Apple to Allow Free iPhone/Touch Apps Without Special Approval?

[MacRumors]

Rumors earlier today from iLounge suggested that Apple would act as a gatekeeper for iPhone and iPod Touch applications based on their upcoming Software Development Kit (SDK). As gatekeeper, Apple would individually review new applications by 3rd party developers to decide whether or not they are allowed for inclusion in the Apple iTunes Store. The exact criteria for this rumored approval is unknown, but some have expressed concerns that this practice could seriously restrict application development on the iPhone.

Electronista, however, now claims that Apple plans on only imposing those restrictions on commercial applications for sale through iTunes and will not try to restrict free programs in any way

...the new contact claims that free applications are not subject to the same rules that will guide paid software downloads. In this model, free software is unlikely to be subject to much if any scrutiny by Apple

Such a tiered system could appease those concerned that an Apple approval system would arbitrarily restrict an otherwise thriving developer environment. Meanwhile, commercial iPhone applications sold through the iTunes store would benefit from the existing infrastructure and customer base of the iTunes store, but in exchange would have to meet some set of predefined criteria.

It is still too early to draw too many conclusions about Apple's SDK plans. Apple has announced very little publicly about their plans, though Apple's COO has recently made comments claiming that with the SDK, the only limit would be people's imaginations.

Apple is hosting a media event on Thursday, March 6th to detail their SDK roadmap.


Article Link

 

[MadDog31]

Let the merry-go-round continue...

 

[Peel]

Oh, let's hope this version of the various rumors flying around is the correct one.

 

[amoda]

Well this sounds reasonable no?

 

[justflie]

Let the merry-go-round continue...

HAha, seriously! Arn's right; it's too early to draw conclusions. Each new tidbit of info seems to contradict the last one. I'm just going to wait and see. I can live with one more week of not knowing.

 

[Baron58]

Can all the ill-informed bedwetters please **** now?

We don't know *anything* one way or the other yet, so just sit tight until the actual announcement.

 

[iJed]

This certainly sounds much more reasonable. I think it would be crazy for Apple not to allow free software to be developed for the iPhone/touch.

I just hope that the beta SDK is available to every ADC member rather than just paying members. I certainly want to try developing something.

 

[gwangung]

Can we agree?

Whine on fact, not on rumor.

 

[Toe]

Then could developers give away free software but charge to use it?

Like free software that gets you into a multiplayer game, but you have to have a subscription to do anything with it...

 

[chicagostars]

harsh

Can all the ill-informed bedwetters please **** now?

We don't know *anything* one way or the other yet, so just sit tight until the actual announcement.

I'll try to wait patiently on my rubberized bed sheets.

 

[imwoblin]

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.....

 

[kainjow]

Then could developers give away free software but charge to use it?

Sounds like yes.

If the article ends up being true, iTunes would be the equivalent to PayPal but with some extra goodies.

Seems reasonable to me. We shall see on March 6th

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.....

I think it's: "Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again."

 

[zombitronic]

...the new contact claims that free applications are not subject to the same rules that will guide paid software downloads. In this model, free software is unlikely to be subject to much if any scrutiny by Apple.

Makes sense. If you want to get paid for your app, Apple checks it out first. After all, they don't want to be held responsible for selling an app through their store if there ends up being something faulty with it. If you don't want to get paid, no checks, but users download at their own discretion. I'd like this.

 

[macintel4me]

I end up having more questions than answers with these SDK rumors. I'm just going to wait until March 6th an try to get my remaining questions answered then. Reluctantly, moving on....

 

[jmorrison0722]

Hrmmm

Does this mean that developers offering 'free' applications can offer them sans ITMS? If so, this means we'll be able to install software without getting it from ITMS. This is good news, no? Sounds very reasonable.

 

[shawnce]

Whine on fact, not on rumor.

I'll vote for that.

 

[Spades]

Does this mean that developers offering 'free' applications can offer them sans ITMS? If so, this means we'll be able to install software without getting it from ITMS. This is good news, no? Sounds very reasonable.

Indeed. Apple can be the gatekeepers all they want as long as they're not the only ones.

 

[Mr Skills]

I'm guessing the free stuff will be something similar to Dashboard widgets...

 

[Darkroom]

what about donationware? better yet, if there's no restriction for free iPhone apps, what is stopping anyone from hosting their own iPhone app on their own site and charging for the download? how is apple going to enforce anything?

this rumor doesn't make any sense...

 

[Muzzway]

Perhaps this is the reason that Apple introduced all the iPhone apps for the iPod touch? They would soon all be available for free (without jailbreaking) anyway, so they thought that they might as well release officially/get some money from them?

 

[Telp]

Sounds to me that just about any rumor you could think of for the SDK, is going to be heard here on macrumors.

 

[junker]

Man - my neck hurts from all this chain-yankin.

I thought it was just me until I read some of previous comments. Sometimes I wonder if they leak out rumors to get a sense of the communities acceptance/rejection potential. I seriously doubt this really - but I gotta admit I like a good backstory!

As for this round-o-rumor, I think it would go over quite nicely. I believe designers and programmers should get paid for their hard work - and a tiered system of graduating acceptance toward a paying model of distribution would help weed out those not serious about quality product, but leave it open for those who just want to learn and play.

Seems to be an interesting move toward encouraging the computer sciences (coincidentally around OSX too) to prosper on small biz level.

Nice how that works.

 

[Stella]

Phew, hope this is correct. Appe really doesn't need to Nanny its users.

 

[stadidas]

I think it's: "Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again."

Classic.
Back on topic; this sounds a lot more reasonable, and actually makes sense. I doubt that Apple would only allow apps onto the phone through the store. Seems fair enough that they want to make sure that people only pay for good software.

 

[Small White Car]

This sounds just like music works.

A band can join a label and get their music on iTunes and a user can see all sorts of reviews and trust that it's a high-quality recording...

...or a band can put an MP3 on their website and let anyone download it. It's easy to get, but the consumer isn't promised anything in terms of sound quailty or music type. Try it or don't, you'll find out of it's worth it after you use it.