ugly natural of apple corporate never really change since 1990.
SJ anti-corporate god, anyone?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
3rd Party Apps Disabled in iPhone 1.1.1
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ugly natural of apple corporate never really change since 1990.
SJ anti-corporate god, anyone?
I understand where you are coming from. But much effort is being taken by Apple not to allow the power of the iPhone to be used. Why not a chat client for AIM/iChat at least?
I have not looked at all the apps that have been made for the iPhone by 3rd parties, but Apple needs to look at what people are wanting from the iPhone and make it available via updates...
Such as offering a $100 credit for disgruntled users?
It doesn't matter if they already had planned both BootCamp and the store credit as a PR stunt... What matters is that Apple actually takes notice of what their user-base does with its products.
And while on the subject of capitalism... I don't know how big a cut Apple makes from each game sold on iTS (I'm speaking about games because, looking in hindsight, they may very well be just a trial for future iPhone software distribution), but I'll tell you two things:
1) Maybe selling software through iTunes is a good idea, security-wise, but there's probably no technical reason to stop them from creating a web-page like the one they have for OS X Widgets, or a podcast directory-like system, and have downloadable 3rd-party apps be checked by iTunes (possibly through digital signatures or something like that). Remember, Dashboard already includes a sandbox for you to test your widgets before permanently installing them, so why not have the same kind of "emulation" embedded into iTunes?
Also, that "free" or "semi-free" system could exist alongside the iTS, much like you can buy music from the iTS but also from AmazonMP3 or on CD and put it into your library or, better yet, you can buy 3rd-party software from both on-line and brick-and-mortar Apple Stores, as well as from Apple Authorized Resellers, Amazon or the developers' websites themselves.
2) Having said that, if having iTS as the sole source for buying iPod games was bad enough, MARKET-WISE (as I said, it's capitalism we're talking about), then what do you have to say about Apple forcing 5G iPod owners to rebuy their whole stuff just because the measly x.x.1 updates they released for the iPod classic weren't free (or reasonly priced) for previous version owners?? I guess you would be happy, being a shareholder, for the increased revenue (I think not, though, as those folks, at least those still using PCs, are now potential *back-switchers*, possibly looking for alternatives from Creative, SanDisk et. al., and while I'm at it, thinking of buying crappy hardware from HP or Dell all over again when they were previously considering switching... As for the Macheads, well, they'll just skip the classic, which translates into less units sold anyway).
The disagreement between this board and you is not on whether Apple should or not allow 3rd-party development or not. No, I'm guessing that for you it would be fine if Apple allowed it, as long as THEY [Apple] got a cut for each title sold, AM I RIGHT?
So, translated into plain English, if that scenario came into fruition, Apple would be employing MONOPOLISTIC, M$-style tactics, as far as iPhone software distribution is concerned!!!
And that's what we (I'm thinking that I speak for most of the people on this forum) don't agree with!
To a degree in some respect. I do think that if I am doing international travel I should be able to buy a SIM that allows me to use my iPhone overseas
The iPhone is not a Treo Palm device. Palm built their model on opening things up to others. Apple wants a closed system for some reason. Security, stability, or profit - it does not matter. The 'hackers" have responded to a missing market. I would gladly pay for a APP PACK that gave me what I feel is missing from the iPhone at this point.
That sums it up right there. End of story. Some people feel that they should be able to install third party apps on their hardware. Those that don't want to don't HAVE to.
What exactly makes it unauthorized? It's my phone. I authorize the third party application to be on there. It's my choice, not Apples. Not, it it was Apple's phone, and not mine, if I didn't OWN the phone, then it would be a different story. As far as I can tell, I OWN the phone, not lease it. I don't recall seeing LEASE clause, and I didn't sign one. EULA doesn't mean squat, and can't be enforced. Hardware does not fall under DMCA. I see nothing that Apple can legally do. They can release software that undoes the hacks, but I don't have to authorize it to be on my phone. They can keep me from iTunes, but who cares? iTunes has nothing to offer me personally.
The mistake that they made was installing both the hack and the update that breaks the functionality of their phone while adding very little in return.
Just my opinion. I'm not installing an update from Apple until they have the functionality that I expect to be there. If they don't ever release the update I'm looking for, the 3rd party software will be fine. If Apple does something to make my life hell, I'll take my business somewhere else. I think I'm going to give AT&T $150 anyways to avoid paying an extra $800 over the next 22 months anyways for the extra $40/month that I'm paying for the family plan over a single line.
-jt2
What contract? I don't remember one? I certainly never signed one. Besides, let them take me to court for hacking MY iPhone. They will spend a lot of money, and get nowhere. I guess you are also saying that Starbucks can tell me how to eat my muffin too.
I have my iPhone. I'm happy with my 3rd party Apps. If apple stock went to $0.02 tomorrow, I don't really care. If Steve Jobs got attacked by a hippie tomorrow, I'm sure the sun would still rise in the east on Saturday. I'm pretty sure my 3rd party apps would still be working. Otherwise, I really don't care.
-jt2
While you're all arguing about the same thing for the 1,000th time, I just need to know if having Installer.app on my phone will brick it with 1.1.1.
I don't even have any 3rd party apps installed. Just installer. Will updating bust the phone? If so, will a restore+update be safe?
I don't even have any 3rd party apps installed. Just installer. Will updating bust the phone? If so, will a restore+update be safe?
AFAIK, the only thing that can brick your iPhone is a SIM-unlock hack... The 3d-party apps and Installer.app are just overwritten...
You might wanna keep backups of your notes, photos and e-mail, but that'd just be a normal and wise procedure, regardless of some data-loss stories that have been circulating around...
Apple did what they said they were going to do, you have a choice not to upgrade your phone, that is what I am going to do.
Apple does not have to keep their system open. I hope they will eventually fill in the gaps and provide a productivity suite, games, ichat, mms. Until then I stick it out with my old software.
Apple does not have to keep their system open. I hope they will eventually fill in the gaps and provide a productivity suite, games, ichat, mms. Until then I stick it out with my old software.
All of this discussion is pretty funny given David Pogue's latest NY Times video on hacking the iPhone that just came out Thursday before the iPhone update,
http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=60063a68a1418ed080c995b01a36efb853a11417
Some of the best programs I have ever used or am using are freeware or open source. Journler is an excellent example. Of course Apple endorses the use of free widgets.
of course Mac OS X itself is full of open source freeware.
As an American scientist, I have used a large number of free 3rd party programs over the years to on PCs and Macs to do my research. Often I need to know exactly what a program is doing and if what is available is all commercial proprietary stuff, I have to end up writing my own program just to be confident in the results. So I always very much appreciate open source software. It saves grant money for other things (read your tax dollars) or even in some cases means giving back money not used because we were so efficient in doing our work.
Proprietary commercial 3rd party software for very specific small markets often is far inferior to freeware supported by the community that the commercial enterprise is trying to target. I have seen expenditures of upwards of $250,000 for commercial applications and PC based hardware that ended up not being used because they did not live up to the sales job. (A private grant gave us a bucket load of extra money to do something with or lose.) After a great deal of frustration, we went back to the non-commercial community software on Macs. Lesson learned. I can only think the commercial stuff exists because of corporate R&D where there is an excess of funds and deficit in the tech. knowledge to make a more educated purchasing decision. Hardly capitalism at it's finest.
All 3rd party developers, keep being creative. You are appreciated !
http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=60063a68a1418ed080c995b01a36efb853a11417
Some of the best programs I have ever used or am using are freeware or open source. Journler is an excellent example. Of course Apple endorses the use of free widgets.
of course Mac OS X itself is full of open source freeware.
As an American scientist, I have used a large number of free 3rd party programs over the years to on PCs and Macs to do my research. Often I need to know exactly what a program is doing and if what is available is all commercial proprietary stuff, I have to end up writing my own program just to be confident in the results. So I always very much appreciate open source software. It saves grant money for other things (read your tax dollars) or even in some cases means giving back money not used because we were so efficient in doing our work.
Proprietary commercial 3rd party software for very specific small markets often is far inferior to freeware supported by the community that the commercial enterprise is trying to target. I have seen expenditures of upwards of $250,000 for commercial applications and PC based hardware that ended up not being used because they did not live up to the sales job. (A private grant gave us a bucket load of extra money to do something with or lose.) After a great deal of frustration, we went back to the non-commercial community software on Macs. Lesson learned. I can only think the commercial stuff exists because of corporate R&D where there is an excess of funds and deficit in the tech. knowledge to make a more educated purchasing decision. Hardly capitalism at it's finest.
All 3rd party developers, keep being creative. You are appreciated !
I don't begrudge Apple breaking 3rd party apps if it was "necessary" to do in order to implement their other changes. For instance, if they needed to change a framework that then renders older apps broken, then so be it. But if they are doing on purpose, then that's just wrong.
Apple could've nipped this whole thing in the bud by doing one or two of 3 things:
1.) Partner with people like Dataviz to offer 3rd party commerical apps
2.) Provide Dashboard for the iPhone/iPod Touch
3.) Provide a full SDK and maybe an approval process so apps can be certified to run on the platform (with the latter maybe coming with a fee for the commericial developer).
I suspect, though, that the real intention behind Apple's upgrade breaking 3rd party apps is that they are either going to offer apps for a fee in the near future or they are going to offer the rumored PDA and don't want people turning their iPhones/Touches into full PDAs.
Apple could've nipped this whole thing in the bud by doing one or two of 3 things:
1.) Partner with people like Dataviz to offer 3rd party commerical apps
2.) Provide Dashboard for the iPhone/iPod Touch
3.) Provide a full SDK and maybe an approval process so apps can be certified to run on the platform (with the latter maybe coming with a fee for the commericial developer).
I suspect, though, that the real intention behind Apple's upgrade breaking 3rd party apps is that they are either going to offer apps for a fee in the near future or they are going to offer the rumored PDA and don't want people turning their iPhones/Touches into full PDAs.
Sounds just like the belief that if guns didn't exists people wouldn't kill people. Guns as does the ability to access the iPhone have nothing to do with the respective problem commonly associated with them. One could even argue that hacking will get even more malicious if Apple locks these devices to tightly, just as crime actually goes up in places with very tight gun control laws.
In the end your point of view is the totally invalid liberal idea that government and corporations need to protect you personally. It is crap as far as a way to live a life and frankly a bit offensive.
And you really believe that what Apple has done will protect the iPhone and you in the future? Be honest now!
Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about. If people want your information they will get it and it has nothing to do with any actions Apple takes.
Actually it is just the opposite. A locked iPhone, free from alternative apps, just means that you can't leverage the device in your business. This is very bad for business users many of whom had already put third party apps to work for them.
In many cases the lack of third party apps will compel people to carry a second device around with them to make up for those restrictions. That device might be a laptop computer. Carrying all this extra stuff just makes you an easier target for exploitation. There is good business justification to minimize the amount of hardware you carry around.
Simply put this restriction on third party apps is just about the worst thing that could happen to iPhone business users.
Another Dave
Its obviously the later, check what they added, I see none of them need to re-lock the phone.
spend $499 to "rent" a phone you can control? no wonder gizmodo.com verdict on iphone as "Don't buy it".
Apple is just repeating the defeat in 1990s, closed up try to grab all money all to itself isn't how this world works now, after taking advantages from free world, open source community, its sad and ugly to see apple turns back to its ugly natural.
If apple so much like all by itself, maybe open source community should change their licenses, let apple try to make a new OS by itself for a change.
Restraint of Trade?
I just had a thought. If Apple sells you a phone and you own it with the understanding that you agree to use AT&T as the provider, then what you decided to do with YOUR iPhone is your business. If Apple requires that all software, ringtones and other 3rd party materials must go through them, then that sounds like restraint of trade. Having the ability to use any software that will run on my iPhone knowing that unless Apple certifies it, could void your warranty and/or won't support it. Now, that is another story. I just wish Apple would spend more time developing product that enhance and support their new device, rather than playing world cop. Do you think Steve Jobs is really Bill Gates evil twin? Apple's attitude is sounding very Microsoftish lately!
Just my rant.
Phil
I just had a thought. If Apple sells you a phone and you own it with the understanding that you agree to use AT&T as the provider, then what you decided to do with YOUR iPhone is your business. If Apple requires that all software, ringtones and other 3rd party materials must go through them, then that sounds like restraint of trade. Having the ability to use any software that will run on my iPhone knowing that unless Apple certifies it, could void your warranty and/or won't support it. Now, that is another story. I just wish Apple would spend more time developing product that enhance and support their new device, rather than playing world cop. Do you think Steve Jobs is really Bill Gates evil twin? Apple's attitude is sounding very Microsoftish lately!
Just my rant.
Phil
Dave
"He who would sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
If cars were illegal then there would never be a car accident. However, if you are afraid of getting in an accident the right thing to do is not drive yourself. Not tell everyone else they can't drive. No one can jailbrake your phone over edge Dave. Your logic is faulty.
You made a personal choice not to take the risk of installing apps. Wonderful. Yet for some reason you don't think I should have the right to make that decision for myself. When you publicly support people being robbed of a personal choice in this country there is no agreeing to disagree.
APPLE
As long as Im not steeling the software I am installing no company has the legal or moral right to sell me a computer and tell me I cant install what I want on it. You can only use programing to try make it hard but I will always support the people who protect my ability to choose what is best for me.
I bought the phone making the reasonable assumption that apple would add the very basic and important features it was missing in a timely manner. (ie a to do list, wall paper) things you can do on a 20$ phone. Instead of adding these basic features apple choose spend its time on ITMS, another way for me to give them money. To add a music store before a to do list or even allow the deletion of more than one e-mail at a time is a totally irresponsible way for apple to treat it's customers.
I would not be too upset about using a closed system where I had to buy my apps through apple VIA the ITS. They spent a lot of time and money making the phone and they have a right to make money off of it. Also while my choices in apps would be more limited those apps may have better security and quality control. But the way apple is proceeding is greedy and out of touch with peoples wants/needs to the point of total mismanagement. I feel like apple sees me like a walking money clip. I'm mean I can spend money where ever I am but I can't have any other wallpaper but plain black?
I for one am going to give my money to the people who are actually trying to improve my user experience and thus life. It just totally confounds me that some people actually enjoy being treated like a walking wallet who is incapable of making his own decisions.
"He who would sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither" Benjamin Franklin
If cars were illegal then there would never be a car accident. However, if you are afraid of getting in an accident the right thing to do is not drive yourself. Not tell everyone else they can't drive. No one can jailbrake your phone over edge Dave. Your logic is faulty.
You made a personal choice not to take the risk of installing apps. Wonderful. Yet for some reason you don't think I should have the right to make that decision for myself. When you publicly support people being robbed of a personal choice in this country there is no agreeing to disagree.
APPLE
As long as Im not steeling the software I am installing no company has the legal or moral right to sell me a computer and tell me I cant install what I want on it. You can only use programing to try make it hard but I will always support the people who protect my ability to choose what is best for me.
I bought the phone making the reasonable assumption that apple would add the very basic and important features it was missing in a timely manner. (ie a to do list, wall paper) things you can do on a 20$ phone. Instead of adding these basic features apple choose spend its time on ITMS, another way for me to give them money. To add a music store before a to do list or even allow the deletion of more than one e-mail at a time is a totally irresponsible way for apple to treat it's customers.
I would not be too upset about using a closed system where I had to buy my apps through apple VIA the ITS. They spent a lot of time and money making the phone and they have a right to make money off of it. Also while my choices in apps would be more limited those apps may have better security and quality control. But the way apple is proceeding is greedy and out of touch with peoples wants/needs to the point of total mismanagement. I feel like apple sees me like a walking money clip. I'm mean I can spend money where ever I am but I can't have any other wallpaper but plain black?
I for one am going to give my money to the people who are actually trying to improve my user experience and thus life. It just totally confounds me that some people actually enjoy being treated like a walking wallet who is incapable of making his own decisions.
What we want?
As many other companies the most important thing for Apple is to earn money.
What we have received from Apple as comsumers has been evolving year after year, some may say we lost some nice features and we gain others in our loved Apple products.
Besides all the other products in this thread we must focus on the iPhone.
The iPhone as described by Mr. Jobs is the Best Phone ever made and a combination of an iPod + Internet Navigator + Phone.
We always want more than what we get, and we know there are many possible features that we want in our beloved iPhones.
We were used to receive from a cellphone: all what we have on the iPhone: address book, SMS, speakerphone, camera. We want all that plus ringtones (they came out into the cellphone business after some years). Some manufacturer allow you to customize it, we want more customization possibilities and Apple do knows we want that, and wants to make a profit of it.
What were we used to receive from an iPod: play all the digital music + videos + podacasts, etc you want in your portable player. We also want more and if its free much better.
What were we used to receive from an Internet Navigator: we have many options, not all are free, not all are portable, some are very slow, some are fast enough to do what wanted to do on the go.
We wanted the ability to do more with our portable devices, we wanted to integrate all what we were used to do with many different gadgets into a single device.
We believe we can have it all with our iPhones, and Apple just want to make a profit of it.
The 3rd party software developers give us either free open source software or "show me the money" software, and they started to satisfy the demands of the iPhone users.
And like in any other business, in what market sector will a company like Apple prefer to invest its money? Into what gives them more money.
Let's be realistic:
- Not all iPhone owners are interested into installing 3rd party apps, or do something beyond syncing its iPhone with iTunes.
- Not all iPhone owners get into forums like this one.
- Many of the iPhone owners and members of this forum do want to continue receiving free open source software, me included.
- Some iPhone owners prefer to pay for the software they want to use on their iPhones:
+ to be safe
+ to avoid a "hack"
+ to be able to have a liable target in case of a loss
+ beacuse doesn't want to loose time doing things they don't understand in order to gain more features or functionality
+ whatever other reason you may have.
- We don't know how many persons are in each category
- Apple may have a good idea how big its their target market
- Not only the USA is the market for the iPhone
- Many people around the globe do want an iPhone to be able to use it with their local carriers.
- Many GSM phones are unlocked and you can use any SIM with them, from any carrier -> Apple don't want that due to its strategic partnerships.
- Apple may want to create an iPhone effect that all other carriers want to make a deal in Apple terms, so they will be able to satisfy the iPhone demand from their customers.
- Many features we find in other products are not present in the iPhone, and some of us are missing them, and waiting to get it soon.
- Some of us do want something that differs from what others want and may be different from what apple wants.
- Some of us will keep the 1.02 firmware running in ou iPhones and wait for an update to gain the new apple produced features + the free stuff
Who is right?
Who will win?
who has more power?
Who creates the product?
who buys it?
Who pays for more?
who gets more for free?
We don't know it all, we are just end consumers with many desires that the iPhone give us all what we want, and that it will be the ultimate have it all portable device.
________
Honda Shadow 600 specifications
As many other companies the most important thing for Apple is to earn money.
What we have received from Apple as comsumers has been evolving year after year, some may say we lost some nice features and we gain others in our loved Apple products.
Besides all the other products in this thread we must focus on the iPhone.
The iPhone as described by Mr. Jobs is the Best Phone ever made and a combination of an iPod + Internet Navigator + Phone.
We always want more than what we get, and we know there are many possible features that we want in our beloved iPhones.
We were used to receive from a cellphone: all what we have on the iPhone: address book, SMS, speakerphone, camera. We want all that plus ringtones (they came out into the cellphone business after some years). Some manufacturer allow you to customize it, we want more customization possibilities and Apple do knows we want that, and wants to make a profit of it.
What were we used to receive from an iPod: play all the digital music + videos + podacasts, etc you want in your portable player. We also want more and if its free much better.
What were we used to receive from an Internet Navigator: we have many options, not all are free, not all are portable, some are very slow, some are fast enough to do what wanted to do on the go.
We wanted the ability to do more with our portable devices, we wanted to integrate all what we were used to do with many different gadgets into a single device.
We believe we can have it all with our iPhones, and Apple just want to make a profit of it.
The 3rd party software developers give us either free open source software or "show me the money" software, and they started to satisfy the demands of the iPhone users.
And like in any other business, in what market sector will a company like Apple prefer to invest its money? Into what gives them more money.
Let's be realistic:
- Not all iPhone owners are interested into installing 3rd party apps, or do something beyond syncing its iPhone with iTunes.
- Not all iPhone owners get into forums like this one.
- Many of the iPhone owners and members of this forum do want to continue receiving free open source software, me included.
- Some iPhone owners prefer to pay for the software they want to use on their iPhones:
+ to be safe
+ to avoid a "hack"
+ to be able to have a liable target in case of a loss
+ beacuse doesn't want to loose time doing things they don't understand in order to gain more features or functionality
+ whatever other reason you may have.
- We don't know how many persons are in each category
- Apple may have a good idea how big its their target market
- Not only the USA is the market for the iPhone
- Many people around the globe do want an iPhone to be able to use it with their local carriers.
- Many GSM phones are unlocked and you can use any SIM with them, from any carrier -> Apple don't want that due to its strategic partnerships.
- Apple may want to create an iPhone effect that all other carriers want to make a deal in Apple terms, so they will be able to satisfy the iPhone demand from their customers.
- Many features we find in other products are not present in the iPhone, and some of us are missing them, and waiting to get it soon.
- Some of us do want something that differs from what others want and may be different from what apple wants.
- Some of us will keep the 1.02 firmware running in ou iPhones and wait for an update to gain the new apple produced features + the free stuff
Who is right?
Who will win?
who has more power?
Who creates the product?
who buys it?
Who pays for more?
who gets more for free?
We don't know it all, we are just end consumers with many desires that the iPhone give us all what we want, and that it will be the ultimate have it all portable device.
________
Honda Shadow 600 specifications
Last edited:
Steve Jobs should go sit on a rake
Not only does he take away some nice and value-adding 3rd party apps, but then only adds software to enable me to give more of my money to him. Not even MMS! It is absolutely ridiculous that on my IPHONE i have to go to a website, login with some ridiculous random id & pw simply to view a picture message. Even my treo 600 had MMS.
Now I'm genuinely hoping Steve's former colleagues now at Palm help Palm create an iphone killer.
Not only does he take away some nice and value-adding 3rd party apps, but then only adds software to enable me to give more of my money to him. Not even MMS! It is absolutely ridiculous that on my IPHONE i have to go to a website, login with some ridiculous random id & pw simply to view a picture message. Even my treo 600 had MMS.
Now I'm genuinely hoping Steve's former colleagues now at Palm help Palm create an iphone killer.
Think Different!
Like most corporations (Microsoft, IBM, Apple), they tend to lose focus and the ability to understand consumers when they get too big and start trying to control everything.
The brand name simply does not sell the product. In the end, only the users will decide what is best.
Please start checking out any flavor of Linux and start supporting it.
Linux may not be there yet in terms of everyday functionality for every type of user, but as far as a competing product, it will be there VERY SOON.
Linux is open source, and I am willing to bet that this will be the OS for the next generation (until another great open-minded group of developers comes along and creates something better). Why not use a great OS with hardware that YOU choose and configure the software how you want?
As we are all tainted by now, I know that the next generation of young tech savvy users will realize the potential. I love computers and I think they should be used to make you feel free and happy with what what you want to accomplish.
Thank you to the hardworking developers for creating a platform to show off the potential of the underdog! Screw the money-hungry, micro-management corporations!
Oh, and by the way, is anyone else getting sick of the narrow-minded Apple fanboys that stick up for every single decision made by their god, Steve Jobs?
Anyway, Bill Gates is much cooler and a more genuine person than the egocentric Steve Jobs. I would rather have a beer and some shots with him at party than Steve Jobs. At least he uses his money for the good, instead of just counting it. Apple is only around because Bill left Microsoft and let his idiotic college roommate, Steve Ballmer, run the show.
Remember, if it was not for generous and open-minded people like Bill Gates, Apple would not have received the financial boost to keep them around as a competitor to Microsoft and progress computer technology.
Trip on that, fool!
Oh, by the way, listen to "The Great British Moan" by MC Wrec. Great song.
Like most corporations (Microsoft, IBM, Apple), they tend to lose focus and the ability to understand consumers when they get too big and start trying to control everything.
The brand name simply does not sell the product. In the end, only the users will decide what is best.
Please start checking out any flavor of Linux and start supporting it.
Linux may not be there yet in terms of everyday functionality for every type of user, but as far as a competing product, it will be there VERY SOON.
Linux is open source, and I am willing to bet that this will be the OS for the next generation (until another great open-minded group of developers comes along and creates something better). Why not use a great OS with hardware that YOU choose and configure the software how you want?
As we are all tainted by now, I know that the next generation of young tech savvy users will realize the potential. I love computers and I think they should be used to make you feel free and happy with what what you want to accomplish.
Thank you to the hardworking developers for creating a platform to show off the potential of the underdog! Screw the money-hungry, micro-management corporations!
Oh, and by the way, is anyone else getting sick of the narrow-minded Apple fanboys that stick up for every single decision made by their god, Steve Jobs?
Anyway, Bill Gates is much cooler and a more genuine person than the egocentric Steve Jobs. I would rather have a beer and some shots with him at party than Steve Jobs. At least he uses his money for the good, instead of just counting it. Apple is only around because Bill left Microsoft and let his idiotic college roommate, Steve Ballmer, run the show.
Remember, if it was not for generous and open-minded people like Bill Gates, Apple would not have received the financial boost to keep them around as a competitor to Microsoft and progress computer technology.
Trip on that, fool!
Oh, by the way, listen to "The Great British Moan" by MC Wrec. Great song.
Why apple didn't include more apps like the free ones?
A nice and intelligent way for Apple business to keep us happy and generate more iPhone buzz, will be to include some of the nice apps in their firmware update. We all know that
is very good adding and improving new features.
How do you think this could happen?
And how far could it be for free?
Please elaborate on the way of doing it and please refrain to post many Mr. Jobs lovers' sentences like: it's not gonna happen, or when something impossible occurs.
Remember that we the called "early adopters" demanded a refund due the price difference and we obtained something, therefore we may also have some influence on this one.
I suggest a Poll:
Are you willing to pay for iPhone software, if so how much?
1) All the iPhone apps should be free because don't want any 3rd party to work on the iPhone for software.
2) Some key apps like the basic ones missing for the PDA-smartphone function on the iPhone should be free: task manager, notes, MMS. For others we may pay.
3) Apple should buy the 3rd party apps and release them in the next firmware update, or through the ITMS:
3.1 For free
3.2 Asking for money to recover the investment: man hours and/or purchase cost
3.2.1 Maximum price $0.99
3.2.2 Maximum price $1.99
3.2.3 Maximum price $2.99
3.2.4 Maximum price $4.99
4) Apple should create their own apps to include nice features like the 3rd party apps available for free, using a similar scheme for # 3).
One final question: what do you think should be the criteria to define the borderline between the free apps by Apple and the ones that you have to pay for?
________
drug test kit
A nice and intelligent way for Apple business to keep us happy and generate more iPhone buzz, will be to include some of the nice apps in their firmware update. We all know that
is very good adding and improving new features.How do you think this could happen?
And how far could it be for free?
Please elaborate on the way of doing it and please refrain to post many Mr. Jobs lovers' sentences like: it's not gonna happen, or when something impossible occurs.
Remember that we the called "early adopters" demanded a refund due the price difference and we obtained something, therefore we may also have some influence on this one.
I suggest a Poll:
Are you willing to pay for iPhone software, if so how much?
1) All the iPhone apps should be free because
don't want any 3rd party to work on the iPhone for software.2) Some key apps like the basic ones missing for the PDA-smartphone function on the iPhone should be free: task manager, notes, MMS. For others we may pay.
3) Apple should buy the 3rd party apps and release them in the next firmware update, or through the ITMS:
3.1 For free
3.2 Asking for money to recover the investment: man hours and/or purchase cost
3.2.1 Maximum price $0.99
3.2.2 Maximum price $1.99
3.2.3 Maximum price $2.99
3.2.4 Maximum price $4.99
4) Apple should create their own apps to include nice features like the 3rd party apps available for free, using a similar scheme for # 3).
One final question: what do you think should be the criteria to define the borderline between the free apps by Apple and the ones that you have to pay for?
________
drug test kit
Last edited:
If there is a free app available, generally speaking, it is better than the ones that are developed and sold. There are a few really good killer applications out there that do not have a freeware option that is better. Honestly, I can only think of a couple myself, and those are not valuable to all people, but have wide-spread acceptance, such as Microsoft Office suite. There are free alternatives to it, but none that combine all aspects of it.
The reason why free software is so great really has nothing to do with the price that is charged for it. It's more about the love and devotion that the developer put into it.
Many corporate software programmers hate their jobs, and the only reason why they are doing it is because they are getting paid. Many develop software that they don't really care about. Not all of them certainly, but many.
Almost all developers of free software do it because they love to do it, and want to develop a great product.
Almost all corporations have people in the middle, between the consumer and the developers. These people are marketing types, project managers, financial types, CEOs, etc. that either think they know what the consumer wants, or is trying out how to twist it so as to make as much profit as possible. The developers get the requirements and desires of their consumers through these channels as twisted bits of information that bares little resemblance to what the consumers really want.
Almost all developers of free software are involved with the distribution of the software and the community of consumers that will use it. They have a much better concept of what consumers want, and if it sounds like a good idea, many will step up to the challenge.
The sad thing is that many people in the US don't know the truth, or have developed the attitude of laziness. They either don't care to go look for better options or believe in the marketing hype that the corporations know what you want. Most also trust that the corporations have their best interests in mind.
Do I think that Apple will produce the products that e desire to be on the iPhone? Maybe, but only if there is financial justification for doing such a thing. Does Apple care about the people that have already purchased an iPhone? I seriously doubt that the desired of the iPhone owners are keeping anyone at Apple up at night, except when it creates negative press, and possibly affects new sales potential.
What I DO know for certain is that there are developers that are writing applications for the iPhone today that are doing so out of love for both the iPhone and the creation of a great quality application. I would gladly use these applications over anything that Apple may dream up. I'd even PAY for them, as long as the act of paying for it does not alter the motivation of the developers.
-jt2
I was just about to buy an iPhone, especially with the new 1.1.1 improvements but w/out the 3rd party apps I am really torn. Has anyone heard news about a nullriver update for 1.1.1?