Apple iPhone Apps Coming, but Limited

Discussion in ' News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 11, 2007.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    A New York Times article reveals some information about Apple's iPhone and the possibility of 3rd party application.

    The article quotes Steve Jobs about why Apple does not want to allow any 3rd party developer make applications for the iPhone:

    While saying this, Jobs does reveal that there will likely be additional applications that can be bought later and installed, but that this will be in a "controlled environment". Apple adopts a similar approach with iPod game development -- only allowing specific products to be developed and released.
  2. gwangung macrumors 65816

    Apr 9, 2003
    I await the "Steve Jobs is a control freak" comments. :D
  3. Asar macrumors regular

    May 29, 2006
  4. neptunet macrumors newbie

    Sep 12, 2005
    The iPhone can kiss my iAss.

    It's going to be terrible without any 3rd party apps.
  5. dan-o-mac macrumors 6502a


    Oct 12, 2004
    Brooklyn, NY
    ********! Then why did he keep stressing how cool it was to have OS X on it.
  6. Aeolius macrumors 6502a

    Jul 25, 2002
    Salling Clicker would be a natural app for the iPhone, which would lead to iPhone control of home automation via Indigo .
  7. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604


    Dec 29, 2006
    dallas, texas
    it's not going to be able to opreate like osx...only look like osx and have some familiar apps, but you arent going to have a full os....thatd be crazy....its going to be "mini-Leopard"
  8. siurpeeman macrumors 603


    Dec 2, 2006
    the OC
    i hope i won't have to pay for ichat when it's released, if it's released at all.
  9. spyderracer393 macrumors regular

    Jan 8, 2006
    ...I can see it now, all apps will be purchased through the iTS. This is obvious because the iPhone is synced with iTunes for everything -- music, videos, calendars, contacts, notes, etc...same deal with iPod. Just like games there will be a section of iTunes dedicated to iPhone apps.
  10. mduser63 macrumors 68040


    Nov 9, 2004
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Gotta disagree with Steve on this one. It's Apple's job to engineer the phone in such a way that simply installing other apps can't prevent the phone from functioning. As for his assertion that it's more like an iPod than a computer, why did he stress that it runs OS X, Safari, Mail, Widgets, etc? Sounds like a computer to me...

    I don't care if Apple requires a certification process for apps to be made available for the phone (perhaps through iTunes), but closing it off to small developers entirely is stupid. I'm sure big companies that can negotiate deals with Apple will be able to write apps for the iPhone, but it seems like some of the very best apps for the Mac are done by small developers.
  11. paulpet macrumors member

    Sep 7, 2006
    3G a software upgrade on the iPhone?

    Did anyone else notice this little gem in the article?

    The device is not currently compatible with the faster 3G wireless data networks that are driving sharp gains in cellular revenues in the United States, although several Apple insiders said the phone could be upgraded to 3G with software if Apple later decides to do so.

    Anyone know if this could be true? I was assuming different chipsets would be involved to move from EDGE to 3G.

  12. dizastor macrumors 6502a


    Dec 27, 2001
    Los Angeles
  13. dan-o-mac macrumors 6502a


    Oct 12, 2004
    Brooklyn, NY
    My point was why did he state is has OS X(I know it's not a full version) as a feature, talk about running a real web browsers, then go ahead and state it's nothing like a computer. He's full of it.
  14. Aeolius macrumors 6502a

    Jul 25, 2002
    I still can't decide if it's a "Mini Mac Mini" (Mac Eentsy Weensy?) or an "iPod Wambo". :D
  15. Whistleway macrumors 6502

    Feb 16, 2005
    I would imagine that stance means, you can kiss corporate users goodbye !
  16. Aeolius macrumors 6502a

    Jul 25, 2002
    I doubt corporate users would buy a GPS-enabled phone that you cannot take the battery out of, anyway. And I have yet to hear if the battery is removable (I hope it is).
  17. BillyShears macrumors 6502

    Jan 30, 2003
    OS X references could be to show it's proven technology

    I initially thought that it running "OS X" (and Core Image, etc.) was a sign of third party developers being allowed in.

    I'm not sure, but maybe he mentioned those to show it's proven technology, and not a whole new OS (with the accompanying bugs).
  18. dr_lha macrumors 68000

    Oct 8, 2003
    I'm not. Not being able to install 3rd party apps is the deal breaker for me. Even if you could just install Dashboard widgets on it that would be infinitely superior to this "closed platform" idea. Shame, I was looking forward to owning one.
  19. coumerelli macrumors 6502

    Apr 7, 2003
    state of confusion.
    Functions like....has features of...

    It's simple, I think. OS X is powerful. It has a powerful graphics engine. It has a gorgeous UI. It has an intuitive UI. It's solid and 'locked down' from un-authenticated/authorized intrusion. These can all be said of the 'OS X' on the iPhone. So, in essence, it IS OS X - just not the FULL OS X we use and rely on day in and day out.
  20. MoparShaha macrumors 68000


    May 15, 2003
    San Francisco
    This is really a poor decision. Part of the allure of a smartphone is that it's a PDA as well. This means 3rd party programs. I use my PocketPC all the time, and rely mainly on 3rd party apps.

    I understand Steve's reasoning, in that he wants a smooth, seemless device. This is somewhat analogous to Mac's being so stable because Apple controls the hardware and software, so OS X is programmed with every possible circumstance in mind, unlike Windows which must cope with a myriad of hardware situations (I know we're only talking about software with the iPhone though). Still, I agree with a previous poster who said it's Apple's responsibility to ensure the smooth operation of the phone portion of the device, regardless of 3rd party apps.

    However disappointed I am by this decision, I think we need to realize this is Apple's first go at this device (and market), so they're being overly cautious. They want to make a good first impression on the majority of consumers, and that means making a simple, efficient, and reliable device. We might see changes once Apple gets a firm foothold in this market.
  21. harmless macrumors member

    Oct 17, 2001
    I disagree

    This is one hell of a computer.

    But if you want it to be just a phone, Steve, guess what. You can keep it. I'm not interested any more.


    I mean, he has to be kidding me. No Skype, SSH, VLC, Chat, Navigation, ... ?! Come on Apple, even *you* are not able to write every piece of software that could be useful for this thing.

    This is kind of a Mac with only iLife on it. Guess Steve would love it. I just don't know anyone else who would.
  22. dan-o-mac macrumors 6502a


    Oct 12, 2004
    Brooklyn, NY
    I'm not really concerned if the OS is full or mini version. My main concern is quotes like this, “We define everything that is on the phone". Thanks, but no thanks. What if I wanted Adium on my phone but Apple doesn't. Let the user decide what they want on the phone, let them take responsibility.
  23. ShermDog macrumors regular

    Mar 15, 2004
    I agree with Jobs on strictly controlling what goes into the iPhone. This is definitely more of a variant of the iPod than it is a computer. Just because it runs a lighter version of OSX doesn't mean that it's meant to function like your desktop or laptop. To me, running OSX on the iPhone means rock-solid stability, a great UI and graphics, and seamlessness between the phone and my desktop/laptop.
  24. SiliconAddict macrumors 603


    Jun 19, 2003
    Chicago, IL
    I've got a name! Forget the iPhone....its the iCub! :D

Share This Page