iPhone SDK, are we expecting a bit much

[ert3]

With the release of the iPhone SDK of course means that both killer apps and killer hackers will now have access to the iPhone.

However how will these apps be distributed. With Nokia phones you can only install apps that come packed with a traceable digital signature (This prevents download and install malware from getting nokia phones like our beloved 1.1.3prep).

I have three fears that I think are quite reasonable.

1. All iPhone apps will have to apply with apple so that apple keeps track of them and may even have final say on what can and cannot be installed on iPhones.

2. The SDK will require that all apps be installed through iTunes for a fee like our custom ring tones. (Garage band does cost 80 bucks for the one time fee)

3. All iPhone apps must be installed through the iTunes music store via purchasing them for a fee. (Think how much the Dev charges and then how much appl tacks on in royalties)

Any-one share my fears or think something entirely different?

 

[GoCubsGo]

With the release of the iPhone SDK of course means that both killer apps and killer hackers will now have access to the iPhone.

However how will these apps be distributed. With Nokia phones you can only install apps that come packed with a traceable digital signature (This prevents download and install malware from getting nokia phones like our beloved 1.1.3prep).

I have three fears that I think are quite reasonable.

1. All iPhone apps will have to apply with apple so that apple keeps track of them and may even have final say on what can and cannot be installed on iPhones.

I may be misreading, is this a general fear? I think it is good.

2. The SDK will require that all apps be installed through iTunes for a fee like our custom ring tones. (Garage band does cost 80 bucks for the one time fee)

I pretty much assumed there may be a free app here or there but Apple isn't relasing the SDK for nothing. The owners of the iPhones will pay in the end. They displayed this with the iPod Touch annoucement yesterday.

3. All iPhone apps must be installed through the iTunes music store via purchasing them for a fee. (Think how much the Dev charges and then how much appl tacks on in royalties)

Any-one share my fears or think something entirely different?

Seems #2 and #3 are basically the same.

Either way, the biggest concern is that the apps can be released by anyone and Apple makes no representation or warranty that the apps will work and not somehow damage your iPhone.

 

[C-Dubs]

your fears are warranted, but I'll reserve my judgement till the SDK comes out. It's most likely going to be some sort of compromise- remember, the cornerstone of the iPhone according to Apple is that it's secure from hackers. I suspect the SDK to be controlled by Apple either by requiring iTunes to be used (so it controls the install mechanism) or requiring the digital signature like Nokia. Money will probably be involved, but since iPhone users are already paying extra each month to have a iPhone on AT&T, I don't expect every app to cost something.

 

[sr5878]

i was under the impression that apple was doing pricing between $0-6(?) for apps, and that apple would make a commission only on the pay-for apps?

idk where i heard that but it sounds more than reasonable.

 

[peeaanuut]

I do like the idea of everything going through iTunes. This will ensure that what we get is apple approved and secure and not just some errant software. That was always a big problem for the Palm OS.

 

[peeaanuut]

i was under the impression that apple was doing pricing between $0-6(?) for apps, and that apple would make a commission only on the pay-for apps?

idk where i heard that but it sounds more than reasonable.

I remember reading that as well, but not sure if it was an Apple statement or some guestament.

 

[Slip]

I think that the apps having to be signed by Apple is a little of a double edged sword, yes it's made sure that these apps work and are non-malicious which is always a good thing, but them having total control will mean that some apps that they do not want to see such as VOIP may be blocked due to them eating into the revenue made from the carrier

 

[arkitect]

I have three fears that I think are quite reasonable.

No need to be fearful.
Personally, I have lowish expectation sof the first apps. Right now, apart from Flash and Cut&paste my iPhone does waht it has to do for me. Anythng extra will be a bonus.

1. All iPhone apps will have to apply with apple so that apple keeps track of them and may even have final say on what can and cannot be installed on iPhones.

That is how I understand it, yes. Apple will keep track — like Widgets were at first… That is just the Apple way. Control.

2. The SDK will require that all apps be installed through iTunes for a fee like our custom ring tones. (Garage band does cost 80 bucks for the one time fee)

Yes, most of the new apps will have to be bought. Some may be free though… depends on the complexity I guess. If an App is worth it I will buy it — provided the price is right. I don't quite see what you mean by Garageband costing $80? I am confident the apps are not so complex and there will be no way someone is going to survive by ripping off users. I am sure we are looking at around $5+.

3. All iPhone apps must be installed through the iTunes music store via purchasing them for a fee. (Think how much the Dev charges and then how much appl tacks on in royalties)

Already covered under point 2.

 

[walnuts]

I totally agree

First of all, I think it is only natural that iPhone apps would be sold via itunes.

Second, just imagine what could be done with a truly open sdk:

• Someone could write a Rhapsody client
• someone could access pandora
• someone could come up with a way to stream videos from the ad based video sites
• finder access
• excel, word, pages document editing

I hate to be all conspiracy theory here, but I think all of these things apple very specifically does not want the iphone to do. I don't see them ever making it easy (or letting someone else make it easy) to access music or video content that competes with iTunes. If you had finder access with document editing capabilities, why would you need the Macbook Air? I would even speculate that you can't use bluetooth headphones because apple is still working on a pair of bluetooth headphones.

I totally expect that this SDK will be very disappointing. I don't think it will have access to anything iphone specific apart from the screen. For the end user, the only differences between these long awaited apps and the current web apps is that they won't need safari, they would have access to the touch gestures, and you'd have to pay for them.

But hey, I could always be wrong.

 

[bbplayer5]

If they block iChat type programs im opting out of ATT and switching phones.

 

[Slip]

First of all, I think it is only natural that iPhone apps would be sold via itunes.

Second, just imagine what could be done with a truly open sdk:

• Someone could write a Rhapsody client
• someone could access pandora
• someone could come up with a way to stream videos from the ad based video sites
• finder access
• excel, word, pages document editing

I hate to be all conspiracy theory here, but I think all of these things apple very specifically does not want the iphone to do. I don't see them ever making it easy (or letting someone else make it easy) to access music or video content that competes with iTunes. If you had finder access with document editing capabilities, why would you need the Macbook Air? I would even speculate that you can't use bluetooth headphones because apple is still working on a pair of bluetooth headphones.

I totally expect that this SDK will be very disappointing. I don't think it will have access to anything iphone specific apart from the screen. For the end user, the only differences between these long awaited apps and the current web apps is that they won't need safari, they would have access to the touch gestures, and you'd have to pay for them.

But hey, I could always be wrong.

I think, sadly, that you are pretty much right. Correct me if Im wrong, but all iPod games are pay-for aren't they? I know for one that I am not willing to pay 4 odd pounds for a game on my iPod and the same applies to the Touch/iPhone. If those games were made free then I would certainly be interested. Let's just hope that there are a wide offering of free apps for the Touch/iPhone

 

[nickspohn]

90% of apps won't cost money.

 

[Slip]

90% of apps won't cost money.

Beautiful

 

[ert3]

If they block iChat type programs im opting out of ATT and switching phones.

See this is what i meant by my first fear. They would go a step further than just blocking malware and start blocking apps they don't want on the iPhone such as third party instant messengers or mms apps and almost certainly the app for jailbroken iphones that allows you to use your iphone as an internet dongle.

There is also the fringe posibility that apple may allow certain apps with spyware through.

Example McAfee being free with comcast high speed internet. Why you ask, because it allows comcast to control what spyware you do and don't have. I know it sounds like conspiracy theory but its the only reason i can think of for all the spyware it keeps missing and the fact the scan takes forever.

 

[walnuts]

If they block iChat type programs im opting out of ATT and switching phones.

You know, unfortunately, that's another one that apple might deliberately not want to have. They've released and rereleased the maps app and still no iChat app that everyone's been clamouring for.

Why instant message when you could text message? Text messages earn money.

 

[SRSound]

If they block iChat type programs im opting out of ATT and switching phones.

Same here