iPhone May Allow 3rd Party Applications?

[Dr.Gargoyle]

GPS is a MUST

Apple seriously needs to integrate GPS either directly in the phone or via third-party like TomTom. I can't understand why they didn't went with a built in GPS considering GPS chips today are small, cheap and very power efficient.... I just don't get it. I won't be buying it until it eventually get this feature. I mean more or less all premium phones have it today. Nokia and SE have had it for years.
They only reason I can find to exclude built-in GPS in a $600 phone with support for google maps, is a total meltdown in the RDF...or if you are solely targeting customers that never roam outside their own neighborhood.

 

[SC68Cal]

Code vetting? Are you serious? That will pretty much guarantee there will be no third party applications.

I don't really see that this is going to be a tremendous problem. The phone runs OS X, not Windows Mobile. How often do applications bring down OS X?

Hah!

http://rixstep.com/2/20060426,00.shtml

That's an old old old bug, which still will bring your entire system down. I tried it today.

I'm pretty sure this is what kills it

<table><tr><td rowspan=2000000000></td></tr></table>

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Hah!

http://rixstep.com/2/20060426,00.shtml

Interesting, but how often do most users experience an application problem that kills OS X?

 

[SPUY767]

I'm very selective about what I install on my Mac, and I would take the same care with installing things on my iPhone. All I see is the potential for more customers if third party applications are allowed, and that means more money in my stock portfolio.

Bring on the third party apps!

 

[SC68Cal]

If the offending code is what I believe it is, it's a pretty easy exploit. What makes me wonder is if it's a piece that can be used for a buffer overflow.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Exchange

I'm very selective about what I install on my Mac, and I would take the same care with installing things on my iPhone. All I see is the potential for more customers if third party applications are allowed, and that means more money in my stock portfolio.

Bring on the third party apps!

If it means the possibility of real Exchange support, from Microsoft or someone else, I'm all for it. I don't think people realize how many so called "business users" are in fact iPod and Mac owners, and are dying to have an iPhone, but can't justify owning and carrying around 2 phones.

 

[backspinner]

Even if it's OS X inside, it will need some form of "real time" features. You won't be happy if you get a call and you can not answer the phone because some application is beach-balling and bringing the whole phone to a crawl...

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Monitor...

Even if it's OS X inside, it will need some form of "real time" features. You won't be happy if you get a call and you can not answer the phone because some application is beach-balling and bringing the whole phone to a crawl...

Perhaps a "Third Party API" that will wrap access to the system calls and manage them differently, giving those applications less priority. A monitor process could detect misbehaving third party apps and shut them down.

 

[SC68Cal]

I don't mean to be a troll, but OS X needs to become a more mature platform.

My calls to delegate more tasks from Windows boxes over to OS X boxes can't be taken seriously with some of the applications that are out there. No CIO or IT person in his right mind is going to think about using a platform where basic UNIX principles and commands that have been part of the UNIX system since day one can be repackaged inside an AppleScript with a GUI, then resold for $20.

That's just not going to happen.

The same thing with the iPhone. They have a chance to make a dent in the WinCE platform, by delivering a streamlined, no-nonsense-works-all-the-time product.

For example:
My Father is a extremely busy businessman. Doesn't know technology at all. He just called me and asked how to switch to dual display for the laptop and monitor combo at home.

Do you think that he's going to care about lots and lots of applications?

He uses a Windows 2000 laptop because he has no idea how to do anything except email.

And the beauty of it is that he doesn't need to do anything but!

So the iPhone would be a great product for him. He just needs phone and e-mail.

That's it. Music is a plus.

But it's got to be literally, unbreakable, and intuitive. He'd get lost in Windows Mobile.

 

[avalys]

My calls to delegate more tasks from Windows boxes over to OS X boxes can't be taken seriously with some of the applications that are out there. No CIO or IT person in his right mind is going to think about using a platform where basic UNIX principles and commands that have been part of the UNIX system since day one can be repackaged inside an AppleScript with a GUI, then resold for $20.

That's just not going to happen.

What does that have to do with the OS? So someone decided to try to charge $20 for a GUI that calls a simple shell script - how does that reflect badly on OS X?

 

[aaronbrethorst]

This is *exactly* the problem I have with Windows Mobile. From the limited experience I have with it (on a Treo 650), I have found that crashing phones is about the most annoying and pointlessly stupid thing about 'smart' phones.

Windows Mobile doesn't run on a Treo 650. That's Palm OS.

Are you referring to the 700w?

 

[milhous]

i doubt apple has either the time or the resources to spend on validating apps.

it's makes much better sense to just invest the time in creating a safe and secure sandbox environment that insulates the iphone, it's software, and the networks from running 3rd party apps.

 

[~Shard~]

i doubt apple has either the time or the resources to spend on validating apps.

Good point actually - they are presumably spread so thin that this is probably a valid point. They needed to pull their QA team off Leopard, thus delaying it, for the iPhone, and although the hardware, software, etc. groups are separate, the fact is that Apple is going hard on OS X, iPhone, AppleTV, iPod, new hardware, iLife, iWork... a company can only do so much - and more importantly, do it well.

 

[Stella]

The impression I get from SJ statements is that mobile OSX isn't robust enough, especially its security to allow 3rd party apps like Symbian et al.

Mobile OSX has a long way to go...

 

[Stella]

Could you imagine having a kernel panic while on an important business call! Ouch!

Any different than a dropped call? If your worried that much about reliability you'd be using a landline.

People make a big deal about an app crashing the iPhone, but people forget about losing valuable work due to a crashing app on OSX.

If Mobile OSX is robust enough, a crashing app wouldn't tank the phone in the first place.

People are like drama queens in this respect, they compare their experiences with windows mobile, which may not be that stable, yet, whilst, other smartphone platforms are very rock solid... ( see above ). Kind of like, windows v OSX

windows mobile v Symbian

i doubt apple has either the time or the resources to spend on validating apps.

it's makes much better sense to just invest the time in creating a safe and secure sandbox environment that insulates the iphone, it's software, and the networks from running 3rd party apps.

Correct. If Apple insisted on validating code - say good bye to freeware and shareware apps. These developers can be the most innovative, coming out with excellent software. They would be a great loss.

 

[SPUY767]

The impression I get from SJ statements is that mobile OSX isn't robust enough, especially its security to allow 3rd party apps like Symbian et al.

Mobile OSX has a long way to go...

You sir, are a very cynical bastard. I could be getting a hummer from Alicia Silverstone and you could say something to make me want to slit my own wrists. It's occasionally good to bring some people back down to earth tho.

I don't think that's the reason behind the possibility of not having third part apps at all. It's a simple matter of apps beng run on the phone reflecting on the OS. If a person runs a crappy app that crashes constantly, even if it doens't crash the phone, people blame the phone. It's like when an app crashes on a computer. You and I don't blame the computer. We know that it is almost certainly a problem with the code, an unhandled exception or the like, but the average user just says, "Stupid computer."

 

[Lumol]

f a person runs a crappy app that crashes constantly, even if it doens't crash the phone, people blame the phone.

IMHO the person that installed the crappy app that turns out to be crashy would blame the crappy app. If the crashes went away when he didn't use the crappy app.

But if the person didn't, then... tough. But I don't think that is a reason to keep 3rd party apps off the platform.

I'm not techy by any means, but surely it's wouldn't be difficult to install a "3rd party sandbox" onto the damn thing. While I realise that there is a demand for Skype-type stuff on the Palm, I think there is a greater demand for simple things like (e.g.) currency/unit converters, doodlepad, a little notepad, astronomy software, mortgage calculator, medical calculators, pregnancy wheel... things too specialised for Apple to create. Such less demanding apps surely could be made to run in a sandbox so that if they crash the iPhone's Unix under-pinnings aren't affected, or phone calls aren't dropped?

Strictly not having any 3rd party support seems like a missed opportunity. The market is moving away from plain PDAs to "smart phones" (i.e. PDAs with phones). So if an iPhone owner needed custom software, he'd have to carry a lowend Palm at least.

And not having GPS is a good idea -- it's Apple's first phone. Have to have something to put into iPhone 2/pro/nano/shuffle.

 

[skinnylegs]

I do and I don't understand the need for 3rd party apps.....

I don't really think I would need anything over-and-above what the iPhone will offer. I want to sync my Address Book contacts and my iCal calendar which it *appears* the iPhone will do. Safari, and a widescreen iPod are just icing on the cake for a guy like me.

Widgets? Eh....I've been with Konfabulator/Yahoo Widgets for many many years and I've dl'd a bazillion widgets but the only ones I use on a regular basis are the weather and calendar widgets which are included with the iPhone.

And yet.....as perfect as it is for me, the iPhone wouldn't work for my g/f. She is a nursing student (about ready to graduate an RN program) and she needs medication and patient diagnosis programs which are readily available for Palm OS. It really gives her an edge in her nursing program.

 

[Evangelion]

I won't be buying it until it eventually get this feature. I mean more or less all premium phones have it today. Nokia and SE have had it for years.

Um, no they don't. I believe that Nokia N95 is the first Nokia-phone with built-in GPS. Sure, you could have GPS in other phones as well, but it needs a third-party software and external GPS-receiver that connects to the phone through Bluetooth. But it's not built-in.

 

[Stella]

Well, my experience with smartphones tell me that 3rd party apps can live quite happily next to the OS: should the app crash, the phone remains unaffected.

If this is not the case, then, the OS isn't robust enough, plain and simple.

Maybe I've just be spoiled by using Symbian and expect too much from other smartphone OSes...

You sir, are a very cynical bastard. I could be getting a hummer from Alicia Silverstone and you could say something to make me want to slit my own wrists. It's occasionally good to bring some people back down to earth tho.

 

[MikeDTyke]

Well, my experience with smartphones tell me that 3rd party apps can live quite happily next to the OS: should the app crash, the phone remains unaffected.

If this is not the case, then, the OS isn't robust enough, plain and simple.

Maybe I've just be spoiled by using Symbian and expect too much from other smartphone OSes...

I wouldn't crow about symbian too hard. Been a symbian user for 7 years now and the number of lockups, unexplained application exits which have been blamed on the kernel, mean that i need to restart once a week to ensure smooth operation. I'm sticking to my p910i which has been the most robust release, don't get me started on Series 60 or v3.1 on the P990.

I think apple's aiming for 2 levels of development, widgets which should be available almost immediately, then applications which will be isolated with a sandbox'd api. They weren't expecting the level of interest in 3rd party development when they started this project 2.5 years ago, so they're now evalutating what the can/cannot give 3rd party developers now. That'll take a little bit of time.

M.

 

[Stella]

Not my experience at all...

I've used 'Symbian' since Psion ( in quotes, since this is where Symbian originated), and apps didn't lock up that too often.

I had a few lockups on my P900, but very solid.

Now, my E70 - *never* crashed due to third party apps... and I use a lot..

UIQ 3.x was released too early, but by the sounds of it, a lot of problems, especially performance has been sorted out.

S60 and UIQ ( now owned by SE ) are't Symbian owned, as you know.. Symbian is the kernel.. not the GUI bit, so what Nokia does with S60 is out of their ( Symbian ) hands.

I wouldn't crow about symbian too hard. Been a symbian user for 7 years now and the number of lockups, unexplained application exits which have been blamed on the kernel, mean that i need to restart once a week to ensure smooth operation. I'm sticking to my p910i which has been the most robust release, don't get me started on Series 60 or v3.1 on the P990.

 

[SeanMcg]

I don't know what he means by a "real" OS X, but I don't think it's reasonable to believe that there is a full version of Leapord on the phone... that doesn't make sense... I mean, it even wastes space. Why would you need Photo Booth, iChat AV, Time Machine, etc..? (Although, if the camera was on the front instead of the back, iChat AV on the iPhone would be kickass.)

Just a reminder to people: don't get the OS confused with the included applications. None of the items mentioned above truly is the operating system, and the computer could operate just as well without them (I don't know about the user, but the computer would be fine. ). I grew up with Apple ][+, VAX/VMS, the Mac and eventually DOS and Windows, so I've seen the evolution of some operating systems. I only mention those because, until I used OS X, I had never used UNIX, although its influence can be seen in command lines across many platforms. The point is, as someone else pointed out, the GUI is where you run into problems. So I have to agree with Apple in wanting to make the API's as bulletproof as possible.

I love the fact that people want to develop for the iPhone long before it has been released. That is a testament to the foundation that Apple has laid with their other products, most notably the iPods. However, that reputation could be ruined quickly if they release a product that isn't robust. Maybe they're being overcautious; fine. If they build a product that gets a bad reputation, then the third-party developers 1) won't want to write for it and 2) won't have a platform to install it on anyway.

And a question: does anyone else feel that we may have seen the end of the PortalPlayer interface on the iPod in favor of an embedded OS X?

 

[SeanMcg]

Apple seriously needs to integrate GPS either directly in the phone or via third-party like TomTom. ...

I thought all phones sold today were required to have, at the very least, E911 functionality, which means putting a GPS receiver of sorts in the phone, right? Someone please enlighten me here. My current Motorola phone has this. Given the maps widget, I would think that they ARE tapping into a GPS receiver, not just triangulating on cell towers.

 

[kingofkolt]

And a question: does anyone else feel that we may have seen the end of the PortalPlayer interface on the iPod in favor of an embedded OS X?

Not really.. If Apple puts OS X on regular iPods, that's too close to the iPhone. I mean, what would you want to do on an iPod in OS X that's not on the Internet?