "changed it's mind"), and thousands of comments on this forum do so as well. Speaking as someone who has followed all the announcements quite avidly however, I can't once remember Apple saying anything of the sort. A (temporary) absence of opportunity is not evidence of a refusal.

I remember people *expecting* third party development. I remember them being disappointed when it was announced that for the moment that this amounted to web apps. I also remember Jobs specifically hinting that they were looking into native development down the road at the time they announced web apps.

It's possible I just missed it but I do not remember (as everyone else seems to) any time when Apple said "we are not going to allow third party apps on the iPhone."

This has always seemed to me to be the same kind of fake drama that evolved around the iPhone rebate. Just because people draw wild inferences from Apple's statements doesn't mean that they are actually true.

[felixkunze]

Best distribution model....ever....

I agree, but there are still some major questions. I would imagine they will tie the App Store somewhat to the iTunes Store. That's all very nice - but will we see what we are seeing on the iTunes store now? There's content on the US store that we can't get in the UK and vica versa. Its not Apple's fault per se but it does make me think. The software developers generally distribute world-wide, but I'm not sure that the iTunes store infrastructure (if they base the App store on it) will be able to handle the distribution, internationally of these apps. I think the delayed launch date has a lot more to do with distribution infrastructure to create a more open distribution framework than is immediately obvious. It wouldn't be an issue if they are distributing all Apps for free, but they are gonna have to accept international payments. They can accept payments from all countries where they have iPhones, as those countries have iTunes stores. But the same can't be said for the Touch as it is undoubtedly being sold (and I'm not talking grey-markets here) in non-iTunes countries.

While this has been an issue since before the SDK announcement, Apple essentially has to have an iTunes store in a country before they can really launch the iPhone, or face a very crippled experience for consumers.

I'd like to know:
- Will apps be country-specific?
- How will payments work from countries that don't have the itunes infrastructure already in place.
- How will distribution of free apps work? Will customers in countries without an iTunes store only be able to get the free apps on their iPod Touches?

[Virgil-TB2]

... Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee.. The fifty pounds is not a hosting fee. It is the price you pay to become part of the developer network. It's also dead cheap compared to the same fees in other developer networks.

The 30% distribution/processing/hosting fee is also very fair compared to other similar situations. You are paying a minimal percentage to get access to a huge market and have Apple handle all the processing etc.

[grappler]

Wonder if it'll be possible to have a call carried over voip and wifi while I'm near a good wifi hotspot, and have it transferred to AT&T's voice network as I leave the hotspot area...

[stompy]

Just because I see this all the time, I would like someone to refer for once to the actual announcement where Jobs/Apple said that there would "never be third party development on the iPhone."

Just because people draw wild inferences from Apple's statements doesn't mean that they are actually true.

Just generally accepted as truth, and reported by "journalists" as well. If I had a buck for ever article that's claimed "Apple does 180" "Apple about face..."

BTW, your comment was very well written, thank you.

[objc]

Well it's pretty cool that one can now develop for this thing using Cocoa. And the fact that they have a simulator and remote debugging is really great. These features will make it much easier to develop "kick ass" applications for the phone.

Now if they could just make the battery replaceable and find a decent phone company*, it would be the perfect mobile device.

* Of course, I'm not sure there IS such a thing as a cell phone company that isn't evil. At least at&t works in more places, like NSA HEADQUARTERS.

[jtm235711131719]

Is there NO ONE in the mainstream or internet media who can ask Apple about Lotus/Domino efforts??? I mean, if Apple says no, they say no, but can someone at least ASK?

Thank you :)


Here is a reaction from the Lotus Notes/Domino world: disappointment (http://www.conxsys.com/blog/2008/03/06/exchange-usurps-notes-in-iphone-annoucement/).

Here are my thoughts/predictions:

1. A lot of organizations use Domino servers (like mine), but Exchange is probably more of an exclamation point for marketing purposes.

2. IBM mentioned and then hastly retracted proposed iPhone Domino server support back in January. Retracted I'm sure due to NDA reasons with Apple.

3. Domino support may be still be there by June.

One question that I have for people who know these things, can ActiveSync interface with a Domino server? What I mean is: are there now commercial enterprise solutions for this?

[Peace]

I like the fact the the SDK actually works in real time!! :)

[bmk]

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??


Yes, you are too damn inexperienced. There is no creative artist in the world, whatever their field, who gets 70 per cent of the sale price of their intellectual copyright. A writer is lucky to get 10 per cent of a book's cover price. Radiohead on average got about one pound fifty for every download of their new album, but that is still more than they would have got from the record company.

[chrisgeleven]

Too bad I have to wait to December to get my iPhone (Verizon contract ends then).

The SDK and App Store sound wonderful. I cannot wait to try this stuff out.

[pdjudd]

Wonder if it'll be possible to have a call carried over voip and wifi while I'm near a good wifi hotspot, and have it transferred to AT&T's voice network as I leave the hotspot area...
No, since VOIP apps will not be able to use a cellular connection. Your call will probably be dropped.

[offwidafairies]

there is only one front page news item that is not related to iPhone

[dicklacara]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

If there is a hole in Apple's distribution plans it is the gap between:

1) IT developing and installing on a large enterprise "network" using an Apple-supplied tool-- presumably an in-house version of the iTunes store.

2) Independent developers selling/installing through the "public" iTunes Store.

Likely, there needs to be an additional distro/install method that satisfies the needs of small, (somewhat) closed ad hoc groups, say:

-- a group of family or friends that share common interests and needs for sharing data: schedules, messaging, contacts.
-- a club
-- a sports league

Once these needs become obvious, there are several ways that Apple could accommodate them.

1) make the IT tool available
2) enhance the iTunes Client on your computer to handle this without going through the iTunes Store-- similar to how the Podcasts which are not listed in the iTunes store. These are downloaded, directly, by the iTunes Client on your computer (and synched to the iPhone).

[ruckus]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

One of the Q and A questions covered this and the response was "We're working on it"

[imwoblin]

I think so, but I wonder if AT&T will be the biggest road block.I can't wait for June. I think as time goes by we will cell the big cell companies fade with the focus being on the consumer buying data plans not hardware. Perhaps focus will shift more to the iPod touch as wifi becomes more available.

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

[akac]

Mmmm... business opportunity...

Apple, or 3rd parties could offer an optimization service.

That is why mobile developers will do a better job initially than desktop developers for iPhone apps. So for example, we are mobile developers with 8 years of experience. Maybe not 8 years of Cocoa experience, but one can learn a new API quickly. Its harder to learn a whole new way of thinking with writing software.

We are working on our press releases now for our iPhone software.

[OS X Dude]

I wold say that this is closer to the norm. There's no charge for writing apps for yourself and some friends, you just push the app through the SDK. Look at the App Store this way: If there was no App Store, how would you advertise/host/sell your app? On your own server? That'll cost a lot more than 99 dollars + 30% of sales?

With the App Store, anyone with an iPhone or iTouch can easily get access to your app. You'll likely find that sales that way will end up being a lot higher than they would if you had to do it yourself.

For large development companies, the 99 dollars becomes nominal and the 30% is no more than they would have to pay in overhead anyway.

Well, technically there is a charge for writing personal apps as you can't upload anything to any iPhone without the £50 developer thing. What I mean is I ain't a company - I'd do the odd freeware app here and there but mostly just cheap stuff. I personally don't have the money to pay Apple so maybe I should start out on OS X, or if that ain't free I will try Linux development. Then maybe ****** it and go with my trance band on a pub-tour :cool:

[i.mac]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.


Homework to you:

- revisit the comments by SJ on the SDK. Extra credit if you are able to find the website with comments on your own. (cost: -15 points)

- revisit the presentation by SJ on Thursday. Extra credit if you can do this by yourself using your own initiative. (cost: - 10 points

- finally, revisit your own comments above, and give yourself a mark. Since you are making me write this, you start from a C grade. That is, a C is the highest grade you can make (without the extra credit). (cost: -5 points)

[gwangung]

If there is a hole in Apple's distribution plans it is the gap between:

1) IT developing and installing on a large enterprise "network" using an Apple-supplied tool-- presumably an in-house version of the iTunes store.

2) Independent developers selling/installing through the "public" iTunes Store.

Likely, there needs to be an additional distro/install method that satisfies the needs of small, (somewhat) closed ad hoc groups, say:

-- a group of family or friends that share common interests and needs for sharing data: schedules, messaging, contacts.
-- a club
-- a sports league.

Yes, I can see the hole here. You don't even have to be that informal--a small business to medium sized business could use something like this, but not reach "enterprise" sizes.

What are the solutions on other platforms?

[Eduardo1971]

I was surprized at the numerous significant announcements that were mentioned yesterday. I too; was expecting less from Apple. It seems like they really want the masses to use the iPhone. It is amazing how prevalent Palm Pilots are in the medical field-not it seems like physicians will have their one "go-to" device-no more carrying around their phones and Palm Pilots seperately.

Yesterday was a very significant announcement; Apple is really taking a 'take no prisoners' approach-they aren't messing around with their iPhone. I cannot wait for iPhone (hardware) 2.0!:cool:

[ShiggyMiyamoto]

Not sure if this was posted already, but :apple: has no reason [i]not[\i] to release iChat for iPhone now that the SDK is public. Then again, they could be dev-ing it as we speak. iPhone 2.0 inclusive perhaps? If not, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

[OS X Dude]

The fifty pounds is not a hosting fee. It is the price you pay to become part of the developer network. It's also dead cheap compared to the same fees in other developer networks.

The 30% distribution/processing/hosting fee is also very fair compared to other similar situations. You are paying a minimal percentage to get access to a huge market and have Apple handle all the processing etc.

So by developer network you mean licenses, tools and the like?

I would still have preferred a 75:25 ratio though :D

[OS X Dude]

Yes, you are too damn inexperienced. There is no creative artist in the world, whatever their field, who gets 70 per cent of the sale price of their intellectual copyright. A writer is lucky to get 10 per cent of a book's cover price. Radiohead on average got about one pound fifty for every download of their new album, but that is still more than they would have got from the record company.

No wonder people go emo ;)

It's an unfair world we inhabit.....

[rustyhurly999]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

My guess is that the iPhone with 3G will be released the same day the applications and games are released via iTunes. It would make more sense for them to wait and ship the new iPhones with the current firmware installed, right?

[jbernie]

As you can't buy an iPhone without the Camera & music/video player options it will still be frowned upon in medium to large IT Depts. Though there will still be execs who get them as they use their power to demand the device. For the average employee it will more than likely be Blackberrys or Windows Mobile.

That being said, i am very interested to see what people come up with for the accelerometer function. I liked the one thing from the event yesterday where they had the clear/reset done by shaking the iPhone.

The best thing about the SDK is the more people you have thinking of ways to use the device the more functions you can come up with.

[iSee]

The SDK really exceeded my expectations. I thought Apple would put developers in more of a sandbox.

There are distribution restrictions. But it's hard to get too upset because it is a great distribution channel:

iTunes does reach *all* potential customers--right on their device--24x7.
And 70/30 is a very reasonable split. In fact, unless you do a high volume, that's a great deal.
The $99 developer program fee is nominal. I mean the Mac you are using for development probably cost at least 10 times that, right? You could maybe hire a programmer for 1 hr for that (if they liked you).

[Spades]

OS X Dude, if you're serious about selling your software, the app store is the best way to go. The charges are not much, especially for what you get. Apple takes care of all the distribution costs and you get free marketing through the store.

But...
There's no charge for writing apps for yourself and some friends, you just push the app through the SDK.
That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

[mgm]

As a physician, it was nice, and a bit surprising to see Epocrates present at the event. They have already done a iPhone specific web app for their site but it is slow, and for some reason you have to log on each time, so it's not user friendly.

But one of the first questions other physicians ask about my iPhone is wether or not this app is there, so it will be a huge help once it's a dedicated program


Now MercuryMD needs to do the same

[Sky Blue]

haha, so this is Arn saying "Stop whining in the forums, this is going to be huge"

I agree!

[ilogic]

To those who posted why June is so far off, when the SDK is available today.

The reason for the Delay is mostly testing the iPhone in the Exchange Environment and has less to do with the development process as the App Store is being tested but won't take that long since Apple has solid experience with the iTunes store.

The Exchange server functionality is critical because it needs to pass testing with enterprise size companies. I'm surprised that they will even release it in June.

Why not make it two different firmware updates? I don't know but I'm sure there is a reason for it... I respect that whatever reason that is, its a valid one. ;)

Slingbox on the iPhone!!!!! :apple:

[usarioclave]

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P

Actually, Apple's program is a pretty good deal. Distribution of any application is an unbelievable pain in the behind, and in the mobile space it's even more difficult.

Besides the marketing, payment, and distribution infrastructure that you need to build (or support or contract), you need to get with the specific carrier to figure out how to get your apps onto the phone...and they may not let you.

Apple's pricing is actually relatively reasonable.

[spazzcat]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

There is not wait developers can get the SDK today. Its just iphone users will have to wait, but this gives developers two to three months to build and test their apps.

[AlphaAnt]

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

Alright, if that's the case then that's probably something I would moan about. So far, though, that's the only part of their plan that I have any qualms with, but I can get over it considering how polished the rest of the circumstances are.

[dicklacara]

I was surprized at the numerous significant announcements that were mentioned yesterday. I too; was expecting less from Apple. It seems like they really want the masses to use the iPhone. It is amazing how prevalent Palm Pilots are in the medical field-not it seems like physicians will have their one "go-to" device-no more carrying around their phones and Palm Pilots seperately.

Yesterday was a very significant announcement; Apple is really taking a 'take no prisoners' approach-they aren't messing around with their iPhone. I cannot wait for iPhone (hardware) 2.0!:cool:

Very savvy observation...

What the iPhone has done for usefulness of a many-function mobile device

and

What the SDK has done for Developers

and

What the enterprise features have done for the IT departments

and

What the iTunes distro model does for users (and developers and IT)

means that the iPhone will soon be ubiquitous...

...everything else will be an "also-ran"

[dashiel]

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

if at&t were smart they would develop their own voip application and give it away for free, but charge users $10 a month to use it. the $10 a month would also give the user unlimited wifi access at starbucks and at&t hotspots.

at&t wins because they get another revenue stream from iPhone users and possibly iPod touch users
starbucks wins because of the increases traffic to their stores
apple wins because it will add yet another reason to buy the iphone
consumers win because $10 a month for voip and such a widespread wifi network is a great deal

at has the insider access, lead time and connections to pull off cell-to-wifi hand off as well which someone like skype would have a harder time accomplishing.

[Peace]

if at&t were smart they would develop their own voip application and give it away for free, but charge users $10 a month to use it. the $10 a month would also give the user unlimited wifi access at starbucks and at&t hotspots.

at&t wins because they get another revenue avenue stream from iPhone users and possibly iPod touch users
starbucks wins because of the increases traffic to their stores
apple wins because it will add yet another reason to buy the iphone
consumers win because $10 a month for voip and such a widespread wifi network is a great deal

at has the insider access, lead time and connections to pull off cell-to-wifi hand off as well which someone like skype would have a harder time accomplishing.

Which would you pay. $10 a month for 2 years for VOIP via WiFi or $39.99 one time for VOIP ?

AT&T won't do this when others will develop the same thing for much less.

[iSee]

If there is a hole in Apple's distribution plans it is the gap between:

1) IT developing and installing on a large enterprise "network" using an Apple-supplied tool-- presumably an in-house version of the iTunes store.

2) Independent developers selling/installing through the "public" iTunes Store.

Likely, there needs to be an additional distro/install method that satisfies the needs of small, (somewhat) closed ad hoc groups, say:

-- a group of family or friends that share common interests and needs for sharing data: schedules, messaging, contacts.
-- a club
-- a sports league

Once these needs become obvious, there are several ways that Apple could accommodate them.

1) make the IT tool available
2) enhance the iTunes Client on your computer to handle this without going through the iTunes Store-- similar to how the Podcasts which are not listed in the iTunes store. These are downloaded, directly, by the iTunes Client on your computer (and synched to the iPhone).

I think what you are talking about can be accomdated by distributing the apps for free but requiring group members to authenticate somehow (log in).
So, if I want to make a special player trading client available to my fanstasy baseball league, I'd distribute it via iTunes for free. But users would still need to log in to make trades in my league.

So the app is public, but the data is private.

It's not like too many groups are actually going to be developing their own custom apps anyway. Most would prefer to download an existing one that suits their needs (there will be no shoratge of those!).

The "enterprise" model the app and data are both private.

There does need to be some kind of local distribution method for private beta testing. As demo'ed we could see apps being loaded on to the device via the SDK tools, so there's a least one way...

[jhande]

Well I'll give you a local reaction here: I sent my boss a link to the quicktime presentation, gave him a short synopsis including "there'll be a Notes client as well. Take some time and watch it in the weekend". A couple of hours later I hear Phil Schiller in his office :D. 3 hours later still, I hear Steve's voice, but this time from our COO's office.

They *will* be assimilated :cool:

[eastcoastsurfer]

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

I doubt it. The industry is headed towards a flat rate, unlimited voice calling as it is now. Some providers offer free voice to people on the same provider, others to 10 or special numbers, others as long as your are in your local calling area. Just recently the big providers came out the $99 all you can talk plans. Voice is becoming a commodity, now we just have to wait for data to do the same.

[EagerDragon]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

Based on what I read, there is a program to allow companies to create iPhone applications that are not for general distribution. These will be internal or just for their customers.

So far I heard that it uses iTunes and that the companies are not happy about that part, but Apple is still working on that and it sounds like it will use some other method. Along the line they are building software for internal sites to host "company approved" applications. The intent is that the phone will be locked and that these apps (probably developed internally) will be pushed to all the iPhones the company has. It will be similar to what Blackberry offers for companies that want to control the applications and develop their own.

Thats what I heard but no known time frame, however they are moving fast so June/ Aug is likely. This is huge for Apple and they are working hard on that.

[psingh01]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

The SDK is OUT! People have to wait for the next firmware update because the current firmware obviously won't be able to support some of the newer features they are trying to polish off. I think non-developers are somewhat confused as to what an SDK is....

You have to understand that first the SDK comes out....only then do developers START making applications. What is the point of getting all these features out to the public now if there are no apps to use? When 2.0 comes out then there will some apps ready to go. In one year even better ones will be out.

From a developer stand point all of the news was great. IMO.

[propofol]

The significance of a native iPhone version of Epocrates (http://www.epocrates.com/) for health care professionals can not be overstated. In my experience, it alone has been significant driver in Palm sales amongst physicians, and its absence on the iPhone has been a significant hurdle for physician adoption of Apple's phone.


This is absolutely true, and epocrates on iPhone is much bigger news for the medical community than the exchange compatibility. Several years ago, epocrates was the main reason for adoption of PDAs (palm/clie) in the medical world (as opposed to patient charting or reference texts) that carries over until today. Up until now, some physicians have to resort to ebay to look for old palms/clies to keep using epocrates who don't want/need a treo/windows mobile device, and don't have a good wireless signal deep in the hospital to use iPhone web.

[DarrenG]

Can anyone tell me what the SDK allows in terms of serial port access or attached accessories such as GPS receivers?

[OS X Dude]

OK, now I'm just stumped as to what to make.

Games seem to have mass-market appeal (Monkey Ball?? OMG I WANT THAT) but needs something to stand out to not fall into the generic genres and FPSs won't suit that touchscreen >:( ho hum.

A translation program? Hmm.... that might work.

[EagerDragon]

Can anyone tell me what the SDK allows in terms of serial port access or attached accessories such as GPS receivers?

I think Steve alluded to "Made for iPod" current program. Sounds like you can via the SDK on a "Made for iPod" device. Not sure.

[spazzcat]

OK, now I'm just stumped as to what to make.

Games seem to have mass-market appeal (Monkey Ball?? OMG I WANT THAT) but needs something to stand out to not fall into the generic genres and FPSs won't suit that touchscreen >:( ho hum.

A translation program? Hmm.... that might work.

I am in the same boat...I want to build some apps, but I am not sure what the need is...maybe macrumors should have a content. Users submit ideas and the developers that build the best apps wins something??????

[dicklacara]

So by developer network you mean licenses, tools and the like?

I would still have preferred a 75:25 ratio though :D

The last time I saw a breakdown, the iTunes Store $ (for a song) went something like this:

$.03 to the credit card company (special rate for Apple)
$.02 profit to Apple
$.25 Store Costs, Servers, Bandwidth, Admin (some Apple, some 3rd Party)
$.70 Record Label

The record label pays the artist $.10 (and bitches at Apple to let them charge more than $.99)

I suspect the breakdown would be (somewhat) similar for games and other apps sold and distributed by 3rd party "software" labels

Lets just look at a few costs that you might incur if you were to sell your app on your own site:

$25 month web site development ( $500 prorated over 20 months)
$15 month web hosting
$100 month Shopping Cart ($2,000 prorated over 20 months)
$25 month download, signing & encryption software ($500 prorated over 20 months)

7% credit card costs per transaction.... if you could even get a merchant account and accept credit cards (Prolly requires maintaining a minimum $25,000 balance in an account, and $1,000 up front)

So, after several months preparation, with several thousands $ spent, out of pocket, you are now ready to sell some apps.

Oh, how will anyone find you... Simple, You advertise (invest in future sales). What's a reasonable amount to spend per month $10? $10,000?

Gee, that $99/yr and 70/30 split starts to look like a pretty good deal!

[spazzcat]

The last time I saw a breakdown, the iTunes Store $ (for a song) went something like this:

$.03 to the credit card company (special rate for Apple)
$.02 profit to Apple
$.25 Store Costs, Servers, Bandwidth, Admin (some Apple, some 3rd Party)
$.70 Record Label

The record label pays the artist $.10 (and bitches at Apple to let them charge more than $.99)

I suspect the breakdown would be (somewhat) similar for games and other apps sold and distributed by 3rd party "software" labels

Lets just look at a few costs that you might incur if you were to sell your app on your own site:

$25 month web site development ( $500 prorated over 20 months)
$15 month web hosting
$100 month Shopping Cart ($2,000 prorated over 20 months)
$25 month download & encryption software ($500 prorated over 20 months)

7% credit card costs per transaction.... if you could even get a merchant account and accept credit cards (Prolly requires maintaining a minimum $25,000 balance in an account, and $1,000 up front)

So, after several months preparation, with several thousands $ spent, out of pocket, you are now ready to sell some apps.

Oh, how will anyone find you... Simple, You advertise (invest in future sales). What's a reasonable amount to spend per month $10? $10,000?

Gee, that $99 and 70/30 split starts to look like a pretty good deal!

I think several non developers don't get why this is such a good deal for developers and Apple. The price for admission could have easily been over $1000 per developer.

[AlphaAnt]

Gee, that $99 and 70/30 split starts to look like a pretty good deal!

Especially for small-time developers. Even large developers are required to go through the same process, so the small-time developers have an equal likelihood of having their applications found as those big-business software companies. Who wouldn't want their small game coming up in the same search lists as, say, Spore or AIM?

[gwangung]

The last time I saw a breakdown, the iTunes Store $ (for a song) went something like this:

$.03 to the credit card company (special rate for Apple)
$.02 profit to Apple
$.25 Store Costs, Servers, Bandwidth, Admin (some Apple, some 3rd Party)
$.70 Record Label

The record label pays the artist $.10 (and bitches at Apple to let them charge more than $.99)

I suspect the breakdown would be (somewhat) similar for games and other apps sold and distributed by 3rd party "software" labels

Lets just look at a few costs that you might incur if you were to sell your app on your own site:

$25 month web site development ( $500 prorated over 20 months)
$15 month web hosting
$100 month Shopping Cart ($2,000 prorated over 20 months)
$25 month download, signing & encryption software ($500 prorated over 20 months)

7% credit card costs per transaction.... if you could even get a merchant account and accept credit cards (Prolly requires maintaining a minimum $25,000 balance in an account, and $1,000 up front)

So, after several months preparation, with several thousands $ spent, out of pocket, you are now ready to sell some apps.

Oh, how will anyone find you... Simple, You advertise (invest in future sales). What's a reasonable amount to spend per month $10? $10,000?

Gee, that $99 and 70/30 split starts to look like a pretty good deal!


Let's not forget your own time in trying to set this up and doing the paperwork for it...

I think you could probably find better deals for all of this (and you'll still be advertising, no matter what)--but you STILL have to find that time to do the research and take care of the paperwork. That time is valuable--don't let anyone fool you into thinking it's not. Time spent here could have been time spent coding or promoting.

[thebrain74]

My apologies if I missed this in the keynote or in this thread, but what you you just want to make an app for yourself. For example I am somewhat new to programming and obviously new to iphone/ipod touch programming and just want to try to make some apps for myself at first to see if I can and then to maybe serve a purpose. Am I going to have to shell out $99 just to use the apps I write on my own ipod, or no?

[eastcoastsurfer]

Especially for small-time developers. Even large developers are required to go through the same process, so the small-time developers have an equal likelihood of having their applications found as those big-business software companies. Who wouldn't want their small game coming up in the same search lists as, say, Spore or AIM?

I don't think anyone is complaining that the store isn't a good idea. It's the idea that you're *forced* to release through the store that people have a problem with. If the store is going to be as good as they say, then why force anyone at all? They'll naturally gravitate towards using it...since it's so great and all.

[Stella]

It seems odd that you can't install your own app on your own iPhone without paying the $99 for iTunes hosting. Is this really correct?

If so, if I developed iPhone apps, I'd be very weary about releasing a product if its not been tested on the real device.

[bytethese]

Especially for small-time developers. Even large developers are required to go through the same process, so the small-time developers have an equal likelihood of having their applications found as those big-business software companies. Who wouldn't want their small game coming up in the same search lists as, say, Spore or AIM?

Ooh ooh! *raises hand*

I'm not much of a developer AT ALL, but having just gone back to college after a huge hiatus to get my degree, some programming logic is still fresh. I'm hoping to write a few small apps to make some money on the side. Hopefully I can write something worth $5-$10. :)

[bytethese]

It seems odd that you can't install your own app on your own iPhone without paying the $99 for iTunes hosting. Is this really correct?

If so, if I developed iPhone apps, I'd be very weary about releasing a product if its not been tested on the real device.

Well, the Simulator uses the exact same API's as the real thing. If you can get it working without any significant flaws, it might be worth the $99 investment to do the "real world" test and then upload to the App Store. :)

[mdntcallr]

I hope there is a way to sell and install programs other than via itunes because apple will exercise editorial control over anything risque.

god forbid someone try to do the app. ivibe. to turn the iphone into a vibrator.

not that i want it, but it's been done. if anyone does a program not too squeeky clean.... apple will reject it.

[Stella]

Well, the Simulator uses the exact same API's as the real thing. If you can get it working without any significant flaws, it might be worth the $99 investment to do the "real world" test and then upload to the App Store. :)

Testing on a simulator isn't good enough, you need to test on the real thing device.

[bytethese]

Testing on a simulator isn't good enough, you need to test on the real thing device.

Did you watch the SDK keynote? :)

[graff156]

Pardon my ignorance (please), but what would stop someone from putting up a site and selling apps straight to consumers? Or, if someone had some amazing "un-approved" app, and wanted to give it to people for free, can you just load an app onto the iphone from your machine?

[jamesarm97]

Who here uses MythTV and is going to write a manager interface for scheduling recordings and such? I have to start studying on how to program in objective C. I can do delphi, asm, c, basic, etc. Just never got into the object orientated stuff.

From what I see in the SDK it will be a nice development environment. I would like to see a notification manager that detects motion via the accelerometer after a message has been received (like you set the phone down or it is in the cradle, then you pick it up) then notifies you of a message without you having to turn the iphone on.

- James

[diamond.g]

Which would you pay. $10 a month for 2 years for VOIP via WiFi or $39.99 one time for VOIP ?

AT&T won't do this when others will develop the same thing for much less.

Slight difference, AT&T can say that their VOIP app works over EDGE as well, where as other developers can't.

[fixyourthinking]

I had wondered if Apple was going to make some announcement about 3G ... in the mean time I discovered a way to get 3G on any iPhone + access the iTunes music store ... see my blog at fixyourthinking.com

[dicklacara]

I think several non developers don't get why this is such a good deal for developers and Apple. The price for admission could have easily been over $1000 per developer.

Especially for small-time developers. Even large developers are required to go through the same process, so the small-time developers have an equal likelihood of having their applications found as those big-business software companies. Who wouldn't want their small game coming up in the same search lists as, say, Spore or AIM?

A developer who wants to get $5 for each app can choose to sell it for $7.14 (say, $7.99). Or, if he wants to be competitive, sell for $4.99 and make $3.50 on each copy.

This is also good for the customer-- popping $5-$10 for a potentially decent app is no great risk.

I suspect that, as this evolves, we'll see "package deals", specials and other promotions.

[dicklacara]

Apple said that they will pay developers every month... that is good.

It is not clear, however, if Apple will furnish the developer the Name, email, etc. of those who purchase the app.

I, personally, would like to see this!

It is a great selling point to creators... to be able to see who is buÿing their product.

Other stores that sell 3rd party content provide this info. For example: CDBaby sells CDs and downloads of unsigned Indie artists. They pay weekly & give a list of each person who bought the song.

[maybesew]

@stella and others:

I think there is a specific reason why you need to pay the $99 to even put an application on a phone for testing purposes. If individuals were able to put "their own" applications on "their own" phones, then there would be nothing stopping them from distributing the source code of these apps and bypassing the app store all together. This would get around the limitations that Steve mentioned like porn, malicious, and "bandwidth hogs."

No one has really mentioned the appearance of "bandwidth hogs" on the limitations keynote slide. I take this to mean no torrent clients. and/or possibly streaming content, but who knows.

[Xfujinon]

Native epocrates is HUGE HUGE HUGE for me. Done deal, sign me up for an iPhone 2.0! Until then, I wait for the Verizon contract to expire.

I can't wait to see what other relevant medical apps come to fore with this SDK, I might even try to do some myself.

Is arn a physician? The article read as if he was. If so, what do you practice, arn?

[GQB]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

FALSE!!!
The SDK is available! Release of the installation mechanism for resulting apps is June.

[spazzcat]

It seems odd that you can't install your own app on your own iPhone without paying the $99 for iTunes hosting. Is this really correct?

If so, if I developed iPhone apps, I'd be very weary about releasing a product if its not been tested on the real device.

The $99 is for a cert, so you can sign your apps. iTunes will not sell any app that isn't signed.

[spazzcat]

Apple said that they will pay developers every month... that is good.

It is not clear, however, if Apple will furnish the developer the Name, email, etc. of those who purchase the app.

I, personally, would like to see this!

It is a great selling point to creators... to be able to see who is buÿing their product.

Other stores that sell 3rd party content provide this info. For example: CDBaby sells CDs and downloads of unsigned Indie artists. They pay weekly & give a list of each person who bought the song.

You could just put your name and email address in the app.

[dicklacara]

It seems odd that you can't install your own app on your own iPhone without paying the $99 for iTunes hosting. Is this really correct?

If so, if I developed iPhone apps, I'd be very weary about releasing a product if its not been tested on the real device.

I think you can (or will be able to) when 2.0 comes out.

I think when you have 2.0 on the iPhone, you select an option in XCode to compile for the device instead of for the simulator.

I think the $99 is to assign you a digital watermark so that the app can be installed through the iTunes Store.

SJ said that Apple will know who wrote each app, and if it is malicious, Apple will go tell your parents! Really, he said something like that!

[sleepingworker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oGaZIKYvo

Great video! Thanks. Ballmer completely missed the point and ultimate direction of the iphone and ipodtouch. BTW, I have actually never met anyone who owns a Zune.

[twoodcc]

i really think the SDK will be accepted, and come in June, things will get very interesting

[SteveLV702]

okay I am a little confused I read people complaining about the 70/30 split and the $99 and several people saying $99/yr um I don't recall Steve saying $99/yr nor does it say it at http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/ I believe its a one-time $99 fee NOT yearly.


Please show me where it says $99 a year....


My second issue is something Steve failed to mention now when I purchase a Application from the App Store now when I connect to iTunes on my Computer will it download a backup of my purchases or if I have to restore my phone or I have to get a warranty replacement do I have to repurchase all the applications again. I think this is something Steve Job's failed to address how do we backup our purchases or does the store remember our Apple ID and just let us redownload?

[BenRoethig]

I think so, but I wonder if AT&T will be the biggest road block.

Not much choice. When it comes to GSM, the T-Mobile is really the only game in town save some smaller regional carriers. Most of the other major carriers use CDMA networks incompatible with the iPhone.

[NDPTAL85]

I don't think anyone is complaining that the store isn't a good idea. It's the idea that you're *forced* to release through the store that people have a problem with. If the store is going to be as good as they say, then why force anyone at all? They'll naturally gravitate towards using it...since it's so great and all.

because Apple wants to make sure people get a good experience here, no the BEST experience here. You can load music onto your Computer without using iTunes, but how many people do that really who aren't geeks? Apple's all about seamless everything. Expecting the world to know how to load programs onto an iPhone on their own is anything but seamless.

[arn]

Is arn a physician? The article read as if he was. If so, what do you practice, arn?

Yes. I'm a nephrologist.

Please show me where it says $99 a year....


http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/03/06iphone.html
The Standard Program costs $99 (US) per year

[spazzcat]

okay I am a little confused I read people complaining about the 70/30 split and the $99 and several people saying $99/yr um I don't recall Steve saying $99/yr nor does it say it at http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/ I believe its a one-time $99 fee NOT yearly.


Please show me where it says $99 a year....


My second issue is something Steve failed to mention now when I purchase a Application from the App Store now when I connect to iTunes on my Computer will it download a backup of my purchases or if I have to restore my phone or I have to get a warranty replacement do I have to repurchase all the applications again. I think this is something Steve Job's failed to address how do we backup our purchases or does the store remember our Apple ID and just let us redownload?

I did read somewhere on apple's site that its $99 a year...which is still a deal.

[dantehicks42]

I'm looking at the librairies available. Is it me or they only allow you to use Address Book and not the Calendar features of the iPhone. Hence no todo integration possible. At this point, I'm not even sure there's Mail integration.

.Mac sync over the air doesn't seem possible either at this time. I have a feeling it will have lots of limitations in terms of integration. Apps will work well on their own, but not with others.

Anyone else notice ?

[iSee]

Apple said that they will pay developers every month... that is good.

It is not clear, however, if Apple will furnish the developer the Name, email, etc. of those who purchase the app.

I, personally, would like to see this!

It is a great selling point to creators... to be able to see who is buÿing their product.

Other stores that sell 3rd party content provide this info. For example: CDBaby sells CDs and downloads of unsigned Indie artists. They pay weekly & give a list of each person who bought the song.

That's a really good point. I'd hate to have to annoy customers with a stupid registration form.

[genshi]

My second issue is something Steve failed to mention now when I purchase a Application from the App Store now when I connect to iTunes on my Computer will it download a backup of my purchases or if I have to restore my phone or I have to get a warranty replacement do I have to repurchase all the applications again. I think this is something Steve Job's failed to address how do we backup our purchases or does the store remember our Apple ID and just let us redownload?

It'll work exactly the same as the iTunes WiFi Music Store on your iPhone; anything purchased from and downloaded directly to your iPhone will then be transfered to iTunes on your main computer next time that you sync.

Is this what you were asking?

[whatever]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

What are you talking about.

The SDK (which stands for Software Developer's Kit) is in the hand of developers. Granted this is six days later than expected, but the kit is there.

Apple did not promise the Firmware to run the iPhones SDK developed apps until yesterday. And Apple has gone above and beyond by providing developers a standard way of delivering their software.

Please define a "general developer".

[gmeddles]

Testing on a simulator isn't good enough, you need to test on the real thing device.

Let me start off by saying that I'm very excited about the SDK and am trying to grasp yesterday's news as it relates to me (a professional software developer planning to do after-hours development for the iPhone). In addition to some lingering technical questions about the SDK itself (bluetooth support) I'm starting to think about the distribution model with current best-practices in professional software development. The thing that a lot of people are really missing here is an understanding of a typical development lifecycle. People are crazy to think that real apps can be coded in 2 weeks. Demo-ware is another flavor of vapor-ware --those apps that we saw yesterday aren't ready for primetime. Let me do a quick and dirty rundown of a typical cycle for what really happens over the next 3 months for a typical consumer app with a lot of stuff missing to keep this short.

1. SDK is released yesterday.
2. Ideas are brainstormed and eventually Requirements are made (by either developers or analysts or whoever).
3. Developers (using the methodology of choice) do design/code/unit test iterations using the emulator.
4. Developers do real-world testing on their own iPhones.
5. Product goes through some sort of Alpha/QA phase where a lot of bugs are found by a small group of testers.
6. Product goes through beta testing by a larger group of testers.
7. Product finally is ready to ship/go GM/whatever.

Apple hasn't addressed a good portion of the typical lifecycle. How the heck are developers going to get alpha/beta testing with the current distribution model? I think this is all great, but there are still basic CS 101 methodology concerns that we don't know about yet with the distribution model. I'm not ready to quit my day job with it's mature processes to become a full-time iPhone developer just yet. (So I'll just slacking off and reading macrumors this friday afternoon instead)

[snowmoon]

Based on the comments from Apple and the $99/year signing requirement and no way to load custom software from your computer without paying Apple the iPhone will be licensing incompatible with GPLv3.

Tivoization: Some companies have created various different kinds of devices that run GPLed software, and then rigged the hardware so that they can change the software that's running, but you cannot. If a device can run arbitrary software, it's a general-purpose computer, and its owner should control what it does. When a device thwarts you from doing that, we call that tivoization.

Personally I could care less since I don't plan on ever buying the iPhone or the Touch because of cost, but this will affect porting "Free Software" to the Mobile OSX Touch platform. Developers will have to be very careful to avoid any gplv3 software.

[Cherimoya]

I had wondered if Apple was going to make some announcement about 3G ... in the mean time I discovered a way to get 3G on any iPhone + access the iTunes music store ... see my blog at fixyourthinking.com

Given you have to not only have three devices but be connected to a power outlet, it's not exactly the ideal mobile solution.

Edge isn't that bad or WiFi hotspots that rare to make it worth the bother IMO

[sleepingworker]

Yes. I'm a nephrologist.

A doctor who specializes in diagnosing and treating kidney disease.

[bithound]

interesting post on personafile products (http://www.personafile.com/products) about iPhone 2.0 final software, they are claiming it will support new hardware, a 3g iphone and a new video capable digital camera. that would be cool. they say that the 2.0 beta is free of these bits (no doubt).

[zorinlynx]

I think the $99 developer fee is not going to be a problem for most. You can fiddle around with the emulator all you want before paying, and it seems to be a good emulator.

My worry is Apple being a gatekeeper. While it's good that they will keep malware from hitting the iPhone, I am certain there will be cases where good software is denied because of this.

For instance, emulators. Someone writes an excellent SNES emulator for the iPhone, but Nintendo whines, so it gets pulled from the store. The developer now can't distribute anymore. How do we know Apple won't cave to the demands of companies claiming apps are illegal when they're not?

Also, "bandwidth hogs" is very vague. What does Apple consider a bandwidth hog? If Adium is ported to the iPhone, will being connected to seven IM services at once over EDGE constitute a bandwidth hog? How about a VNC client?

A gatekeeper is alright as long as it's a GOOD gatekeeper that doesn't cave to third party demands. I guess only time will tell how good a gatekeeper Apple will be.

[whatever]

While I'm here, would Firefox ever be compiled for the iPhone, or even a Linux distro???

Firefox yes.

But Linux, no.

I'm so tired of all of this Linux talk. Why would anyone want to take a stable device and cripple it with something that it was never intended to run. I already hear, well, Linux is opensource, blah, blah, blah. But stop and think for a second, you have already paid for the OS! It works. It's like asking if Apple will distribute Windows Mobile. Sounds like a stupid question, well so does asking if there will be a Linux distro.

Granted I openly admit that I'm not a fan of Linux, because I'm a firm believer that you get what you pay for. And I'm no UNIX newbie, I started playing around with UNIX in the 80's on a VAX and have used many versions of it on various platforms, from AIX to Solaris to good ol' SCO UNIX, to various distributions of Linux and OS X (which is by far the best OS I've ever used).

[elgruga]

It took five years for the iPod to become the unstoppable Juggernaut that it now is.
The iPhone hasn't been in existence for a year yet...

The line about training for Crackberry using companies is amusing. How much training do you need to check your email?

The blackberry is another over-rated device that works and sells on massive peer pressure within the insanely conformist business world.
RIM has tapped in to the dullness of 'business' and profited, just like micro$oft.

I do not see either dull monopoly lasting much longer.

Be happy, perhaps the iPhone will wake some of these Ballmer-types from their weird 1950's snooze-world.

[olternaut]

I'm 16 and iPhone/iPod Touch will be my first foray into software engineering, and what has seemed a lil unfair is the price of all this.

OK, so it's £50 ish pounds per year to get the dev certificate you need, then they get 30% of your proceeds. So, in a year (with programs priced at £5 and an average of 150 downloads), thats £1825 gross to you every year (£152/month). Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee (£1,775) and Apple takes 30% of the remaining figure (so that's you £532.50 out of pocket) finally leaving you with £1,242.50 take home in a year (£103.54/month).

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P

A little high?.........maybe. I thought the hosting fees was already taken cared of by Apple? In any case kid this deal by Apple is a good thing not a bad thing. And if you got the talent they actually want to give you the tools and support to succeed. Your on the ground floor of a very big opportunity so take advantage of it!

[mrod]

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.
It's worse than that Jim... It's $99 per year to be able to run your own code on your own property.

I wonder what the EU competition commission would have to say about this monopolistic practise.

P.S. I'm not even thinking of the iPhone here, more the iPod Touch which has no impact on telcos.

[eastcoastsurfer]

because Apple wants to make sure people get a good experience here, no the BEST experience here. You can load music onto your Computer without using iTunes, but how many people do that really who aren't geeks? Apple's all about seamless everything. Expecting the world to know how to load programs onto an iPhone on their own is anything but seamless.

You're making my case for me. If the world doesn't know or care how to load apps onto the iPhone outside of the app.store, then why does Apple need to force it? Let the market decide. If the store is the best place for apps to be then that's where they will be. If an app isn't in the store b/c it wasn't forced there then one has to wonder what flaw in the store is preventing the app developer from using the store?

[GQB]

Great video! Thanks. Ballmer completely missed the point and ultimate direction of the iphone and ipodtouch. BTW, I have actually never met anyone who owns a Zune.

I such a best in the wild recently. It was someone who had won it in a company raffle at the Christmas party. :)

[eastcoastsurfer]

Granted I openly admit that I'm not a fan of Linux, because I'm a firm believer that you get what you pay for. And I'm no UNIX newbie, I started playing around with UNIX in the 80's on a VAX and have used many versions of it on various platforms, from AIX to Solaris to good ol' SCO UNIX, to various distributions of Linux and OS X (which is by far the best OS I've ever used).

You are aware that the OSX kernel (among other parts) is Darwin, which is open source. It was built from Mach and BSD which were also open source and free. I never understand the Linux sucks, but OSX is great because we paid for it argument when OSX itself is built on free software.

[GQB]

Just out of curiosity, given the SDK access to the address book, what keeps an app from using someone's addressbook to send send mail without their permission?

[genshi]

Just out of curiosity, given the SDK access to the address book, what keeps an app from using someone's addressbook to send send mail without their permission?

Exactly why Apple will be screening and approving (or rejecting) these apps before allowing them to be sold through the App Store.

[PharmD]

As a pharmacy student starting rotations in June, the addition of native eppcrates is going to be so great.

[whatever]

You are aware that the OSX kernel (among other parts) is Darwin, which is open source. It was built from Mach and BSD which were also open source and free. I never understand the Linux sucks, but OSX is great because we paid for it argument when OSX itself is built on free software.

Yes, I do, however, an OS is not defined just by it's kernel or by it's GUI, but a combination of the two (and several other factors, such as ease of install, support, and upgradeability ). When taken as a whole, OS X is superior to Linux (in my opinion).

There are also many misconceptions about Open Source such as:

The contributions to the Open Source community is done mainly by non-corporate entities (you know the independent developer working nights and weekends on their free time) or Firefox. This is so far from the truth.

Open Source companies are not for profit.

Alright I'm not sure why I'm on a soap box talking about this, so I'll stop.

[GQB]

Exactly why Apple will be screening and approving (or rejecting) these apps before allowing them to be sold through the App Store.

So you're thinking that the security wall will consist purely of Apple Approval?
I'd think that it would be easy to hide malicious code in a compiled app.
Or will Apple be inspecting source code as well?

While we're at it, anyone heard how distribution of apps to multiple machines will be controlled? If I buy an app and get a new machine, how will I xfer it?

[OS X Dude]

The last time I saw a breakdown, the iTunes Store $ (for a song) went something like this:

$.03 to the credit card company (special rate for Apple)
$.02 profit to Apple
$.25 Store Costs, Servers, Bandwidth, Admin (some Apple, some 3rd Party)
$.70 Record Label

The record label pays the artist $.10 (and bitches at Apple to let them charge more than $.99)

I suspect the breakdown would be (somewhat) similar for games and other apps sold and distributed by 3rd party "software" labels

Lets just look at a few costs that you might incur if you were to sell your app on your own site:

$25 month web site development ( $500 prorated over 20 months)
$15 month web hosting
$100 month Shopping Cart ($2,000 prorated over 20 months)
$25 month download, signing & encryption software ($500 prorated over 20 months)

7% credit card costs per transaction.... if you could even get a merchant account and accept credit cards (Prolly requires maintaining a minimum $25,000 balance in an account, and $1,000 up front)

So, after several months preparation, with several thousands $ spent, out of pocket, you are now ready to sell some apps.

Oh, how will anyone find you... Simple, You advertise (invest in future sales). What's a reasonable amount to spend per month $10? $10,000?

Gee, that $99/yr and 70/30 split starts to look like a pretty good deal!

Fair points, but the fact that I'm a greedy f**ker undoes all of your logic :p

[axcess99]

So you're thinking that the security wall will consist purely of Apple Approval?
I'd think that it would be easy to hide malicious code in a compiled app.
Or will Apple be inspecting source code as well?

While we're at it, anyone heard how distribution of apps to multiple machines will be controlled? If I buy an app and get a new machine, how will I xfer it?

My uneducated guess is the same way they do music, movies, videos, games, bookmarks, contacts, cal-events, photos,... Sync them back to your mac from your ipod/iphone and they are then available to be copied to your other iphones/ipods/safari/ical/iphoto/etc...

[OS X Dude]

I am in the same boat...I want to build some apps, but I am not sure what the need is...maybe macrumors should have a content. Users submit ideas and the developers that build the best apps wins something??????

An awesome idea - I've started asking friends and doing polls on sites as to what people want from their phones, besides email and internet which the iPhone does with aplomb.

Sadly, for the majority, it seems that's it :(

I'm thinking maybe proper Bebo/MySpace programs that format the page to fill the screen and optimize the site for iPhone, but, as Facebook have proved, that's just a web-page optimization away for those companies.

Blogger app? Firefox?? <£5 says Apple censor it lol> Mercury Messenger? Sad thing is, you can't take open source apps like Firefox, compile them for iPhone and charge for them coz it's against the T&C of the software (Firefox at least) - else I'd have ££££s coming at me like fat kids to the opening of a new McDonalds.

But yeah - sound plan man.

[genshi]

So you're thinking that the security wall will consist purely of Apple Approval?
I'd think that it would be easy to hide malicious code in a compiled app.
Or will Apple be inspecting source code as well?


Fair point, I guess we'll see.

I used to work in the video game industry for many years and when the company I worked for released it's first Playstation One game, it had to go through Sony's approval before being allowed into manufacturing as did all Playstation games. And incidentally, one of my tasks as Game Test manager was purchasing the Development Playstations for the testers to work on. This included an SDK, a Blue Playstation (missing the lock-out chip so we can test burned, in-house copies of our games) and costed $3000! And I had to buy 5 of these! (I still have one.) So for me, everything about this whole iPhone SDK deal is just great!

[AlphaAnt]

Fair points, but the fact that I'm a greedy f**ker undoes all of your logic :p

Not necessarily. If the cost of doing all of that on your own ends up higher than the 30% that Apple charges, then the greediness factor says to go with iTunes. You also have to take into account the labor costs in managing all of the things that he said, which alone would probably make the iTunes charges worth it. That's time you could be spending writing other apps, for example.

[aswitcher]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5oGaZIKYvo

Ballmer,
Ballmer,
Ballmer....

:p

Yeah, its all about him.

[OS X Dude]

A little high?.........maybe. I thought the hosting fees was already taken cared of by Apple? In any case kid this deal by Apple is a good thing not a bad thing. And if you got the talent they actually want to give you the tools and support to succeed. Your on the ground floor of a very big opportunity so take advantage of it!

Yeah I since found out that the £50 is the money you pay annually to develop for the OS, presumably for licenses, tools etc.

I only thought it was a little high because I've never done this before and I have no past tariffs from companies to compare it to - I'm coming to this blind essentially.

Now, after knowing that they process it, market it to millions 24/7 and sort out the headaches, it seems a fair deal.

I've been into Apple since I was 8, and I remember thinking "wow, one day I would like to be able to make a program and see it be successful" (or 8 year old's words to that effect :p) - and now I am finally doing what I've wanted, and I'm really excited - just need to get experience on the costs this work incurs and host reliability etc, all of which will come in time.

I intend to program for iPhone, iTouch, Mac and probably Windows and maybe Linux in the future..... just see how I go with this first lol.

[pflau]

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

That would suck. That would be the one thing in this whole thing that I don't like.

But you can look at it this way: those who pay the yearly $99 fee can have any app loaded on to their iPhone. Any app, unlimited number of apps, provided they can get a hold of the source code.

Think of the possibilities.

[Rocketman]

As I have been saying since day 1 of the pre-release, the iPhone is a computer in the palmtop with broadband. It also is becoming the ultimate thin client for client-server computing if you consider desktop application performance from 3 years ago "thin".

Some would properly call that THICK client-server computing.

That fact it is already standards based with BSD unix, and Safari web, and much of the desktop mac experience, is good. The fact it is about to obtain full client-server parity with any terminal, desktop, or vertical application out there, is more that that. It is amazing.

With all due respect, gents, we have arrived at the beginning edge of end-user computing nirvana.

All applications everywhere.

Rocketman

Carmack was an early adopter NeXT user as well as an early adopter (successful) Mac programmer. The fact he is a rocket geek doesn't hurt one little bit.

[arkmannj]

I'm really excited for June!!

I just watched the video, and wow I didn't know the spore guys, AIM, etc. all built what they had to present in about 2 weeks !! that's pretty amazing.
I wonder since they will have more time, it it would be possible for the AIM team to build in Audio chat (tleast when hooked up to wifi) that, would be awesome.

[pflau]

I'm really excited for June!!

I just watched the video, and wow I didn't know the spore guys, AIM, etc. all built what they had to present in about 2 weeks !! that's pretty amazing.
I wonder since they will have more time, it it would be possible for the AIM team to build in Audio chat (tleast when hooked up to wifi) that, would be awesome.

But that would be Skype. They probably don't want to alienate the iPod Touch users who have no speakers on their device.

[dangleheart]

OS X Dude, if you're serious about selling your software, the app store is the best way to go. The charges are not much, especially for what you get. Apple takes care of all the distribution costs and you get free marketing through the store.

But...

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

For me, more than the $99, what if my app bundles with it some data, like a catalog of music that a bunch of our friends/social network has. And I want to write an app that works off of that data and share it with my friends. This app is completely useless to the rest of the world. It is those kind of opportunities that will get missed with the currently proposed way of distributing the apps. I think what Apple is offereing to paid and free app hosting and distribution is great but that should not be the only way to get an app on to the iPhone.

I bet you this. Someone is going to write a very thin layer app that exposes an equivalent API. Once you load that app, you can write an app you want and directly download it to the iPhone. I do not think that is inconceivable. It is too bad people will have to resort to such a thing since it will involve sacrificing efficiency and the elegance of the iPhone API.

[snowmoon]

As I have been saying since day 1 of the pre-release, the iPhone is a computer in the palmtop with broadband.

As long as it's locked in to both a carrier and a store it is not a computer, but an Apple revenue generating device. Now some people may decide that this is worth the cost, but I would never mistake it for a computer.

Short of greed their was no reason to lock it from installing 3rd party apps from their computer without a signature. It would be like iTunes not allowing you to rip your own CD's to load on the iPod.

[joemama]

Best distribution model....ever....

Just imagine this same concept for an iTunes record label. Artists could create their own music, sell it directly on iTunes and make a 70% profit.

Much better than the current 1-5% artists get from record labels.

Hmmm.....

[spazzcat]

As long as it's locked in to both a carrier and a store it is not a computer, but an Apple revenue generating device. Now some people may decide that this is worth the cost, but I would never mistake it for a computer.

Short of greed their was no reason to lock it from installing 3rd party apps from their computer without a signature. It would be like iTunes not allowing you to rip your own CD's to load on the iPod.

There is 100% a reason to require a signature on the apps... security I think people forget these are phones...a cell network. This is nothing like taking a CD you bought from a store and ripping it. There are bad people out there and yes they ruin it for everyone.

[arkmannj]

But that would be Skype. They probably don't want to alienate the iPod Touch users who have no speakers on their device.

True, the difference with Skype/AIM though is that most of my no tech savy friends and family already have AIM accounts and the chances of my ever getting my parents and others to use or understand Skype is slim. But they do already have iChat/AIM load-up when their computers start and now know how to accept an audio chat invitation. (after several years of teaching LOL)

[sleepingworker]

As long as it's locked in to both a carrier and a store it is not a computer, but an Apple revenue generating device. Now some people may decide that this is worth the cost, but I would never mistake it for a computer.

Short of greed their was no reason to lock it from installing 3rd party apps from their computer without a signature. It would be like iTunes not allowing you to rip your own CD's to load on the iPod.

Um, it's still a computer with an OS. It's just happens to be a tightly controlled proprietary computer which generates revenue for Apple - which is a good thing don't you think?!

[snowmoon]

There is 100% a reason to require a signature on the apps... security I think people forget these are phones...a cell network. This is nothing like taking a CD you bought from a store and ripping it. There are bad people out there and yes they ruin it for everyone.

Short of BREW, what other phones that run general apps are locked down where you can't load unsigned apps? This security angle is a red-herring designed to hide the true motives which are either driven by contracts with AT&T or greed in squeezing their iphone/touch customers who are the latest cash cow for apple.

People should be allowed to choose between signed apps in the iTunes store ( what most people will do ), and loading unsigned applications directly off their computer ( what SOME tinkerers will do ).

[ENasty]

Especially for small-time developers. Even large developers are required to go through the same process, so the small-time developers have an equal likelihood of having their applications found as those big-business software companies. Who wouldn't want their small game coming up in the same search lists as, say, Spore or AIM?

I don't think anyone is complaining that the store isn't a good idea. It's the idea that you're *forced* to release through the store that people have a problem with. If the store is going to be as good as they say, then why force anyone at all? They'll naturally gravitate towards using it...since it's so great and all.

Actually, I've been thinking that, from the perspective of the small-time developer, it is beneficial (with some caveats) for the App Store to be the Exclusive App-Loading method for the iP/iPT.

Think about it. On the internet, while there are thousands and thousands of download sites for you to visit (some legal, some not so), there is no one site that every user must visit (and due to language barriers, you could argue that there is no one site that every user can visit).

However, with this method being exclusive, Every.Single.iP/iPT.User must come here to get an app, which means that everyone will have access to your app. I mean, really, you can't buy that type of exposure (well, I guess you can... it'll cost you 70/30 :rolleyes:). Think about it people, you can make an app that reaches 10% of the soon to be 10 million world-wide users (which will explode even further when Apple penetrates the Asian market) and sell your app for $.25, you'd earn $175K. If you extrapolate those numbers out a bit, you will see that very times in history have so many people had such a clear opportunity to literally become millionaires. (McDonald's stock in the 60's, drug dealer in the 70s, computer stock in the 80s, dot com boom and real estate in the 90s, and now the ability to release your app to millions of app starved individuals who have already been conditioned by iTunes to throw aways $.99 at a time like it's a drop in the bucket).


The are only possible (realistic) problems you can have are two things:
1 - How slow will this gatekeeping process be? Well, you can't gripe about this one until sometime after the SDK is released and we get real world times and complaints to look at.

2 - How restrictive will this gatekeeping task be (NES emulators, porn for those of us addicted, etc.)? This is almost moot, because sooner or later, the hackers will find a way for the power user elite to bypass the exclusivity of the app store (most certainly, probably).


Sorry to be so long winded, but I haven't yet seen anyone argue in favor of the exclusivity of the App Store.

[gwangung]

Short of BREW, what other phones that run general apps are locked down where you can't load unsigned apps? This security angle is a red-herring designed to hide the true motives which are either driven by contracts with AT&T or greed in squeezing their iphone/touch customers who are the latest cash cow for apple.

This might be true if a) Apple were not similarly tight fisted about their other products, b) if Apple's terms were significantly higher than all other platforms and c) if Apple didn't deliver substantial advantages for that exclusivity (and frankly, there are some decent arguments to be made for that).

[Nick.]

I know millions have probably already said this but why is it all us iPod Touch users get blagged off with paying for all the decent updates, especially in the UK, we had to pay $26 for that stupid update, and I bought it, for £12.99 I expect to get every future update free. I paid £270 for my device like almost every other iPhone owner, why should I have to pay for updates. :@

[GQB]

That would suck. That would be the one thing in this whole thing that I don't like.

But you can look at it this way: those who pay the yearly $99 fee can have any app loaded on to their iPhone. Any app, unlimited number of apps, provided they can get a hold of the source code.

Think of the possibilities.

Well if the installer.app folks are as truly into free software as they claim, then they should have no problems releasing their source code precisely for this purpose. Actually not being sarcastic here (ok, maybe I started out that way.)
$99 for all the porn apps you want? (I seriously doubt you need to renew yearly if all you want to do is compile code to your own iPhone. Doubt that the Dev kit blows up after a year.)
Might be a model here.

[GQB]

As I have been saying since day 1 of the pre-release, the iPhone is a computer in the palmtop with broadband. It also is becoming the ultimate thin client for client-server computing if you consider desktop application performance from 3 years ago "thin".

Some would properly call that THICK client-server computing.

That fact it is already standards based with BSD unix, and Safari web, and much of the desktop mac experience, is good. The fact it is about to obtain full client-server parity with any terminal, desktop, or vertical application out there, is more that that. It is amazing.

With all due respect, gents, we have arrived at the beginning edge of end-user computing nirvana.

All applications everywhere.

Rocketman

Carmack was an early adopter NeXT user as well as an early adopter (successful) Mac programmer. The fact he is a rocket geek doesn't hurt one little bit.

I'm telling ya'...
Come up with a keyboard with a dock connector that you can snap your iPhone/touch into, throw a little brains and memory into the keyboard, DVI (for a full monitor) and USB, and you have enough processing power for 99% of most users' needs.

[snowmoon]

This might be true if a) Apple were not similarly tight fisted about their other products, b) if Apple's terms were significantly higher than all other platforms and c) if Apple didn't deliver substantial advantages for that exclusivity (and frankly, there are some decent arguments to be made for that).

A) Last I checked I could load whatever I wanted on my laptop, no signature required. I can load music from other online stores like Amazon MP3 and eMusic onto my iPod. Would you like them to prohibit that as well?

C) Yes, they do, but you missed the whole point. They don't need to force exclusivity for developers to choose the iTMS for delivery.

[GQB]

But that would be Skype. They probably don't want to alienate the iPod Touch users who have no speakers on their device.

Snap Ons!!!
Little external with docking connector, good DSP and stereo mic, battery and speakers if desired.
iPhone/touch as core of expandable digital swiss army knife.

[arkmannj]

I know millions have probably already said this but why is it all us iPod Touch users get blagged off with paying for all the decent updates, especially in the UK, we had to pay $26 for that stupid update, and I bought it, for £12.99 I expect to get every future update free. I paid £270 for my device like almost every other iPhone owner, why should I have to pay for updates. :@

I'm not saying this is the right way of doing things or not, but I'm sure it has to do with the fact that iPhone users not only payed for the phone, but are basiaclly (indirectly) paying a monthly revenue stream to Apple.

It's kinda like iPhone users are paying a subscription, while iPodT. users bought an as-is package.

this isn't that new of a business model. For example you can buy business objects enterprise, and crystal reports, as individual products. Or you can buy the products and you can pay for annual technical support, the technical support while being a separate plan typically includes software upgrades to future versions, where as those that buy the stand alone product pay separately for the new features.

The reality is that both users had to pay for the updates, just one paid directly, while the other paid indirectly.

I think the big question is, was the iPodT. worth what you paid for it at the time you paid for it. If so, and I'm assuming iPodT. users thought or they would 't have purchased it in the first place.

[dvs]

Will there be any way to transfer data (other than what already syncs with iTunes) between an iPhone and a computer? For instance, could a "Notes" app allow syncing text notes with a computer? Or what if I just want to load a bunch of html pages onto my iPhone for viewing offline in Safari, for speed and/or viewing when out of EDGE range?

And what about cut/copy/paste?

[GQB]

Short of BREW, what other phones that run general apps are locked down where you can't load unsigned apps? This security angle is a red-herring designed to hide the true motives which are either driven by contracts with AT&T or greed in squeezing their iphone/touch customers who are the latest cash cow for apple.

People should be allowed to choose between signed apps in the iTunes store ( what most people will do ), and loading unsigned applications directly off their computer ( what SOME tinkerers will do ).

The difference is that (ironically) we're looking at the flip side of the 'big target' argument that Windows loyalists make against Mac safety.
There is little target for mischief in the type of phones you're referring to. Just too little saturation in the overall picture.
iPhone is generally being credited (even by critics) as a game changer for the platform and the industry.
As such IT now becomes the big target, and I (for one) applaud Apple for locking this thing down until we understand the threats better.
Its easier to loosen things up (e.g. the SDK) than it is to get the toothpaste back into the tube.

[darkblu]

It's worse than that Jim... It's $99 per year to be able to run your own code on your own property.

no. jailbreak it and run away all the code you want at no cost. when you bought the device nobody promissed you free legit development for it.


I wonder what the EU competition commission would have to say about this monopolistic practise.

the same the EU commission is saying about the game consoles for which you cannot run your own code unless you pay the heafty fees for licensed development: nothing.


P.S. I'm not even thinking of the iPhone here, more the iPod Touch which has no impact on telcos.

there's not difference between the two devices development-rules-wise.

[chillywilly]

It seems odd that you can't install your own app on your own iPhone without paying the $99 for iTunes hosting. Is this really correct?

If so, if I developed iPhone apps, I'd be very weary about releasing a product if its not been tested on the real device.

Not sure if someone has already answered this, but this is my concern. I signed up yesterday and downloaded the SDK. Haven't paid the $99 yet (obviously), but would like to know if I have to upload my unfinished app online in some sort of forced beta or if I can load it onto the phone and test it. Granted, the 2.0 update is not out yet and all testing until it's out will be done on the emulator, but when it's out, it would be nice to have some way of testing it on a real iPhone/touch before it's ready for release.

[rstone3]

The significance of a native iPhone version of Epocrates for health care professionals can not be overstated. In my experience, it alone has been significant driver in Palm sales amongst physicians, and its absence on the iPhone has been a significant hurdle for physician adoption of Apple's phone.

This is right on. I am a doctor and the only thing keeping me from buying an iPhone is the lack of Epocrates. I will buy one the day after that program is released (hopefully also 3G) and say good bye forever to my Palm, Verizon cell phone, and pager in favor of one device.:):)

[gwangung]

A) Last I checked I could load whatever I wanted on my laptop, no signature required. I can load music from other online stores like Amazon MP3 and eMusic onto my iPod. Would you like them to prohibit that as well?

C) Yes, they do, but you missed the whole point. They don't need to force exclusivity for developers to choose the iTMS for delivery.

Your A) is a non sequitor. Your C) misses actually misses MY point. Though I sympathiize with the urge for direct control, I am less than convinced that it's worth fighting for. In many ways, you are being compensated by Apple for giving up control over distribution.

[spazzcat]

A) Last I checked I could load whatever I wanted on my laptop, no signature required. I can load music from other online stores like Amazon MP3 and eMusic onto my iPod. Would you like them to prohibit that as well?

C) Yes, they do, but you missed the whole point. They don't need to force exclusivity for developers to choose the iTMS for delivery.

They don't own the ATT network. And I can see in the near future all smart phone apps requiring to be signed...its just a matter on time.

[Nick.]

Is there a mirror anywhere or a direct download link to the SDK, I'm dying to start developing some apps on it, but all I get is "We are processing your request, please try again." Even when I try to login now.

Please could someone post the direct link or a mirror? Thanks.

[spazzcat]

Not sure if someone has already answered this, but this is my concern. I signed up yesterday and downloaded the SDK. Haven't paid the $99 yet (obviously), but would like to know if I have to upload my unfinished app online in some sort of forced beta or if I can load it onto the phone and test it. Granted, the 2.0 update is not out yet and all testing until it's out will be done on the emulator, but when it's out, it would be nice to have some way of testing it on a real iPhone/touch before it's ready for release.

I believe once you pay your $99 you will be install and test your apps on your phone...but this up in the a little until people start getting their certs and beta testing 2.0. I can't see anyone not testing apps on the real thing before releasing them into the wild

[GQB]

I believe once you pay your $99 you will be install and test your apps on your phone...but this up in the a little until people start getting their certs and beta testing 2.0. I can't see anyone not testing apps on the real thing before releasing them into the wild

$99 gets you certificate (for accountability) and the ability to test on a physical device. You won't be able to submit to Apple for approval/sale without the certificate.

[chillywilly]

Thanks for the reply, spazz. I hope as June gets closer, that they will clear this up.

[snowmoon]

Nevermind... the RDF is far too strong in here

[gwangung]

Nevermind... the RDF is far too strong in here

Your faith is weak, my son. There is no try...do or do not.

[dicklacara]

Just imagine this same concept for an iTunes record label. Artists could create their own music, sell it directly on iTunes and make a 70% profit.

Much better than the current 1-5% artists get from record labels.

Hmmm.....

The App store Boutique within the iTunes Store is a way for Indie Developers to monetize their creation/content. It has relatively few restrictions, low entry cost and relatively high profit (to the Indie Developer) when compared to other methods of promoting/publishing/distributing their work.

I suspect that it would quite easy for Apple to offer similar Boutiques for writers, composers and other performers.

Maybe this is the future of how creative people will get their stuff "out there" & make a fair return....


Of course it would really piss off the record labels, but they are a dying breed!

The iTunes Store is at (or soon will attain) critical mass-- so it doesn't matter what the labels want!

[typecase]

I'm very excited about the native ePocrates. It's the only reason I still tote around my Palm, and the main reason I bought it. I can't wait tiil I can run this natively. :D

[yoyoman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

I doubt it. The industry is headed towards a flat rate, unlimited voice calling as it is now. Some providers offer free voice to people on the same provider, others to 10 or special numbers, others as long as your are in your local calling area. Just recently the big providers came out the $99 all you can talk plans. Voice is becoming a commodity, now we just have to wait for data to do the same.

it is. 20 bucks, all you can eat.

[rstone3]

I'm very excited about the native ePocrates. It's the only reason I still tote around my Palm, and the main reason I bought it. I can't wait tiil I can run this natively. :D

My thoughts exactly! I'm using an old Tungsten T3 and 90% of the use for it is for ePocrates. Per their site you can use the online version of it in the meantime, but I'm biding my time for the G3 iPhone and native application.

[alexexexex]

I'm 16 and iPhone/iPod Touch will be my first foray into software engineering, and what has seemed a lil unfair is the price of all this.

OK, so it's £50 ish pounds per year to get the dev certificate you need, then they get 30% of your proceeds. So, in a year (with programs priced at £5 and an average of 150 downloads), thats £1825 gross to you every year (£152/month). Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee (£1,775) and Apple takes 30% of the remaining figure (so that's you £532.50 out of pocket) finally leaving you with £1,242.50 take home in a year (£103.54/month).

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P


If you sell 150 apps a month that's 1800 apps a year at £5 each meaning apple takes £9000 off customers for your app. they keep 30% of this (£2700) and give you £6300 out of which you pay £50 leaving you £6250 (£520/month)

that in itself is not bad but to aim for only 150 downloads a month is very low. lets say by the end of 09 there are 25 million iphone/ipod touch users, if your app is decent then maybe 1%, hell let's say 0.5% of them get it that's 125,000 sales lets even call it $5 (£2.50) per app then you're looking at £218,750 NET.

clearly the incentives and potential for developers of all sizes is huge


Edit: ok you said 150 apps a year
so 150x£5=750 750-30%=£525 £525-£50=£475
but surely even a really crap app would get more than 150 downloads a year! 25 Millions users and only 150 people buy it? the hello world app would sell that many!

[samab]

If you sell 150 apps a month that's 1800 apps a year at £5 each meaning apple takes £9000 off customers for your app. they keep 30% of this (£2700) and give you £6300 out of which you pay £50 leaving you £6250 (£520/month)

that in itself is not bad but to aim for only 150 downloads a month is very low. lets say by the end of 09 there are 25 million iphone/ipod touch users, if your app is decent then maybe 1%, hell let's say 0.5% of them get it that's 125,000 sales lets even call it $5 (£2.50) per app then you're looking at £218,750 NET.

clearly the incentives and potential for developers of all sizes is huge

The problem is that developers on other mobile phone platforms get a larger revenue share. Since the beginning (all the way back in 2001), BREW developers gets a 80% revenue share.

http://wbt.sys-con.com/read/40914.htm

Sure it costs about $1000 for "True BREW Testing" and about $400 for a digital certificate --- but you would be still ahead in the end even with your 150 downloads per month (i.e. recovering your initial higher fixed costs).

If you reach the 125000 units target, that 10% difference amounts to 30,000 pound less money for your pocket.

[GirthP]

Why can't I download the SDK???

It's very frustrating. I'm registered...

[gwangung]

The problem is that developers on other mobile phone platforms get a larger revenue share. Since the beginning (all the way back in 2001), BREW developers gets a 80% revenue share.

http://wbt.sys-con.com/read/40914.htm

Sure it costs about $1000 for "True BREW Testing" and about $400 for a digital certificate --- but you would be still ahead in the end even with your 150 downloads per month (i.e. recovering your initial higher fixed costs).

If you reach the 125000 units target, that 10% difference amounts to 30,000 pound less money for your pocket.

To be helpful here, what are typical sales for an app or app class on BREW?

What it looks like here is that Apple is trading off a lower entry barrier for a larger slice of the pie if the application is a success (depending on what success is).

(On the other hand, how much is Apple willing to renegotiate fees for very big sellers? That might be interesting for folks to know).

[GQB]

To be helpful here, what are typical sales for an app or app class on BREW?

What it looks like here is that Apple is trading off a lower entry barrier for a larger slice of the pie if the application is a success (depending on what success is).

(On the other hand, how much is Apple willing to renegotiate fees for very big sellers? That might be interesting for folks to know).

This is a nonsense arguement without figures on BREW traffic.
Bottom line is that Apple is presenting developers with zero hassle exposure, sales, installation, updates and payment, to a market of EVERY SINGLE iPHONE AND TOUCH USER! Not to mention one that will actually allow low-skilled users to actually install the product. I've dealt with app installation on various phones and they're a nightmare. I've actually walked away from paid-for apps, unused, because they were not worth the hassle of installing.

I guarantee that no other distribution mechanism for any other mobile platform offers the potential return of this model for 'blue collar' developers.
I'm mass mailing all my developer friends and telling them to get an idea an code it NOW. This is a gold mine for developers who actually sit down and write something rather than just whine about it on a forum.

[rols]

I'd love to read some of the stuff on the iPhone dev center home page but I go there, it asks me to log in, I log in, it takes me to a page thanking me for registering and telling me there will be a mail with an SDK download link.

Click that link and it takes me back to a page asking me to log in, which takes me to the iPhone dev homepage (with no clickable links) and asks me to log in which takes me to the page thanking me for registering.

Is the iPhone dev center even up?

[winterspan]

Why does RIM's Blackberry Push email require so much additional infrastructure such as the Blackberry enterprise server that connects to your Exchange server, and Blackberry network operations center to do the same thing that the Exchange server can (now) do natively?
Is this a new functionality introduced with the latest version of Exchange server and Blackberry's system was required before this new functionality?

Will new blackberry models have the same direct exchange connection as the iPhone? Does this mean that RIM will not need to run their operations center anymore and that companies won't need Blackberry enterprise servers anymore? What are the implications for RIM?

On a similar note, anyone know if direct exchange access with push email is available on current windows mobile devices? does it require v6.0?

[megfilmworks]

Why can't I download the SDK???

It's very frustrating. I'm registered...
Gridlock...I had that screen all day, but finally broke through and got my download...and access to a great iTunes library on how to use the tool kit, etc.
I had the same problems as rols just before I finally broke through to the main page and downloaded the SDK.

[winterspan]

a few questions regarding the SDK:

1) Obviously Itunes will be the official distribution point for commerical (and free) software. My questions is will you be able to load software that you download (binary or compiled source) from a website onto an iPhone through iTunes?
I assume you can, and if not, you'll be able to use the SDK to do so.

2) If you wish to develop a personal/internal/in-house application for your iPhone, do you need to become a $99 ADC member? And do you have to have received a digital certificate to load even personal apps?

[samab]

This is a nonsense arguement without figures on BREW traffic.
Bottom line is that Apple is presenting developers with zero hassle exposure, sales, installation, updates and payment, to a market of EVERY SINGLE iPHONE AND TOUCH USER! Not to mention one that will actually allow low-skilled users to actually install the product. I've dealt with app installation on various phones and they're a nightmare. I've actually walked away from paid-for apps, unused, because they were not worth the hassle of installing.

I guarantee that no other distribution mechanism for any other mobile platform offers the potential return of this model for 'blue collar' developers.
I'm mass mailing all my developer friends and telling them to get an idea an code it NOW. This is a gold mine for developers who actually sit down and write something rather than just whine about it on a forum.

Qualcomm has 500 million CDMA users worldwide. Since 2001, it has remitted over a billion dollars back to BREW developers.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Qualcomm-039-s-BREW-Platform-Generates-Income-of-over-1-Billion-48702.shtml

Verizon Wireless gets a lot more people buying apps from Get It Now store than AT&T on a ARPU basis --- for a 60+ million user base. DoCoMo has 48 million imode users in Japan. Nokia has the Nokia Content Discoverer deck on all their S60 phones.

Every single iphone/ipod Touch user in the world is 5 million.

[megfilmworks]

a few questions regarding the SDK:

1) Obviously Itunes will be the official distribution point for commerical (and free) software. My questions is will you be able to load software that you download (binary or compiled source) from a website onto an iPhone through iTunes?
I assume you can, and if not, you'll be able to use the SDK to do so.

2) If you wish to develop a personal/internal/in-house application for your iPhone, do you need to become a $99 ADC member? And do you have to have received a digital certificate to load even personal apps?
1) not sure
2) if you are a developer you will be able to load and test on your iPhone.
for sale or personal use. (With select developers getting an early beta release of 2.0)
All the details are sketchy. I'm still watching the shxtload of help videos.

[GQB]

Qualcomm has 500 million CDMA users worldwide. Since 2001, it has remitted over a billion dollars back to BREW developers.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Qualcomm-039-s-BREW-Platform-Generates-Income-of-over-1-Billion-48702.shtml

Verizon Wireless gets a lot more people buying apps from Get It Now store than AT&T on a ARPU basis --- for a 60+ million user base. DoCoMo has 48 million imode users in Japan. Nokia has the Nokia Content Discoverer deck on all their S60 phones.

Every single iphone/ipod Touch user in the world is 5 million.

Well then, I guess iPhone SDK developers have a lot to look forward to then.
Thanks for the numbers.

[diamond.g]

Why does RIM's Blackberry Push email require so much additional infrastructure such as the Blackberry enterprise server that connects to your Exchange server, and Blackberry network operations center to do the same thing that the Exchange server can (now) do natively?
Is this a new functionality introduced with the latest version of Exchange server and Blackberry's system was required before this new functionality?

Will new blackberry models have the same direct exchange connection as the iPhone? Does this mean that RIM will not need to run their operations center anymore and that companies won't need Blackberry enterprise servers anymore? What are the implications for RIM?

On a similar note, anyone know if direct exchange access with push email is available on current windows mobile devices? does it require v6.0?
From my understanding Active Sync is new as of Exchange 2003. RIM became popular because originally Microsoft Exchange didn't do push email to devices. Current Windows Mobile devices can use Exchange Active Sync.
I don't think a whole lot is going to happen to RIM, I mean they will lose some market share, but for places that don't want their Exchange servers facing the outside world (think DoD/DoJ systems) RIM will always have a place.

[kcdstudios]

I'm 16 and iPhone/iPod Touch will be my first foray into software engineering, and what has seemed a lil unfair is the price of all this.

OK, so it's £50 ish pounds per year to get the dev certificate you need, then they get 30% of your proceeds. So, in a year (with programs priced at £5 and an average of 150 downloads), thats £1825 gross to you every year (£152/month). Then out of that comes the £50 hosting fee (£1,775) and Apple takes 30% of the remaining figure (so that's you £532.50 out of pocket) finally leaving you with £1,242.50 take home in a year (£103.54/month).

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated :P

150 DL is nothing. by the end of 2008 they will have 10,000,000 of these sold.

[aswitcher]

Why can't I download the SDK???

It's very frustrating. I'm registered...

Just got it and started downloading. Had to login twice but everythings active now.

[Kageden]

Got the program installed and am playing with it right now.

One odd thing though. I shut down my computer for awhile today and for some reason when I went to turn it back on my iMac wouldn't even turn on. Not even the screen. This seems to have happened only after I installed the SDK... because it's never done this before. Anyone else having problems like this?

On the plus side the SDK is pretty nice so far.

[winterspan]

From my understanding Active Sync is new as of Exchange 2003. RIM became popular because originally Microsoft Exchange didn't do push email to devices. Current Windows Mobile devices can use Exchange Active Sync.
I don't think a whole lot is going to happen to RIM, I mean they will lose some market share, but for places that don't want their Exchange servers facing the outside world (think DoD/DoJ systems) RIM will always have a place.

ok... that all makes sense. Another thing I read somewhere mentioned that the use of RIM's enterprise server and operations center gives the Blackberry better battery life than if it used Exchange Active Sync like the iPhone will? Any ideas on why that would be? Assuming it has something to do with the method of notifying the phone a new email has been received, how does this process work on Blackberry and on the iPhone? AFAIK, cell phones data connections aren't constantly connected, they are in like a standby mode until you request a connection/open a browser. So how does push email notification work?

[gibbz]

I'm very excited about the native ePocrates. It's the only reason I still tote around my Palm, and the main reason I bought it. I can't wait tiil I can run this natively. :D

My girlfriend is a med student and has been wanting this since we each got our iPhones. I know several of her fellow students had put off getting the iPhone since ePocrates wasn't available, but are now getting it after the news on Thursday. I think Apple has opened a very large door for itself.

[OS X Dude]

If you sell 150 apps a month that's 1800 apps a year at £5 each meaning apple takes £9000 off customers for your app. they keep 30% of this (£2700) and give you £6300 out of which you pay £50 leaving you £6250 (£520/month)

that in itself is not bad but to aim for only 150 downloads a month is very low. lets say by the end of 09 there are 25 million iphone/ipod touch users, if your app is decent then maybe 1%, hell let's say 0.5% of them get it that's 125,000 sales lets even call it $5 (£2.50) per app then you're looking at £218,750 NET.

clearly the incentives and potential for developers of all sizes is huge


Edit: ok you said 150 apps a year
so 150x£5=750 750-30%=£525 £525-£50=£475
but surely even a really crap app would get more than 150 downloads a year! 25 Millions users and only 150 people buy it? the hello world app would sell that many!

Just shows how much of a Padawan I am doesn't it? :p Yeah on thinkin about it 150 is a lil lame.... but then I never said the quality of my app!

See, I have no prior experience to base any of this on, I don't know how many downloads I should be getting per month/year. Before today I thought Apple was ripping people off with the 70:30 split and £50/year thing, but now I think it's quite reasonable for what you get (why did BREW develoers get 80% though? I bet they didn't market/promote/process it like Apple so could give more to devs).

I'm doing this really as a nice lil way of getting out of doing a part time job while in Sixth Form next year and hopefully earn enough to pay for my car insurance, and learning programming at the same time.

[jhande]

Let me start off by saying that I'm very excited about the SDK and am trying to grasp yesterday's news as it relates to me (a professional software developer planning to do after-hours development for the iPhone). In addition to some lingering technical questions about the SDK itself (bluetooth support) I'm starting to think about the distribution model with current best-practices in professional software development. The thing that a lot of people are really missing here is an understanding of a typical development lifecycle. People are crazy to think that real apps can be coded in 2 weeks. Demo-ware is another flavor of vapor-ware --those apps that we saw yesterday aren't ready for primetime. Let me do a quick and dirty rundown of a typical cycle for what really happens over the next 3 months for a typical consumer app with a lot of stuff missing to keep this short.

1. SDK is released yesterday.
2. Ideas are brainstormed and eventually Requirements are made (by either developers or analysts or whoever).
3. Developers (using the methodology of choice) do design/code/unit test iterations using the emulator.
4. Developers do real-world testing on their own iPhones.
5. Product goes through some sort of Alpha/QA phase where a lot of bugs are found by a small group of testers.
6. Product goes through beta testing by a larger group of testers.
7. Product finally is ready to ship/go GM/whatever.

Apple hasn't addressed a good portion of the typical lifecycle. How the heck are developers going to get alpha/beta testing with the current distribution model? I think this is all great, but there are still basic CS 101 methodology concerns that we don't know about yet with the distribution model. I'm not ready to quit my day job with it's mature processes to become a full-time iPhone developer just yet. (So I'll just slacking off and reading macrumors this friday afternoon instead)

I'm wondering about this as well. How do you do iterative development without iTunes? Perhaps we'll be forced to release source to testers, who'll then compile/install on their iPhones. Doable, but a major pain, and makes it impossible to test on complete non-devs.

I really hope Apple has a program addressing this, I just can't get my head around how, though.

[Edit] Just thought of something: Maybe Apple hasn't thought about this at all. I mean, look at their own development cycle, hardware and software. They do it all in-house, or in small closed groups they have direct access to.

[OS X Dude]

Finally!! The SDK IS DOWNLOADING!!!

10 hours........ oh. crap. Cursed 512kbps Broadband!!!!! Ah well more time to think of an app.

I am really impressed with the level of support you get on the iPhone Dev page - more vids, books and sample code than you can shake an iPhone at, so even I could make an app!

For me, Apple has set the benchmark in terms of dev support.

[darkblu]

I'm wondering about this as well. How do you do iterative development without iTunes? Perhaps we'll be forced to release source to testers, who'll then compile/install on their iPhones. Doable, but a major pain, and makes it impossible to test on complete non-devs.

you do iterative development from your desktop the moment you have a valid certificate. there are no sources sent to testers - they get either the pre-installed product, or install it from a complete distributive if apple will allow certificating multiple workstations, i.e. your testers would be able to install the app from their own desktop.

I really hope Apple has a program addressing this, I just can't get my head around how, though.

[Edit] Just thought of something: Maybe Apple hasn't thought about this at all. I mean, look at their own development cycle, hardware and software. They do it all in-house, or in small closed groups they have direct access to.

i'm puzzled what's there to be addressed? - the SDK is there (alas in beta), the device is available, by june only select developers will have ready apps, as only select devs have certificates now. the rest of us will be able to run code on the actual hw the moment apple open the gates to the certification program.

[jhande]

you do iterative development from your desktop the moment you have a valid certificate. there are no sources sent to testers - they get either the pre-installed product, or install it from a complete distributive if apple will allow certificating multiple workstations, i.e. your testers would be able to install the app from their own desktop.

"....if apple will allow certificating multiple workstations...."

With our current level of knowledge that's a pretty big if. It will help, if true, but not help large faceless tests a la Omnifocus and the like.

Don't get me wrong, I'm nit-picking here. I'm generally extremely satisfied with the SDK, and got far, far more than I had hoped for.

[elbruelsio]

I see many people are still unhappy with the way Apple is running this iPhone show. "First there was no SDK, then it was web apps only, then the SDK was to be released in February, now we have to wait until June. ZOMG!1" I also enjoyed hearing,"The iPhone will never be truly successful as it doesn't appeal to business users."

Well people, what other company listens and responds to the demands of the market in such a way and in such a short time? The iPhone has only been out for 8 months and Apple is now promising everything that has been touted as standing in the way of the "true" success of the device.

[samab]

See, I have no prior experience to base any of this on, I don't know how many downloads I should be getting per month/year. Before today I thought Apple was ripping people off with the 70:30 split and £50/year thing, but now I think it's quite reasonable for what you get (why did BREW develoers get 80% though? I bet they didn't market/promote/process it like Apple so could give more to devs).

The carriers get 10% of the BREW reveune share --- so Qualcomm doesn't have the extra marketing expense. It is a lot more cost effective when you are working with the carriers.

[gaberamos615]

the iphone sdk was WAY more than I expected. im sure you can run nes, ds games etc.. on emulators. I think it is going to soon replace the laptop.

[iStefmac]

Best distribution model....ever....

Agreed. Its very good. For Apple, and Developers, and even consumers.

No one loses here, except I guess the consumers who have to buy the apps to make the business cycle itself. But, we're not forced to buy anything, and a large selection of apps will be in the free - $1.99 range (you'll see), and they are sure to be stunningly helpful to some or most people.

Anyone who develops great app ideas and can actually create them in an app can make a fortune off the app store.

Thank you Apple

[iStefmac]

QUESTION:

Are their any legitimate complaints here? I can't think of any. Aside from the control that Apple can exert over what apps go on the store, there is no downside here.

[bradenkeithcom]

I have a mac, however it's not as fast as my windows desktop, so I would prefer to make apps on it, does anyone know if there's Xcore, or all of the developing software to make the apps, for Vista?

[OS X Dude]

I have a mac, however it's not as fast as my windows desktop, so I would prefer to make apps on it, does anyone know if there's Xcore, or all of the developing software to make the apps, for Vista?

No, these are Apple tools made exclusively for the Mac.

In all honesty, I don't think programming is too demanding on a system - speshally iPhone programming.

So long as ur G4+, u should be OK mate.

[Krafty]

Meh, I could go without Java.

[OS X Dude]

the iphone sdk was WAY more than I expected. im sure you can run nes, ds games etc.. on emulators. I think it is going to soon replace the laptop.

I doubt Apple will allow emulators - and I think you're exaggerating with the laptop replacement - PDA replacement hell yeah - but it's too early to kill the laptop.

[EagerDragon]

I think this news about the licensing of Active sync is bigger than most people realize.

Assuming for a moment here that Apple is not restricted to only use that license on the iPhone, but instead is able to deploy it on all of its products, this also means that it will be available soon on the Macs and other future devices.

One of the reasons why the Macs were not allowed in corporations was that it could not sync with exchange in a secured manner. Well now it is a matter of time before it can.

We are likely to start seeing a small adoption of Macs in a lot more companies. Specially those that do not want to put the money into dealing with the thousands of viruses and those that would use Linux and open source.

This is great news not just for the iPhone but for the Mac and for us that are tired of using a PC at work.

Drinks for everyone, let's cheer.

[dicklacara]

1) Of course the biggest missing piece to the iPhone SDK is the 2.0 firmware on the iPhone or Touch device. This, of course, prevents testing on the device, itself.

2) The simulator does not support OpenGL ES.

3) The simulator does not support rotation of the device-- though it looks like it should: Menu--->Hardware--->Rotate Left. Maybe this is a bug.

4) The simulator does not support MultiTouch gestures-- I was wondering how they were gonna' do that... turns out, they didn't!

5) The simulator does not support the accelerometers.


I feel that these omissions are rather significant... it prevents "learn by playing".

No amount of "looking at the code" can substitute experiencing the "cause and effect" interaction.

If the simulator is to be more than a stop-gap pacifier (until the new firmware is available) Apple should address these issues ASAP.

--Build a subset of Mac OS X OpenGL for the simulator

--Allow free rotation of the device in the x,y,z axis via the mouse and/or arrow keys... maybe borrow some code from Pages :)

--Allow simulation of the accelerometers with arrows keys, multi-keypress, combined with command key for rapid velocity increases.

--Allow simulation of MultiTouch by: right-click to establish/disestablish each active touch point indicated by a transparent colored circle on the screen. then offer a menu of MT gestures from a popup menu (pinch, drag, etc).

Of course, MultiTouch will be a lot easier to simulate when the Mac has a MultiTouch screen :D

Hey, Maybe I could write an iPhone app for the simulator that does all these things.... but, there'd be no way to test it....

Oh.... my head is beginning to hurt :confused:

[michelle21]

Many of the so called restrictions people are grumbling about don't seem to be restrictions.

I spent serveral hours watching all the iphone developer tutorials on my appleTV last night. They are rather informative. and really cool to relax in bed and watch on an apple TV.

And it seems that the background limitiation is not a policy, but more to the fact that the Iphone does not support multitasking.

To scale osx you have to make compromises and I guess multitasking was one of them.

WM 6 has multitasking support and I have to say I find it more problematic sometimes then useful.

[gr8ful]

Can anyone comment on how a developer will be able to allow buyers to register their application(s) for support? I haven't seen any information on this so far.

[dicklacara]

I doubt Apple will allow emulators - and I think you're exaggerating with the laptop replacement - PDA replacement hell yeah - but it's too early to kill the laptop.

Yeah... but I'll bet we see a bigger MT device from Apple before too long (the clock is ticking on that 2-year lead).

Maybe several: UltraPortable, Tablet, or an iPhone on steroids, say, 3"x5"... it would still fit in most pockets.

[dicklacara]

No, these are Apple tools made exclusively for the Mac.

In all honesty, I don't think programming is too demanding on a system - speshally iPhone programming.

So long as ur G4+, u should be OK mate.

Sorry... SDK is for Intel Macs only!

[dicklacara]

Can anyone comment on how a developer will be able to allow buyers to register their application(s) for support? I haven't seen any information on this so far.

I hope that Apple will capture buyers name, email, etc. as part the selling process... then furnish these to the developer.

CDBaby does this for artists who sell their CDs or downloads through the CDBaby store.

[OS X Dude]

Sorry... SDK is for Intel Macs only!

Indeed!! An oversight on my part and I apologise for thr misleading info.

It's coz I started downloading the SDK at 11am GMT and, at 18:03GMT, there's still 3hrs 25mins on the clock!!!!! I AM GOING MAD.

[OS X Dude]

I spent serveral hours watching all the iphone developer tutorials on my appleTV last night. They are rather informative. and really cool to relax in bed and watch on an apple TV.

I shall hold you to this and try it tonight - God help you if I end up confused and unable to sleep!!! lol

[CisternaChyli]

This is right on. I am a doctor and the only thing keeping me from buying an iPhone is the lack of Epocrates. I will buy one the day after that program is released (hopefully also 3G) and say good bye forever to my Palm, Verizon cell phone, and pager in favor of one device.:):)

same here..im a med student..and im dying to pick up the iPhone. Now that epocrates will be native, it will work great. But i want an iPhone with a decent camera, at least a 3.2 autofocus lens camera..:)..3G would be nice as well.

[soapsuds]

2) The simulator does not support OpenGL ES.

4) The simulator does not support MultiTouch gestures-- I was wondering how they were gonna' do that... turns out, they didn't!

5) The simulator does not support the accelerometers.


Yeah, I was pretty disappointed by this as well. Of further note, the simulator does not appear to reflect processor speed or memory constraints. I'm guessing a true emulator would have been possible and may even exist within Apple, but would have been a huge boon to hackers.

Basically, this means that useful hobbyist game development will not be possible until "June".

I was surprised to find out the iPhone uses the PowerVR (tiled rendering) architecture. From what I can tell, it is a "Lite" version which probably doesn't have the vertex processor. I suspect it will fall somewhere between the DS and the PSP in terms of performance, probably closer to the DS. I've seen reports on the net of the iPhone having some sort of vector floating point unit; not sure if this is true, but it would be awesome if so, especially if supported with GCC inline asm or intrinsics! Well, we'll have to wait until summer to find out, unless of course one of the licensed developers breaks their NDA and tells us first!

[arkmannj]

sorry if this has been asked, but does anyone know when Apple will be adding in the Interface builder update to the iPhone SDK?

The current version does not update the Interface builder application to have mobile/iPhone interface stuff. :confused:

[arkmannj]

4) The simulator does not support MultiTouch gestures-- I was wondering how they were gonna' do that... turns out, they didn't!


you can Option+Click+drag for pinch-in and pinch-out.

[dicklacara]

you can Option+Click+drag for pinch-in and pinch-out.

Yes.. Option+Click seems to allow pinch as well as rotation.

Where did you find that gem of info?

[dicklacara]

Yes.. Option+Click seems to allow pinch as well as rotation.

Where did you find that gem of info?

Quoting myself here...Simulator: Shift+Option+Click seems to allow 2 finger drag, where the touch points stay a fixed distance apart

Also, some apps do allow rotation-- WhichWayIsUp. But this appears to be enabled by the app... seems odd, especially when Kalimba displays in Landscape but the simulator insists on being held in portrait.

[GaryPDX]

People are funny here... June is NOT a long time to wait... developers have something now.. this is good. And anyone that thinks the 70/30 split for world-wide distribution through iTunes is too much has no idea of distribution models for software.... this is very fair and reasonable.

The SDK and the program Apple has put together is great... it's going to change the value proposition for the iPhone and for the iPod Touch too... this is big.

Exactly. Anyone who has been in retail knows that a 30% gross margin is a VERY reasonable retail markup. Plus, with a market space at this level of development there is no competitive landscape preventing a developer from asking as much as it likes, adjusting later as needed. Finally, this includes instant visibility in a worldwide store with millions of potential customers. It's a gift horse in my view.

[darkblu]

I was surprised to find out the iPhone uses the PowerVR (tiled rendering) architecture. From what I can tell, it is a "Lite" version which probably doesn't have the vertex processor.
the non-lite MBX does not have vertex processing abilities either - there is a separate (IP) part, the VGP, that goes with the MBX series (among others) which takes care of vertex processing, but from what is known on the subject, VGP is not in the iphone.

I suspect it will fall somewhere between the DS and the PSP in terms of performance, probably closer to the DS. I've seen reports on the net of the iPhone having some sort of vector floating point unit; not sure if this is true, but it would be awesome if so, especially if supported with GCC inline asm or intrinsics!

the ARM1176JZ(F)-S found in the iphone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#ARM_cores) does have SIMD, but nothing is clear about it. i'd be very surprised it did not help with dot products, but it may turn out to be narrow (2-way, vs 4-way needed).

Well, we'll have to wait until summer to find out, unless of course one of the licensed developers breaks their NDA and tells us first!

same boat here.

ed: about the comparison of iphone to ds and psp - i'm seeing it much closer to the psp, and in some cases clearly surpassing even that.

[OS X Dude]

AHHHHH - My SDK has 2 hours left of download time from 10 hours and my connection speed is fallin rapidly - if i pause it from the downloads window in safari, can i pick up the SDK download from the point it's at now tomorrow????


Many thanks

[arkmannj]

Yes.. Option+Click seems to allow pinch as well as rotation.

Where did you find that gem of info?

I just kept thinking to myself "There's gotta be a @#$ way to do this!" and kept trying different things.


Edit: 300th Post :-)

[arkmannj]

Quoting myself here...Simulator: Shift+Option+Click seems to allow 2 finger drag, where the touch points stay a fixed distance apart

Also, some apps do allow rotation-- WhichWayIsUp. But this appears to be enabled by the app... seems odd, especially when Kalimba displays in Landscape but the simulator insists on being held in portrait.

To bad Apple doesn't have a 3 dimensional circle/sphere thing (one of those spheres that show all three axis) to be able to click and drag to simulate moving the phone around.

[dicklacara]

To bad Apple doesn't have a 3 dimensional circle/sphere thing (one of those spheres that show all three axis) to be able to click and drag to simulate moving the phone around.

Actually they do... in some of their Pro apps, in Core Image, Quartz Composer, even in a graphing calculator that displays formulae in 3D

[razorianfly]

I was quite content with what was announced by the roadmap event. Even being the owner of the iPod touch, when I bought the device I bought it knowing apple would blow me away with new features, but as with pervious iPod's, I thought I was going to have to buy an entirely new model of ipod, for the privilege. I'm just glad this isn't the case. The way I see it, it's new functionality which I didn't have before hence me dropping $20 for the January Software Update hours after it was announced. As along as Apple don't show their greed by placing the price point of the 2.0.0 update at more than $50, I'll probably drop it - the functionality deserves it.

I have one question about the whole event. When the Wifi iTunes Music was announced, Steve made a big deal of the purchased tracks from it 'syncing back up to your iTunes library' after syncing. There was no mention of this for purchased applications. Anyone who bought the Jan update and has restored since, will be aware that iTunes needs a physical 'iPod application' file (.ipa) to re-apply the application pack after the device has been restored. I hope this is the case with the App Store and anything downloaded from it, otherwise, I can see people spending hundreds of £/$ through the App Store worldwide, and if something goes wrong, restoring their device, and everything they purchased/downloaded is gone. Surely Apple will put in place a 'Back to my Library' sort of feature, right?

R-Fly

[samab]

Exactly. Anyone who has been in retail knows that a 30% gross margin is a VERY reasonable retail markup. Plus, with a market space at this level of development there is no competitive landscape preventing a developer from asking as much as it likes, adjusting later as needed. Finally, this includes instant visibility in a worldwide store with millions of potential customers. It's a gift horse in my view.

It may be reasonable in other industries, but when you compare it with other mobile platforms --- it is not that great. While you are going to face more competitive landscapes in other mobile platforms, you are also going to expose to hundreds of millions (or even billions) of mobile users.

[gwangung]

It may be reasonable in other industries, but when you compare it with other mobile platforms --- it is not that great.

Not that bad either. Other mobile developers have cited higher figures. True, there are lower figures, but its not that out of line (for example, the entry barrier for Apple is considerably lower).

Generally, folks who tend to focus in on a single industry tend to get tunnel vision. They forget they can learn lessons from other industries.

[pixelpixi]

As expected, Apple is exerting editorial control on applications that appear on the iTunes App Store. Explicit restrictions are quite reasonable...


Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

:mad:

[gwangung]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable."

Yes it is...when you're the publisher. Your interests aren't the only ones at stake...

[OS X Dude]

If I ported Firefox to the iPhone - presuming Apple didn't kill it - would I be allowed to charge for it?

[winterspan]

If I ported Firefox to the iPhone - presuming Apple didn't kill it - would I be allowed to charge for it?

You would have to look at the license and see if it's GPL/LGPL/MIT/etc, but I would assume absolutely not. At least not firefox, but you could use the code base and make your own browser based on Gecko/XUL and probably charge for it, except you would need to contribute back source modifications you make to the components. As far as one individual porting something like that, I say good luck.
Mozila is working on a mobile Firefox already, and I'm sure they'll be porting it to the iPhone very soon. I would see if you could officially contribute to their project.

[arkmannj]

Actually they do... in some of their Pro apps, in Core Image, Quartz Composer, even in a graphing calculator that displays formulae in 3D

Cool, is there a way to turn this on in the iPhone/Aspen simulator so we can (virtually) move the fake iPhone/iPod-Touch around and test how applications are reacting to 3d movement/accelerometer feedback ?

[michelle21]

I shall hold you to this and try it tonight - God help you if I end up confused and unable to sleep!!! lol

Ok, but I've been known (fondly called that gal with no life!) to stay up as much as 24 hours working on client projects.

So my taste may differ.

BTW

I find apple tv to be a great self training tool.

I went through the quantum physics university series they had on Itunes last summer.

[dicklacara]

Cool, is there a way to turn this on in the iPhone/Aspen simulator so we can (virtually) move the fake iPhone/iPod-Touch around and test how applications are reacting to 3d movement/accelerometer feedback ?

It's not a matter of just "turn this on". The programmer(s) who wrote the Aspen simulator would have to incorporate other programmers' code Gasp!

I suspect that these various Apps are written with XCode and (mostly) Objective-C... so it shouldn't be too difficult... they might do it, but they wouldn't like it!

[arn]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable."

I don't allow illegal, malicious or pornographic content on this site, and I don't expect Apple to allow it on their store.

arn

[dicklacara]

Ok, but I've been known (fondly called that gal with no life!) to stay up as much as 24 hours working on client projects.

So my taste may differ.

BTW

I find apple tv to be a great self training tool.

I went through the quantum physics university series they had on Itunes last summer.


Don't know much about this programming stuff, but I learned conversational Portuguese and how to cook a rabbit in the hills of Tuscany :D

[winterspan]

I don't allow illegal, malicious or pornographic content on this site, and I don't expect Apple to allow it on their store.

arn

That is just fine.. It's your website and I'm sure you don't wish to scare away advertisers who in turn don't need the Family Research Council beating down their door (thats another topic entirely... Tony Perkins definitely makes the idiot list)

The problem with Apple is that they are monopolizing the distribution channel. I'm assuming they are not going to let you download binaries from a website and install onto your iPhone through iTunes. If that's the case, censorship is ********. I can understand the case against illegal material, and anything harmful to the user or device itself such as malware.

But restricting access to Adult/Mature software???? That's a total load of ********. They could just place parental controls on the Itunes account which requires a credit card if they are worried about it. But to disallow software involving porn entirely, while at the same time maintaining absolute control over app distribution? That's a terrible practice. What are they, the ****** "morality" police? Consumers surely don't need Apple playing Jerry Falwell in their lives! Now for myself, I rarely look at pornography, and I don't see the draw of native applications involving porn, but its about principal!!

Seriously, am I the only one that thinks this is unbelievably wrong? it's similar to the situation of denying terrorist "suspects" the right to due process and a trial by peers because it'll "help save lives". Or the ILLEGAL wiretapping of citizens without FISA court oversight, again, " 'cause it saves lives". Not to turn this into a political tirade, but I'm so sick of seeing people in this country giving up on their principals??????

[olternaut]

As long as it's locked in to both a carrier and a store it is not a computer, but an Apple revenue generating device. Now some people may decide that this is worth the cost, but I would never mistake it for a computer.

Short of greed their was no reason to lock it from installing 3rd party apps from their computer without a signature. It would be like iTunes not allowing you to rip your own CD's to load on the iPod.

Good grief people! You gotta start looking at this long term. You think Jobs really cares about the iffy performance of 3G? Yes, he will release a 3G iphone but he isn't that excited about it.Because even 3G isn't up to Steve's standards. And while he will do his song and dance on stage saying how excited he is by it. He is much more interested in 4g Wimax/LTE networks coming sooner than all of you realize. Haven't any of you been keeping an eye on the 700mhz auctions? Nationwide wifi baby! :D

[arn]

The problem with Apple is that they are monopolizing the distribution channel. I'm assuming they are not going to let you download binaries from a website and install onto your iPhone through iTunes. If that's the case, censorship is ********. I can understand the case against illegal material, and anything harmful to the user or device itself such as malware.


I was just pointing out to the original poster that there are such things as "reasonable" editorial control.

arn

[winterspan]

Good grief people! You gotta start looking at this long term. You think Jobs really cares about the iffy performance of 3G? Yes, he will release a 3G iphone but he isn't that excited about it.Because even 3G isn't up to Steve's standards. And while he will do his song and dance on stage saying how excited he is by it. He is much more interested in 4g Wimax/LTE networks coming sooner than all of you realize. Haven't any of you been keeping an eye on the 700mhz auctions? Nationwide wifi baby! :D

Well with restrictions on the SDK such as for "applications that "hog" bandwidth",
and the inability for applications to even have write access to the filesystem, It won't matter how fast a cellular network gets, there won't be anything to take advantage of it. Look how the USA providers already strip the front-facing video calling camera out of their phones. EVDO 3G is plenty fast in both directions to handle this use.

I really wish it to not be true, but just wait....

1) Video conferencing camera not included in 3G iPhone
2) SlingPlayer denied access to iPhone app store because of "bandwidth hog" label.
3) Unique location based application denied from app store because of "privacy implications"
4) IM/VOIP with live video transmission denied because of "bandwidth hog"
5) VNC/remote desktop application denied because of "bandwidth hog"

I REALLY hope this type of crap doesn't happen, but we've seen Apple make some dumb moves recently.

I think they need to keep the iTunes distribution model -- it's a great idea -- but DO NOT make it the exclusive way to get Apps onto the iPhone. I HATE any form of monopolistic crap like this.

[chillywilly]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

I was just thinking about a company like Playboy, which already has done some mobile offerings. Guess Apple won't let them publish any of their programs, should they decide to offer any.

[chillywilly]

I just kept thinking to myself "There's gotta be a @#$ way to do this!" and kept trying different things.


Edit: 300th Post :-)

Cool info. I will remember that one once I start tinkering with the SDK.

And a fellow Utah Mac user, too. :)

[winterspan]

I was just thinking about a company like Playboy, which already has done some mobile offerings. Guess Apple won't let them publish any of their programs, should they decide to offer any.

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

As I wrote above, the real problem is that Apple can ONLY do one thing:
1) Make iTunes store the single point of distribution
2) Choose the content allowed in the Itunes App Store

Instead, they are telling you that you can ONLY use applications that their store provides, and that they are going to censor your access to certain applications, like some ****** morality police. IT'S REALLY UNBELIEVABLE! What arrogance they have! Tell me what apps are allowed on a computer I own? Are you kidding me?

If they are worried about minors, it's very easy to setup a parental control in the Itunes store... Don't they already have something like this for M rated songs? They could also provide a primary app store, and an uncensored or adult section. Now I'm not a big porn fan, and I don't see many use cases for porn in a native application, but again, it comes down to the principal of it.

I really hope this is not an issue that people see as "frivolous", and something which gets attention. Although seemingly minor as a practical matter, it needs to be changed.

[chillywilly]

If they are worried about minors, it's very easy to setup a parental control in the Itunes store... Don't they already have something like this for M rated songs? They could also provide a primary app store, and an uncensored or adult section. Now I'm not a big porn fan, and I don't see many use cases for porn in a native application, but again, it comes down to the principal of it.

They already tag songs with EXPLICIT tags. Why not do the same for iPhone apps.