I really don't understand why you would call this an "Epic Fail." First off, there is a lot of specialized software already capable of running effectively on an iPhone/iPod Touch that goes from POS (point of sale) through medical applications that even include plug-in devices using the 30-pin dock connector for I/O. To give these apps access to a larger, easier to read screen and potentially even add new capabilities (I honestly expect iPhone OS 4 to follow soon,) then this is far more likely to be an epic Win rather than fail. Just because it's different from what you want doesn't mean it can't do the job just as well or even better.
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.
Apple Asking App Developers to Prepare for Large Screen Demos Next Month?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I really don't understand why you would call this an "Epic Fail." First off, there is a lot of specialized software already capable of running effectively on an iPhone/iPod Touch that goes from POS (point of sale) through medical applications that even include plug-in devices using the 30-pin dock connector for I/O. To give these apps access to a larger, easier to read screen and potentially even add new capabilities (I honestly expect iPhone OS 4 to follow soon,) then this is far more likely to be an epic Win rather than fail. Just because it's different from what you want doesn't mean it can't do the job just as well or even better.
WowWOwwoWwow w..o..w
The screen will be round as befits a portable washer, so no one will ever use a laundromat again.
The screen will be round as befits a portable washer, so no one will ever use a laundromat again.
I certainly hope there is an app store for the tablet.
As to veto power they certainly need to have that available. Mainly because it is their store and they have to set the standards. In any event I've yet to have a good explanation from anybody as to why having a veto is a problem. Generally it has worked out good for both Apple and the users. As for developers well if 99% of them that have had apps rejected had read the SDK agreements there wouldn't be any problems.
Because it is a different product? Think about it, Apple delivers on IPhone more software capability than has been seen on all cell phones before iPhone came out. Yet even with this giant leap forward people are concerned about Apple managing it's software store for that cell phone. Previous your choices where to take it or leave it, software not included and not available. Now Apple gives you software in quanities un heard of and people nitpick over what could be if only the device where more open.
Now we have this rumored tablet comming which people fret about because it might be tied to an app store. Frankly that Gould be seen as a very good thing in my opinion especially if that app store starts out with compatible iPhone software. It would be very possible for that Tablet to have more apps available at launch than are on the Mac right now. The number of those apps would grow quickly too. The reason being is that app store premits low cost low exposure innovation in software that allows for more developers to take advantage of the platform. The simple reality is that the tablet needs an Apple sponsored app store for rapid growth and long term success.
People look at app store as a negative but that is opposite of reality. Apples app store has assured the success of iPhone but more importantly has provided a playground for a bunch of successful developers to start up businesses. At the consummer end the store is a windfall of reasonably priced apps.
So what is the problem?
Dave
There better be an app store as that has been a key to IPhone success. It is not something that can be dismissed. Do we need to be limited to Apples app store - probably not, but I will be the first to say I would have little respect for developer or software not for sale on the tablets app store.
As to veto power they certainly need to have that available. Mainly because it is their store and they have to set the standards. In any event I've yet to have a good explanation from anybody as to why having a veto is a problem. Generally it has worked out good for both Apple and the users. As for developers well if 99% of them that have had apps rejected had read the SDK agreements there wouldn't be any problems.
Because it is a different product? Think about it, Apple delivers on IPhone more software capability than has been seen on all cell phones before iPhone came out. Yet even with this giant leap forward people are concerned about Apple managing it's software store for that cell phone. Previous your choices where to take it or leave it, software not included and not available. Now Apple gives you software in quanities un heard of and people nitpick over what could be if only the device where more open.
Now we have this rumored tablet comming which people fret about because it might be tied to an app store. Frankly that Gould be seen as a very good thing in my opinion especially if that app store starts out with compatible iPhone software. It would be very possible for that Tablet to have more apps available at launch than are on the Mac right now. The number of those apps would grow quickly too. The reason being is that app store premits low cost low exposure innovation in software that allows for more developers to take advantage of the platform. The simple reality is that the tablet needs an Apple sponsored app store for rapid growth and long term success.
People look at app store as a negative but that is opposite of reality. Apples app store has assured the success of iPhone but more importantly has provided a playground for a bunch of successful developers to start up businesses. At the consummer end the store is a windfall of reasonably priced apps.
So what is the problem?
Dave
I may not want to run iPhone apps full-screen. I'd be likely to hold a tablet in landscape position even while using portrait-orientation apps. So they could scale up to the height of the screen but not the fulll width.
More likely a single screen that can act like e-Ink when necessary and also display vivid colors. Given Apple's practice of streamlining design, I can't see any Apple device having 2 separate screens. This may be the screen we'll see:
http://www.pixelqi.com/home
Two display sizes makes sense
- It allows two different sizes of devices.
- It allows two different prices.
- It forces developers to support two different resolutions, hence making it a no-brainer to say "might as well also support iPhone/iPod touch at this point".
RE : Reason Apple didn't specify resolution for apps at demo.
Unless a developer has been living under a rock they know full well from all the tons of speculation what size the ******* will be. Knowing this it would be very easy to use as a template. So to speak.
As far as what OS will be used. Same thing. The iPhone uses a variation of OSX. They call it iPhone OS. There's even an iPhone simulator that can be used under OSX to test the app on. I'm guessing these "select" developers have their hands on a simulator that emulates the *******.
The part that says the app "should work fine" implies a variation of the iPhone/OSX OS.
And since it should work fine it will run on the arm processor. This tells us the ******* has an arm processor in it.
just sayin'
Unless a developer has been living under a rock they know full well from all the tons of speculation what size the ******* will be. Knowing this it would be very easy to use as a template. So to speak.
As far as what OS will be used. Same thing. The iPhone uses a variation of OSX. They call it iPhone OS. There's even an iPhone simulator that can be used under OSX to test the app on. I'm guessing these "select" developers have their hands on a simulator that emulates the *******.
The part that says the app "should work fine" implies a variation of the iPhone/OSX OS.
And since it should work fine it will run on the arm processor. This tells us the ******* has an arm processor in it.
just sayin'
You really don't want to be able to do things like have google voice support, VOIP, slingplayer over 3G, springboard replacements, third-party web browsers, flash, nintendo emulators, etc.? Do I need to run down the litany of apps that have been rejected? I don't mind if Apple wants to run a store and reject apps on the store, but for a tablet we should be able to distribute apps other ways as well.
You really want to have to wait 3 weeks for a simple app update because apple is too swamped reviewing fart apps to get around to reviewing it?
There are many great things about the app store, but a tablet isn't a cellphone, and doesn't need apple's dictatorship to make sure apps don't break anything.
Am I missing something as to why this isn't just a higher resolution iPhone? The Nexus One and Driod phones both have a resolution of 480 x 854. Seems silly for Apple to ignore this. Announcing it in January gives developers time to create resolution independent versions of their apps.
Also, can anyone think of an app that'll actually run well on a 10" display? Games will be uncomfortable, and most other apps will be far too simplistic...
Also, can anyone think of an app that'll actually run well on a 10" display? Games will be uncomfortable, and most other apps will be far too simplistic...
There you go. (Some sort of) iPhone OS for the tablet (is increasingly likely).
Also mobile iLife/iWork that uses the larger size of the tablet display.
That's why I see many new apps for the tablet, starting with iLife and iWork.
Excuse me, large screen? I don't consider anything under 2560 x1600 pixels large!
.
.
.
.
.
I appreciate your sentiment.
Since nobody will actually answer the question, "what is full screen?", I will simply ask how many iPhone screens will fit in 1024x768, 720p, or 1080p?
Rocketman
Rocketman
If this tablet runs ANYTHING remotely close to the iPhone OS, I guarantee you it will fail miserably. Why would I want somethig bigger than my iPhone just to run lame bigger versions of 99 cent apps? The only way that could possibly be close to fathomable is if the tablet is priced at $400 or under, which will not happen (considering an iPod Touch isn't much less.)
I'm sorry, but I can't see this thing being useful if it only runs iPhone OS-based apps, or it being worth anyone's money, or even Apple's money for making it.
Apple needs to start competing in the COMPUTER market, not the mobile gadget market of which they already control. (Regarding the iPod/iPhone)
Limit me to an App Store? I think not. Have fun with an HD version of iFart...so we can fart all day on our $1000+ iPods....I mean tablets.....lol
I'm sorry, but I can't see this thing being useful if it only runs iPhone OS-based apps, or it being worth anyone's money, or even Apple's money for making it.
Apple needs to start competing in the COMPUTER market, not the mobile gadget market of which they already control. (Regarding the iPod/iPhone)
Limit me to an App Store? I think not. Have fun with an HD version of iFart...so we can fart all day on our $1000+ iPods....I mean tablets.....lol
I agree, it's really hard handling doubling a small screen size. On something as small as an iPhone, you can only fit 3-4 user interface elements on a screen, and even then when you go to interact with them, Apple's UI will make each one full-screen, such as lists and text entry fields. So if you had twice the display area, you would have to choose between combining smaller pages into one, or keeping the same UI elements, but giving them more space (make the list taller to show more options before editing, or make a multi-line text field show more lines). That would be especially difficult to dynamically do, if there were a whole range of possible resolutions.
Doesn't the iPhone have video out support? Wouldn't that be at 640x480? Do they just do simple scaling, or do you draw to the built-in screen differently than out the video port? I wonder when they'll move to HD video out?
That would be hilarious, if all these tablet rumours were simply about the same form factor device, but with a higher resolution screen. The more I think about it, the more I doubt it's a tablet. Unless the tablet could fold, or was still close in size to the existing device.
If we buy the tablet, will we be able to use the Apps we've already paid and downloaded on the app store OR will they make exclusive versions for the tablet, forcing customers to shop for the same apps again..
Remember a little feature that just came out in iTunes 9 that lets you copy media and APPS? I'll bet they will just work!
YAYAYAYAYAY IT IS ABOUT TIME WE GET THE TABLET! WOW I'm excited haha!
iWork and iLife Mobile here we come!
P.S. So if they say the apps will still run just fine, what does that mean for Tablet hardware? Is a new P.A. Semi designed CPU out of the picture?
Wouldn't they beef up all the hardware specs?Apple's constantly updating connectivity to coincide with new generations of hardware, possibly increasing cost has never stopped them before..
And I'm sorry, but I'd rather hit myself in the head repeatedly with a cast iron skillet rather than use a USB hard drive.. USB blows.. My one true hatred of my iPhone (besides AT&T) is the the slow-as-molasses-in-January data transfer... It's not even walk away and brew coffee slow, it's walk away brew and drink coffee then brew another pot slow.. USB on a device where you're doing entertainment/media and possibly *work*? Thanks, but no thanks. I'd wager that slow data access will kill a tablet faster than any possible AT&T issues or cost.. If Light Peak isn't in the cards, FW800 damn well better be..
shrug.
AppleTV is an embedded CE device, there's no API offered for a developer to write to. It's not a problem for anyone to support.
In the Apple world there are 2 API's with a lot of overlap, that's the iPhone OS X and the Mac OS X. The difference from a developers perspective is predominantly in cocoa, but also in some of the file handling calls.
Guess what? In the Google world you also have 2 API's, one is Android (Of which there is currently 3 variants, not 100% backwardly compatible) and then there's Chrome OS, and the best bit is there's zero overlap between the API's.
So what's the advantage here? There isn't one.
The user interface is an app. Touch finder. On MacOS it is Finder.
Add an IBM Thinkpad style thumb stylus and BOOM you have a MacOS style Finder compatable tablet.
I hope they do a Lisa user interface just for old time's sake. We have an app for that!
Rocketman
Start Saving
They probably want developer apps using vector graphics [lines], not raster [dot matrix] graphics, or for those select developers to convert them...
Vector graphics are scalable unlike rasters which pixelate the larger they are displayed...
So they prolly secured the big two streaming media providers... It might run iPhone OS 4.0 by March April...
There will be an OS X version though, and probably a bigger screen to accommodate virtual keyboard...
They probably want developer apps using vector graphics [lines], not raster [dot matrix] graphics, or for those select developers to convert them...
Vector graphics are scalable unlike rasters which pixelate the larger they are displayed...
So they prolly secured the big two streaming media providers... It might run iPhone OS 4.0 by March April...
There will be an OS X version though, and probably a bigger screen to accommodate virtual keyboard...
