Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I suspect that many of the "applications" written for iPhone will be widget-based, and the different processor wouldn't matter terribly much for most Dashboard widgets, as the widgets themselves are not compiled binaries but rather script-based and interpreted by WebKit. Only widgets that use compiled plugins would be affected.

As for the stability of the platform: this thing is going to be running on a metered telephone network, not your usual unmetered internet line. I can see the argument for being a little more careful about what kinds of applications can run on the platform.

The phone has bluetooth and wifi besides the radio for the phone company (GSM, etc). Also it uses a browser, browsers are the most insecured types of applications ever created. The requirements for browsers make them a security risk.

Malware of all forms can enter the phone via the browser, the radio signal, bluetooth, and wifi.

However it looks like Apple will not allow Applications to run unless they been crytographically signed by Apple, so little will get thru unless is a vulnerability in Phone OSX or drivers.

If they do the above, the iPhone will be more resistance to malware than a lot of other phones.

Now days javascript is a big worry at the client side. it has gotten too powerful and hackers are injecting scripts into browsers all the time. There is a particular type of attack where the script can buy or sell all your stock once you login with your browser at your broker, and this occurs without your knoledge and using the browser you are currently using. They use this to bump the value of a particular stock they purchased earlier and bump the price by selling all your stock and using the money to bump the price of the stock they care about.

Many people been burned this way thanks to javascript and injectable web pages. This all occurs in the client side browser. So neither windows, not OSX can do much about it if they provide the ability to execute javascript. The script has your cookies, your session number, etc. It can do what you can do.
 
I am currently using a Treo 700p. Pretty much every 3rd party app I have tried for it ends up crashing the device or making it ultra unstable. The only app I have tried so far that doesn't do this is google maps.

The phone I had before that, a Motorola A630 did the same crap. Except, the phone was more unstable then a stock Treo 700p.

3rd party apps on cell phones is something I am going to avoid from now on, its just not worth the headaches.
 
I am currently using a Treo 700p. Pretty much every 3rd party app I have tried for it ends up crashing the device or making it ultra unstable. The only app I have tried so far that doesn't do this is google maps.

The phone I had before that, a Motorola A630 did the same crap. Except, the phone was more unstable then a stock Treo 700p.

3rd party apps on cell phones is something I am going to avoid from now on, its just not worth the headaches.

This is why we need Apple to just take the lead and do the development for the top most used applications for a typical data phone.

For most people, millions and millions of people, this means connectivity to corporate email systems.

Microsoft has developed the direct push licensing program, and companies are now using this. If Apple simply used this protocol, and used their mobile mail client as a front end, I would buy one of these in a heartbeat. However, since this looks like it is being marketed to consumers only, Im stuck on this POS Motorola Q
 
I am currently using a Treo 700p. Pretty much every 3rd party app I have tried for it ends up crashing the device or making it ultra unstable. The only app I have tried so far that doesn't do this is google maps.

The phone I had before that, a Motorola A630 did the same crap. Except, the phone was more unstable then a stock Treo 700p.

3rd party apps on cell phones is something I am going to avoid from now on, its just not worth the headaches.

Don't judge every other smartphone on the basis of your Palm experience - its not accurate.

Its exactly like a windows user refusing to believe that your Mac doesn't have any viruses, and neither do you need a virus checker ( yet ).
 
I am currently using a Treo 700p. Pretty much every 3rd party app I have tried for it ends up crashing the device or making it ultra unstable. The only app I have tried so far that doesn't do this is google maps.

The phone I had before that, a Motorola A630 did the same crap. Except, the phone was more unstable then a stock Treo 700p.

3rd party apps on cell phones is something I am going to avoid from now on, its just not worth the headaches.

good choice.

Apple can if they so desire ask for the source code of all apps targetted at the iPhone and conduct code reviews to ensure the code is stable, it wont damage anything and is properly secured. They can also then do additional QA on the third party application. But they will either need to charge for this service or require a cut on the software. Last but not least they would sign the software so it can run in the iPhone and distribute the software via iTunes. This means that they would not allow installation of code by other than iTunes.

If they do that, the 3rd party application could be considered reasonably secured and stable and I (mr Paranoid) would buy them and install them. Until then, no way Jose!
 
I say open it up to 3rd party apps to shut up all the whiners, but once a user has installed a 3rd party app then don't offer technical support, unless they do a hard reset to factory setttings.
 
Apple could set up a certification process for 3rd party apps, where the 3rd party pays Apple to test the app on the phone and certifies if for use.

It maybe that Apple could then deliver these apps via a sale in iTunes.

Ian
 
Anyone know if Excel and Word docs can be opened or even edited on the iPhone?? Definately a must for enterprise customers.
I don't think you are an enterprise user as you would have experience with Blackberry. There is only limited support for this on BB/RIM. Reading Excel docs is a pain on those, and word docs are not always rendered correctly or even supported (based on what is in the doc and what version of word). However, RIM seems to be doing fine.

If Apple would build some kind of Exchange server conduit, they should be fine in the enterprise market. As said before in this thread by me and some others, in the enterprise market, corporations do not allow 3rd party installation (locked down due to security concerns) or enterprise users are really not installing the apps that much.

That doesn't mean 3rd party apps wouldn't be welcomed in the consumer market, but the article is discussing the enterprise market (quote: "the iPhone has been described as a "closed device" which could make enterprise market penetration difficult")
 
Yes some Enterprises want to create FAT Clients to run on specific phones. But not that many. It requires a lot of know how, the right infractructure, programmers, and may also require them to open holes in their firewalls to let in the application specific protocols.

Most busineses are well served by web applications that are accessible via normal workstations and phones that have a browser. It is not often that they need a custom fat client application.

With the introduction of AJAX, FLEX and FLASH, we may start seeing more of these fat clients, but most of them will be run on Blackberries since they support all the other Enterprise level stuff and security required.

Enterprises are not about to switch to the iPhone just cause it is cute and very user friendly.

Hell many of those enterprises are still using COBOL on their mainframes and CICS with green screens, not what I call user friendly or modern.

Large businesses want a big ROI (Return on Investment), so they want to milk their technology until it starts to adversely affect their business.

Apple will open their phone when it makes Financial sense and when they can certify the 3rd party software and harden the OS a little more.

Small businesses and some mid size businesses where the cool factor outweight their need for security will go ahead and buy low security phones like the iPhone and others to give to their people and live with the risks involved.

Apple is not shooting for the enterprise yet, so it does not have to include all the security features and does not need goobs of 3rd party applications yet. For a regular phone user, the iPhone will come with more than enough capabilities to makes most regular users very and i mean very happy.

Without the business side, Apple can sell 100 million to 500 million iPhones, the consumer market is around 2.5 billion and growing. It may take them a few years, not sure they are yet in a rush to put their arms around the enterprise yet.
 
At least give developers a time line !

I think many of us who feel 3rd party program support is a deal breaker might be appeased even by a distant promise of supporting developers in the future, once Apple figures how to keep things stable.

While I appreciate Apple's desire to keep the iPhone experience stable, there's no way I'm going to use both a PDA and an iPhone, given my reliance on dictionary software that runs on the PalmOS. There's a whole class of professionals who rely on PDAs (pharmacists, translators, etc.) who would fall into this category.
 
Apple could set up a certification process for 3rd party apps, where the 3rd party pays Apple to test the app on the phone and certifies if for use.

It maybe that Apple could then deliver these apps via a sale in iTunes.

Ian

Oh great, then you can kiss goodbye to the hobbiest ( spelling ) developer - so goodbye freeware / shareware applications. Some of which are very good.

It would be far too expensive.

This isn't an option.
 
I think many of us who feel 3rd party program support is a deal breaker might be appeased even by a distant promise of supporting developers in the future, once Apple figures how to keep things stable.

While I appreciate Apple's desire to keep the iPhone experience stable, there's no way I'm going to use both a PDA and an iPhone, given my reliance on dictionary software that runs on the PalmOS. There's a whole class of professionals who rely on PDAs (pharmacists, translators, etc.) who would fall into this category.

Sometime this year early next, maybe this June, bu likely in January, I bet that Apple will have an API, changes to Xcode, test device, and a certification program available for developers. Those that pass Apple certification will be made available via iTunes if they are willing to give Apple a nice cut, those that do not want to jump thru those hoops will run their software on the test device as they will not be able to load it in a real iPhone and will not sell their software. It is 1984 again but Apple is the one running the show. Play by Apple rules and you sell the software, don't and developers wasted their effort.
 
Oh great, then you can kiss goodbye to the hobbiest ( spelling ) developer - so goodbye freeware / shareware applications. Some of which are very good.

It would be far too expensive.

This isn't an option.

Depends what the certification process entails...if it's some sort verification process, it wouldn't be prohibitive for the hobbyist developer. We could also see developer that do freeware on the mac side, move to a commercial model for the iPhone.

For example, while I love the fact that Adium is free on the mac, I'd be willing to sell out $ for it on the iPhone because the increased functionality it would offer. (It's more of a convenience on my 20" monitor, whereas on the iPhone's screen it's ability to combine all the chat apps into one interface is crucial).
 
Oh great, then you can kiss goodbye to the hobbiest ( spelling ) developer - so goodbye freeware / shareware applications. Some of which are very good.

It would be far too expensive.

This isn't an option.

Correct on the hobbiest developer, shareware / freeware. As to the price .... I expect the cost to be very reasonable due to the size of the market, but this is a guess. In the past, the software for Blackberries and Treos were expensive since the smart phone / PDA market was small and not growing as much. With the iPhone, this market will explode and software will be inexpensive since you can sell many millions and Apple will do the adverticing for you.

IMHO - Very special applications that have little appeal to most users will not be made or they will be very expensive, things most users can use will be dirt cheap (around 1/2 of the cost of RIM or Treo 3rd party apps today) or free under the subscription model (if developed by Apple).

I could be wrong obviously.
 
If your enterprise is anything like my enterprise iPhone won't get into that market until someone makes the truly horrendous, memory hogging, platform breaking GoodLink available on it. :mad:
 
How many days B4 Apple TV was opened?

If Apple tries to release a "closed" iPhone, hackers and developers will find a way in very quickly. Rather than having people adding hacks, it would be far better for Apple to provide an open door with customized APIs restricting the size of third-party applications since flash memory is so small in comparison to hard disk storage.
:rolleyes:
Perhaps third party applications can be stored on a virtual partition something like BootCamp so they would not interfere with the phone service.
 
If you look on all mobile platforms you will see a wealth of software from the hobbiest developer. These developers are an asset, for Apple to block these out would be insane. Imagine Apple blocking out these developers from OSX software...

For smartphone platforms, the software is generally cheap - $10 to $30 on average - any more expensive and you'll price yourself out. I very much doubt that software for Palms is any more expensive - if so, no wonder its dying.

Your making assumptions about the iPhone.. it could fail utterly, or be a raging success, or somewhere in between.

Bottomline - paying Apple to QA iPhone applications is expensive and will more than likely lead to more expensive software than other platforms. Its a no go. It will fail, and Apple wouldn't be stupid enough to do this, one hopes.


Correct on the hobbiest developer, shareware / freeware. As to the price .... I expect the cost to be very reasonable due to the size of the market, but this is a guess. In the past, the software for Blackberries and Treos were expensive since the smart phone / PDA market was small and not growing as much. With the iPhone, this market will explode and software will be inexpensive since you can sell many millions and Apple will do the adverticing for you.

IMHO - Very special applications that have little appeal to most users will not be made or they will be very expensive, things most users can use will be dirt cheap (around 1/2 of the cost of RIM or Treo 3rd party apps today) or free under the subscription model (if developed by Apple).

I could be wrong obviously.
 
If you look on all mobile platforms you will see a wealth of software from the hobbiest developer. These developers are an asset, for Apple to block these out would be insane. Imagine Apple blocking out these developers from OSX software...

For smartphone platforms, the software is generally cheap - $10 to $30 on average - any more expensive and you'll price yourself out. I very much doubt that software for Palms is any more expensive - if so, no wonder its dying.

Your making assumptions about the iPhone.. it could fail utterly, or be a raging success, or somewhere in between.

Bottomline - paying Apple to QA iPhone applications is expensive and will more than likely lead to more expensive software than other platforms. Its a no go. It will fail, and Apple wouldn't be stupid enough to do this, one hopes.

I see and respect each and every one of your arguments, and normaly would agree with each of them.

However Apple right now has the phone closed, and none of those players can develop for the iPhone at this time.

Maybe you are correct, but I expect them to keep a firm and almost absolute grip at first and loosen their grip a bit at a time as times go by and they have more time to build more protections in their OS code.

I can not be sure at this time if the ARM chip they are using can protect memory or do virtual memory, so I have to assume that the chip they are using does not. Also Apple stated that they were worried about 3rd party applications adversly affecting the phone and possibly also affecting the user experience. If they are worried I have a tendency to believe that the ARM chip does not have the protections needed to isolate the apps so that the app can crash without affecting other apps or the OS. If that assumption is correct, I expect them for a time to have an IRON Grip.

Yes I am making assumptions JUST LIKE EVERONE ELSE in this forum. None of us has the facts.

As before .... I could be wrong, but that is my opinion and some of the bases of that opinion.

Yes I expect it to soar and to drive the market, the other phone manufactorers are running scared. I do not expect it to flop in the least.
 
For 3rd party apps, doesn't GCC let you compile for ARM procs? If so, then it shoud be easy to set it in xCode or whatever. Then it would just be a matter of getting your app onto the iPhone.
 
Slingbox Fanboy

Give me slingbox and I am happy.

It almost HAS to have some sort of application to connect to your iTUNES other than syncing 8GB of music, video, and picture.

Perhaps when iPHONE comes out, :apple:TV will play a larger role.

Until then... LET US PRAY!!!

b3781105.jpg


p.s. Whoever said slingbox and :apple:TV only work on the Mac version of Slingbox was very wrong. Apple TV works beautifully on PC, Handheld, and Mac versions of Slingbox. Takes some tinkering, but very nice.
 
The iPhone can survive without the hobbyist, and without a huge software ecosystem. Yes, those would help a LOT (and love to see both happen)... but they WOULD also hurt a lot in other ways. The iPhone is not doomed in either case.

Nothing is perfect, even the iPod will screw up.

My Symbian phone very very very rarely crashes and I have lots of 3rd party software. I'm more likely to miss a call due to lack of coverage than buggy 3rd software - in fact, thats never happened. The only time that I've heard of a Symbian phone dropping calls is because some one was playing Doom on their Symbian device!!

Apple excuses are a smoke screen and I consider it to be that mobile OSX isn't up to scratch.

Well, even a toaster can screw up. The point is, an iPod crashes FAR, FAR LESS than any personal computer--even a Mac--and this is partly due to it not running a cacophony of non-screened 3rd-party software add-ons. Simplicity an stability really do go hand in hand.

The software you put on your Symbian unit hasn't failed--and that's great. Other people's have--and you gave one example.

Rare crashes become even MORE rare without 3rd-party software. There's just no denying that. And if the iPhone is not aimed at the Symbian market niche but at "the rest of us"--and at people even LESS technically inclined than us forum-goers--then that stability may well be more important than the ability to install apps without limit. You or I wouldn't choose that route for ourselves, but at the same time we can't deny the merits that a "closed" system has.

What "smoke screen" you are seeing here? What's your evidence of deception? What statement has Apple made that you feel is false?


Apple's controlling nature killed the Mac platform from being a main player in the the computing world ( Mac still has a very small minority of users at 6% ), and it'll kill iPhone too in the same way. iPod is different - you play music and that source is readily available e.g., rip CDs.

So the iPod is different, but the Mac and the iPhone are the same as each other? I contend that the iPhone is not the same as the Mac either, and faces different market forces than the Mac faced in the 80s.

I also contend that Apple's "controlling nature" has both good sides and bad sides, and in fact has led to much of what makes the Mac platform great. You can't say central control is always bad by definition. If anything, I think it might be MORE beneficial to control a phone rigidly (and keep it table and consistent in user experience) than to control a computer rigidly. (Though I really don't see Apple being controlling about Mac developers anyway.)

To suggest that the iPhone needs to have unauthorized freeware (crashing all over the place for some, stable for the luckier folks) is too one-sided. That would be great, I agree--but the other extreme has valid reasons too. And there may be a middle....
 


One additional tidbit from Apple's shareholder meeting notes was a revealing blurb that Apple still hadn't completely decided whether or not they will open the iPhone to 3rd party developers.



Apple's choice to limit iPhone development has been the target of a lot of criticism against the iPhone. In the days after the iPhone announcement, Jobs stated that while you will be able to purchase and install additional applications on the iPhone, that this would be limited and in a "controlled environment". As a result, the iPhone has been described as a "closed device" which could make enterprise market penetration difficult.

Yeah, because my life just wouldn't be complete without 30 different 3rd party versions of solitaire to play on my cellphone.

*yawn*
 
Yeah, because my life just wouldn't be complete without 30 different 3rd party versions of solitaire to play on my cellphone.

*yawn*

Well said. I am not sure about others, but in my case before I install a piece of software, I must have a need for it. The iPhone has a lot less space than my laptop so I have to be even more carefull. Deintalling unauthorized software may also leave bits behing and may cause instabilities. Ever looked at the registry in Windows?

Applications need do something useful, like give me directions to an address while I am driving, let me surf a web page and pay a bill or trnasfer money. Maybe keep track of my expenses during a trip so I can file my expense report without loosing money.

I can see young fellas loading al sorts of junk on their phone and later having problems. Those that think the iPhone is another tool to make our life simpler want to ensure the device works as expected when needed and would minimize risk by not loading junk and by not wasting money buying junk.

Junk = Something I don't really need.
 
A good list of Treo 3rd party apps that are missing from the iPhone is here.

What would have happened if only Apple provided the apps for the Mac? It would have stunted Mac penetration. There's a reason Apple hosts the WWDC. 3rd party developers are extremely important to the success of the platform.

You personally may not need more than a iPhone with Safari. However I think you'll find there's a lot that people using WinCE, Symbian and Palm based phones that rely on them to accomplish tasks that can't done by just Safari and dashboard widgets. There's a market out there for inventory applications, bluetooth barcode scanner support, RFID scanners, custom CRM applications and POS integration just to name a few.

There's hundreds of these apps on the other smartphone platforms, and if Apple wants to take on the business smartphone space (and not just the comsumer ipod lover space) they'll need more than Exchange server support in mail. They'll need to allow 3rd party developers to build custom solutions for enterprise customers. Apple shouldn't waste resources building all the bells and whistles... let 3rd party developers like dataviz provide the Office compatibility the iPhone needs to appeal to big business.

It's a no brainer. Build the platform, let developers cater it to every conceivable market for you.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.