iPhone SDK Details Emerging?

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,594
10,908
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

iLounge cites several sources "familiar with Apple’s iPhone and iPod touch software development kit (SDK) plans" to reveal some new details:

• iTunes Store as hub - as expected, Apple will require future iPhone and iPod Touch applications to be distributed through Apple's iTunes Store.
• Apple as Application Gatekeeper - iLounge believes that Apple will act as a gatekeeper for the applications themselves and will formally approve or deny all software releases.
While one source saw this as a positive for major developers, suggesting that Apple will be choked by application submissions and forced to give priority to releases from larger companies, another source disagreed, stating that Apple’s current approval processes for third-party products have resulted in lengthy, needless delays.
• No Accessory Support - no ability to support dock-based accessories, though the iPhone's own phone, Wi-Fi, and camera will reportedly accessible.

iLounge confirms earlier rumors that the SDK would be not ready for release at Apple's March 6th event. Instead, they echo that a beta releases will be available then, with the final release to await WWDC in June. Meanwhile, they do expect Apple to announce Microsoft Exchange and Lotus Notes support at the March event.

Article Link
 

Markleshark

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2006
6,240
0
Carlisle, Up Norf!
It'd be a shame if it didn't include accessory support, but the fact they are reviewing the apps is a plus in my eyes. I think this is a must, especially if we're going to be charged.
 

The Phazer

macrumors 68030
Oct 31, 2007
2,849
497
London, UK
I'm not *too* bothered by most of it - some apps are better than nothing, and I've little doubt that the key to allow applications that Apple refuses to still be installed will be forthcoming in hours rather months.

However, no dock access is a major, major ****up. One of the things I've been looking forward to with the SDK is third parties picking up Apple's slack and giving us a working radio remote or an external synced flash for the camera. Possibly even bluetooth keyboard support. I just cannot fathom any reason for not including it, because it's really, really stupid.

It's very, very disappointing news if true.

Phazer
 

paulpthcom

macrumors newbie
Feb 6, 2004
7
0
Just say NO

As a small 3rd party developer I'm just going to refuse to do anything for the iPhone/iTouch platform if Apple acts like a gatekeeper. If iTunes is an option that's fine, if its mandatory and Apple has to approve each app I'm just not interested. Hopefully other developers feel the same way.
 

Leemo

macrumors 6502
May 7, 2006
430
0
Nottingham, UK
It'd be a shame if it didn't include accessory support, but the fact they are reviewing the apps is a plus in my eyes. I think this is a must, especially if we're going to be charged.
I agree actually. Having the apps approved by Apple and available from the iTunes store instantly opens them up to a wider audience - especially those who had never considered adding applications to their phones before.

Having had Windows Mobile, Symbian and Palm based phones in the past I see this as a strong positive step forward.

I just hope Apple get it right.
 

neilw

macrumors regular
Aug 4, 2003
235
151
New Jersey
If true, this is a lot of folks' worst-case scenario. Very unfortunate and short-sighted on Apple's part. This strongly suggests, as well, that free applications will be non-existent. Forget a chat or VOIP application.

The silver lining is that Apple originally didn't plan (or at least didn't tell us) an SDK at all, but here we are. So maybe they'll loosen up over time.

This is really control-freaky, even for Apple.
 

indiekiduk

macrumors 6502
Jul 26, 2005
399
298
Glasgow, Scotland
Geez I hope all of this isn't tue, surely Apple can't get it THAT wrong. Apple approving every application? - that's just ridiculous. SDK Take 2 this time next year?
 

SFC Archer

macrumors 68000
Nov 9, 2007
1,742
0
Troy, MT
Good for Apple...This means that Apple is still in charge and will control what will be will be. It also gives all of those that love to whine something else to express their anger about...so here we go with ALLLLLL of the pissed off users that just want to whine cause the phone won't be able to "think" and "do" for them.

At least this way, we will continue to have a quality, high end product that won't turn into a cheapend Treo with totally broke software and cheap plastic attachements.

So....lets get on with the show and see how many different ways the cry babies can whine and bitch about the same old missing stuff....Entertain me...let the show begin....lmao!!!
 

BryanLyle

macrumors 6502a
Aug 2, 2005
719
15
If they announce immediate Exchange support on March 6th it will take the sting out of the SDK announcement (beta only). I would be shocked if apple WASN'T the gatekeeper for these applications. If they don't we will end up with a bunch of crappy software.
 

Markleshark

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2006
6,240
0
Carlisle, Up Norf!
As a small 3rd party developer I'm just going to refuse to do anything for the iPhone/iTouch platform if Apple acts like a gatekeeper. If iTunes is an option that's fine, if its mandatory and Apple has to approve each app I'm just not interested. Hopefully other developers feel the same way.
Why? So I can get your free break-my-iPod app on my iPod without Apple knowing? Yeah, people with your attitude will be missed by myself and I'm sure by Apple. :rolleyes:

At least we'll get quality apps, and not deadwood.
 

abijnk

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2007
3,286
4
Los Angeles, CA
Is this how apple handles things like widgets for the mac platform? If so, then I suppose it could be alright. Especially if it is going to be pay, we don't want to pay for something with a lot of bugs or something like that.

Whatever Apple does with this, it is sure to make someone somewhere very upset. It will be an interesting Thursday!
 

swordsman24

macrumors newbie
Feb 29, 2008
5
0
Approval and review a requriement

I can promise you that the Apple certifications of applications is being driven by AT&T. AT&T does not want consumers calling them when they have problems with an application nor do they want applications on the phone that may expose vulnerabilities in their network.
 

dr_lha

macrumors 68000
Oct 8, 2003
1,593
6
Did anyone think that Apple would distribute stuff on the iTunes store (the obvious way to distributing iPhone/Touch software) and not vet it? The last thing they need is a lawsuit because some malicious software was made available on iTunes. Like it or not having iTunes as the software repository (as opposed to "the Internet") gives all iPhone software an air of Apple "approval".

Lets not moan about this until we have evidence that Apple aren't anything other than a good gatekeeper here, which I imagine will be decided about the time when the first VOIP app gets sent for Apple's seal of approval.
 

dr_lha

macrumors 68000
Oct 8, 2003
1,593
6
I can promise you that the Apple certifications of applications is being driven by AT&T. AT&T does not want consumers calling them when they have problems with an application nor do they want applications on the phone that may expose vulnerabilities in their network.
Why is this not an issue for Palm, Symbian or Windows Mobile apps then?

EDIT: Sorry for multiple posts.
 

dr_lha

macrumors 68000
Oct 8, 2003
1,593
6
Erm, yes it is. You not heard of mobile virus'?
My point is that AT&T haven't required any software vetting on any of their other smart phones have they? Yet swordsman24 is sure that this is the reason why Apple want to vet apps. If AT&T were so pushy in this area, it would be true for all other smartphones as well, especially now that phones like Blackberries are becoming mainstream.
 

levitynyc

macrumors 65816
Aug 19, 2006
1,100
3,235
I am disappointed if the SDK was still in Beta form. Stevie said that it would be ready to go in February and now it'll be March and still in Beta form? I hope this isnt true.
 

Markleshark

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2006
6,240
0
Carlisle, Up Norf!
My point is that AT&T haven't required any software vetting on any of their other smart phones have they? Yet swordsman24 is sure that this is the reason why Apple want to vet apps. If AT&T were so pushy in this area, it would be true for all other smartphones as well.
I see your point now, see, I far from believe it is anything to do with anyone other than Apple not wanting ***** on their Mobile Phone/iPod.
 

dr_lha

macrumors 68000
Oct 8, 2003
1,593
6
I see your point now, see, I far from believe it is anything to do with anyone other than Apple not wanting ***** on their Mobile Phone/iPod.
I tend to agree with this, although I do have a slight worry that they're going to be vetting anything that cuts into AT&T's business like VOIP and AIM (or even free SMS apps). I hope this isn't the case though.
 

Markleshark

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2006
6,240
0
Carlisle, Up Norf!
I tend to agree with this, although I do have a slight worry that they're going to be vetting anything that cuts into AT&T's business like VOIP and AIM (or even free SMS apps). I hope this isn't the case though.
Yeah, I can see them [Apple] doing this :eek: which would be a shame. However, as with these 'details' we don't know until that first app goes, as you said earlier.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.