Apple Slowly Ramping Up iPhone Developer Program

[EagerDragon]

One item that people may not understand .... Most of what one learns in order to program for the iPhone is directly applicable to the Mac.

Some of the PC developers that move into the iPhone, will be able to also program for the Mac. This will increase the number of developers.

Also one can write more complex applications that cover both the iPhone as a client component and the Mac as a server component. Most people are only considering the iPhone as the platform, but when you combine both, you have a much richer environment.

Instead of selling $1.99 software, you maybe selling software for $500 all the way to $50,000 per license. Selling to businesses is where the big bills are at.

You can make a fortune either way, the key is to find the niche and producing something that meets or exceeds the need. Maybe mix your knowledge about a subject or hobby since you have a good understanding of the challenges and what is needed.

If you hit it right, you will be swimming in cash.

Instead of bitching about the current practices of Apple, take the time to hone your skills and develop your idea more, take it to the next step, think about how the original product will evolve a year or 3 years from now, think about how it will combine with that second product you also have in your mind. Look 1 to 3-5 years into the future (5 years is harder), then build your first product with the 3 to 5 year plan in mind, dont forget to add the hooks you will need in the future and do not paint your product into a corner.

Well thought out products targeted at a particular population is what is going to make you rich!!!!!!!!

 

[dicklacara]

FYI, I co-wrote ClarisWorks and sold it to Claris, and I got the "non-acceptance" email. I guess my iPhone version of Subway Shuffle , which I've been waiting to implement since the iPhone was announced, will have to wait. (Yeah, yeah, I can at least work on it in the simulator.)

Not that I'm really surprised. I don't think my ClarisWorks history is reflected in my ADC profile; I was not a member then.

Bob... Wasn't Randy Wiggington involved in that? I seem to remember he and someone else demoing a "works" package to Jean-Louis & Mark Wozniak in our Sunnyvale Computer Plus Store. Also, IIRC, some one(s) in that same group worked with Don Williams to write AppleWorks... later purchased by MS & released as MS Works... then killed?

 

[bob_hearn]

Bob... Wasn't Randy Wiggington involved in that? I seem to remember he and someone else demoing a "works" package to Jean-Louis & Mark Wozniak in our Sunnyvale Computer Plus Store. Also, IIRC, some one(s) in that same group worked with Don Williams to write AppleWorks... later purchased by MS & released as MS Works... then killed?

Nope. Sounds like a story I'd like to hear more about, though. My history with ClarisWorks is here.

Re AppleWorks -- the Apple II program, that is (which was a completely different program from ClarisWorks) -- I thought Bob Lissner wrote that?

 

[Virgil-TB2]

They say it will be expanded to other countries during the "beta period" which suggests before June. However, US only at present still sucks.

I am a big Apple supporter, but judging by the absolute failure of Apple to support countries other than the USA in the past for things like iTunes content, Apple Stores, shipping, pricing, etc. I would take any announcements from them about international *anything* with a giant grain of salt.

They have made many statements in the past about how they were going to be supporting X, Y, or Z "internationally" or releasing something in the USA and then "rapidly ramping up international availability" or some such and they have basically failed each and every time to live up to their statements. Apple has a habit of largely overstating it's capabilities in this regard.

 

[swagi]

iPhone applications ... no money in that.

End result will be some decent corporate and media apps by big players but I am having a hard time believing that any small or independent developer will make living developing for iPhone.

I strongly disagree. There are gazillions of things, you can easily transform into an iPhone app that makes sense. I'll give you some examples (won't list my best ideas, because maybe I start learning programming and do them myself):

- educational app for picking colors or symbols to sharpen eye accuracy
- educational tool for learning the alphabet - remember the millions of analphabets in your own county (no national pun intended, as there is a certain percentage in every country)
- specialized dictionaries (Cocktail recipes and stuff like that)
- specialized algorithms for a systematic approach to a problem (e.g. use an algorithm to determine, what type of engineering problem your machine has)
- Pick the note -> music education

All can be very tiny apps and use the iPhone as portable device. There is no need for fancy gestures or accelerometers. Think something like an offline wikipedia, where your iPhone doesn't need to access the web, but you look something up just on the go.

And if coded well, people will buy! (Think Epocrates for instance!)

Best regards,
swagi

 

[michelepri]

Steve Jobs is a corporate fetishist and would love to see all individual developers absorbed by large companies.

On the other hand I think Apple knows very well that the new Google platform will wipe out the IPhone consumer market in no time. It's just superior, more open, and does not require customers to get ripped off from the worst telecoms in the world.

This is why they want to concentrate on corporate applications. They are the only possibility for Iphone to survive in a couple of years. And it makes sense that Apple would control the applications that come out. Corporate clients don't want many creative apps but just a few reliable and safe ones.

 

[admanimal]

On the other hand I think Apple knows very well that the new Google platform will wipe out the IPhone consumer market in no time.

Google can make the best platform in the world but unless the actual phone manufacturers can come up with an integrated hardware/software solution that is overall as nice as the iPhone/iPod (which so far they have failed miserably at), Apple won't have much to worry about. Not to mention the huge head start/momentum that the iPhone has.

 

[michelepri]

Google can make the best platform in the world but unless the actual phone manufacturers can come up with an integrated hardware/software solution that is overall as nice as the iPhone/iPod (which so far they have failed miserably at), Apple won't have much to worry about. Not to mention the huge head start/momentum that the iPhone has.

That's true. But unlike Nokia or Motorola google knows how to make user friendly technology. Not much effort is required from hardware manufacturers, they just have to design a nice case with a touch screen. The rest comes from Android. I certainly hope so because having a monopoly in the market is always dangerous, and Apple goes even further by forcing other carrier monopoly upon consumers. Apple has a momentum but its choices are controversial, in some cases even sending people away from Apple products in general.

 

[akac]

iPhone applications ... no money in that.

End result will be some decent corporate and media apps by big players but I am having a hard time believing that any small or independent developer will make living developing for iPhone.

Considering that we and many other companies have made a nice living selling just in Windows Mobile or just BlackBerry devices - I think the iPhone will provide an even better market.

 

[firewood]

PalmPilot deja vu

iPhone applications ... no money in that.

End result will be some decent corporate and media apps by big players but I am having a hard time believing that any small or independent developer will make living developing for iPhone.

PalmPilot's and other PalmOS handhelds supported a good size small developer community for several years, until device sales finally dropped off. The interesting question is, compared to Palm handhelds, how many iPhone and iPod-Touch-like devices will be sold and used, and what percentage of those customers will install applications on their Mac OS handheld. If it's equal or better than Palm did, then it's likely that a reasonable number of business-savy small or independent developers could do quite well.

 

[guzhogi]

A friend of mine who's a developer signed up to be an iPhone Developer and got this e-mail back (some areas snipped for security concerns):

Dear <snip>,

Thank you for registering as an iPhone Developer. To access the iPhone Dev Center and download the free SDK, simply click on the button below, and sign in using your Registered iPhone Developer Apple ID and password.

Your Registered iPhone Developer Apple ID is: <snip>

<<button to development website here>

If you need further assistance, please contact us.

iPhone Developer Program

 

[admanimal]

A friend of mine who's a developer signed up to be an iPhone Developer and got this e-mail back (some areas snipped for security concerns):

That is a different email that you get when you sign up for an account on the developer site, it's not the same thing as being approved for the $99 dev program.

 

[guzhogi]

That is a different email that you get when you sign up for an account on the developer site, it's not the same thing as being approved for the $99 dev program.

Okay, thanks. Wasn't sure.

 

[koko76]

That's true. But unlike Nokia or Motorola google knows how to make user friendly technology. Not much effort is required from hardware manufacturers, they just have to design a nice case with a touch screen. The rest comes from Android. I certainly hope so because having a monopoly in the market is always dangerous, and Apple goes even further by forcing other carrier monopoly upon consumers. Apple has a momentum but its choices are controversial, in some cases even sending people away from Apple products in general.

Please to show examples of Google building actual end user hardware?
It's not as simple as "just build some hardware" either. Good hardware can be let down by poor software and vice versa. It's only a great combination of the two that will succeed. Much remains to be seen about android, but thinking that it will be a simple road to a complete device from a conglomerate of companies, some of which directly compete with each other is kind of silly.

 

[DreamPod]

I wouldn't mind this situation so much if Apple had made the Aspen Simulator capable of doing OpenGL ES stuff - the Mac can do OpenGL, so how much work would it really have been? But as it is, my company can't progress AT ALL on any real iPhone work until approved, as our games are going to be 99% OpenGL.

It's nice to finally read that *some* people are getting accepted, though - hopefully the reports here are real. Rumors were that Apple didn't even have the certificate stuff working yet on their end.

 

[Veri]

getting software on the iPhone

Is there any evidence that certificates are revoked/checked remotely? I guess a simple method of getting free software on the iPhone/iTouch otherwise will be for one group to stump up $99 then simply post the cert somewhere for download. Of course Apple won't then offer iTunes downloads for software published using that cert, but it could be the basis for another download community where the networks won't prohibit VoIP, and the prudes won't prohibit Hula Girl.

More interesting would be Apple's reaction to this - would they start remote checking? A revocation list? Threaten action against free software developers?

 

[DreamPod]

Well, as I understand it, once you get a certificate, you then register your iPhone or iPod Touch by getting a code from the device, uploading that to Apple, and then they change that into a code that will activate only that device. One certificate probably only allows one device to be registered, so it would be useless to share your certificate with other people. Not to mention Apple would know exactly who did it.

 

[GQB]

Anyone who doesn't understand that beta programs are by their very nature selective by definition doesn't have the experience to belong in the program.

The purpose of a beta is to thrash out bugs for the author (Apple) first, and the benefit the (the developer) second.

At the point when everyone is 'accepted' is called 'final release'.

 

[kiwi66]

iPhone SDK is nonsense

The SDK is not really what you want.
Apple has put the thumb screws at every corner.
Even though the SDK is beautiful and nicely integrated, it has still quite some open ends. Beta in Apple terms means there are all features built in but some bugs are left. So its more like an alpha release of an SDK.

Put that aside theres much more dynamite in the rules Apple has put out. I call it censorship.

Read the full story on

http://a-fink.blogspot.com/

 

[admanimal]

Beta in Apple terms means there are all features built in but some bugs are left.

Ummmm....last time I checked that's pretty much the definition of beta that everyone uses.

P.S. In your blog you come off as a whiney brat who is just annoyed that Apple won't let you have complete freedom to hack the iPhone as you please, even if it would obviously open up the platform to security risks.

 

[DreamPod]

Whomever wrote that blog seems kinda clueless. "I have nowhere seen how you get this "special" key and neither how you get and install it." - it's stated pretty clearly how you get the key and install it, and there is lots of talk on the internet (like, say, here) about it. Or "Background daemons are not permitted. So no daemon who listens to bluetooth filetransfers, synch's or functions as a modem. Bluetooth projects are killed because of this." Why are bluetooth projects killed? Why does it have to do anything in the background for a file transfer? Only a "background downloader" would have a problem, any other use of Bluetooth is just fine, from this rule. Oh, and he wants the iPhone to function as a modem? Isn't that like totally against pretty much all cell-providers' rules? There's a reason the iPhone doesn't do that.

So the iPhone SDK doesn't let you do system-level things, that's a security/reliability measure, imagine downloading something and it crashes your $500 phone, maybe kills it entirely. Remember, Apple is rather parranoid about reliability and security, they originally didn't even want to give us access to writing native apps at all.

 

[tutubibi]

iPhone applications ... no money in that.

End result will be some decent corporate and media apps by big players but I am having a hard time believing that any small or independent developer will make living developing for iPhone.

There was so many replies to this, nobody agreeing with me.

My point is that iPhone is pretty closed and limited (in terms of distribution options). I could write Windows Mobile or JavaME application and distribute it in 100s of ways. There are dozens of manufactures, hundreds of carriers that provide some kind of distribution channel or chance to get your application pre-installed.
No so with the iPhone. It's either Apple way or highway.

 

[benspratling]

macrumors should change their name to iphonerumors.

Well, Apple Computer changed their name to just "Apple." (And I don't want to get any replies that say "inc")

But seriously, you've got to notice that the iPhone runs Mac OS X! even if there is no (removed to avoid violating the SDK terms and conditions).

 

[benspratling]

Is this all about games?

I'm working on three break-through iPhone apps about __________, which are clearly not games. So no. And it would be great to get to use multi-touch on the simulator, like if I could plug in the phone and even if I can't install the app on the phone, get the screen of my sample app down to the phone so I can see what it will look like... or maybe get the touches on the screen on the phone sent back up the loop to the compy so I can try some real multi-touch stuff. But let's face it, my apps will work within the confines of the simulator, although I do need to test them in the field instead of at my desk.

 

[arn]

There was so many replies to this, nobody agreeing with me.

My point is that iPhone is pretty closed and limited (in terms of distribution options). I could write Windows Mobile or JavaME application and distribute it in 100s of ways. There are dozens of manufactures, hundreds of carriers that provide some kind of distribution channel or chance to get your application pre-installed.
No so with the iPhone. It's either Apple way or highway.

The question becomes .... how many Windows Mobile customers bother installing 3rd party apps? I'd say iTunes over-the-air distribution trumps those 100s of ways to distribute your app (which really means 100s of websites). The iPhone also has exceeded Windows Mobile marketshare, last I heard.

arn