iPhone SDK Details Emerging?

[SFC Archer]

I did not sell my iPhone - just that I jailbroke and unlocked it and decided no more money in Apple/AT&T pocket. I don't know if for my money I would ever accept a coporate overlord telling me what app I can develop and what app I can download for what amount of money. If you do well - it looks like it would be better for you not to rely on your judgement and liking and instead have a far away clueless corporation decide on your behalf.

And if you cannot write in a mature fashion or if you cannot comprehend that others can have different opinions than you - my advice would be that you stop public interactions, get the problem sorted and then try again. Ok?

Nice of you to take out that part where I agreed with you so that you could insert your "mature" remark

I do have to disagree with you in that Apple is far far far from being a "far away clueless corporation" They seem to be doing rather well to have generated such a following to include yourself. What you do with and how you use your phone is your choice, I could care less if you have broke your phone and dont like ATT, that is your right. However, It is also my right to use the phone as it was designed and not be insulted for doing what I decide is right. No where has apple said it would limit, charge for or implement your so called "overlord" position. They are in there way attempting to make and maintain a (limited) bug free product and if they decide to control the distribution of 3rd party apps...Then IT IS their right.

The last thing I have to say is to try adhere to your own words "that others can have different opinions than you" That was my opinion of how some of these threads go...Sorry if you are unable to comprehend in a "mature fashion"

 

[unconcious]

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!!!

I could have not said it better !!!!!

 

[werkedm3]

for all the knee-jerker in this thead:
apple is offering a consumer-friendly platform. they cannot, and will not, turn this into a 'free-for-all', simply because the average consumer cannot exist in a 'free-for-all' environment. ever seen your parents and grandparents computing happily under linux? or under windows without the obligatory and utterly annoying anti-virus, anti-malware and and-you-name-it security governants? - i doubt it.

apples and oranges. All those dialogues can be disabled, anti-virus can be uninstalled. Windows does not dictate what you can and cannot install, much like what apple is probably going to do with the iPhone. And of course most "grandparents and parents" aren't using linux, most people who are perfectly capable getting around windows/mac don't even know it exists.

 

[moreAAPLplz]

All that I want is to be able to play on PokerStars or Full Tilt Poker.

 

[yg17]

Your jailbreak is the problem. Apple has a right to control who and what gets the seal of approval.

No they don't. The end users are the one who shelled out money for the stupid phone, they're the ones who get to give apps their personal seal of approval. Apple doesn't control what apps you install on your computer, why should they control what you put on your phone?

 

[The Tuck]

Free Market

There's a reason we live in a free market society and country where the government doesn't approve every business that starts up. If this is true, Apple is being (I guess legally) very anti-competitive with its own products. This kind of behavior can't be good for the market.

 

[Svennig]

Ah, a strawman …

He made the implication that what would and would not get passed was clear to a developer from the start.

I made the observation that, either he knows something we do not, or he is wrong. If he does know something, perhaps that knowledge should be shared.

 

[Hooka]

No they don't. The end users are the one who shelled out money for the stupid phone, they're the ones who get to give apps their personal seal of approval. Apple doesn't control what apps you install on your computer, why should they control what you put on your phone?

This is not a computer. It is a phone and it needs to work. You don't pay $$$ each month to use your computer. Ipod apps have always been controlled by Apple in some way. Nike + ring a bell?

 

[SFC Archer]

Ah, yes. I guess that the average user don't use disk mode. The average user don't use copy/paste, reading a PDF or other document they might want to put on there, not to mention all the rest of the crippling that Apple has done purposefully. Only "geeks, fanboys, trolls and worldly unhappy individuals" would ever think of something that extreme. Good thinking.

Also, I'm wondering if you're even aware of what the words you type mean? A fanboy (I'm assuming an Apple-one?) is hardly someone calling Apple out because of the crippling. A geek that is technophobe? Another example of excellent thinking on your part

Amazing...and you are still bragging about your glorious iPhone to your peers everyday and yet you are so unhappy because you cant figure out how to make it work because its missing a few apps...did your world stop revolving cause you had to type something instead of using copy/paste. Far from being a fan boy....I am and always will remain a PC user...I only state my opinion as it is my right to do so...and if you had read in my (no offense intended) that you so conviently removed when quoting me...that I didnt intend to offend anyone, it was a generic statement. Don't be a newspaper editor please.

 

[Tosser]

He made the implication that what would and would not get passed was clear to a developer from the start.

No he didn't. He said, that if apple acts like a gatekeeper with itunes being mandatory and apple having to approve each and every app, he just wasn't interested:

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.

I made the observation that, either he knows something we do not, or he is wrong. If he does know something, perhaps that knowledge should be shared.

No you didn't. Not at all, in fact. You asked him to post a list of things that would or would not pass, a list of things that he "clearly" owned.

Aaah I see - may I have a copy of the list of things that will and will not pass that you clearly own?

Thus you made a strawman: If he could not produce such a list at this time, his argument (which had no relation to your demand) would be faulty. That is a strawman.

 

[Eraserhead]

Then stop thinking. This isn't something that can be solved.

Why not? Unsigned apps have to be run in a sandbox, signed apps can be run outside a sandbox for a $99 fee or free/low fee if they are submitted to iTunes.

That sounds like a sensible and achievable model.

 

[Otaviano]

Well said Dick...have to totally agree with you and might I add (without putting words into your mouth) It is their soul right to do so...they own the phone and can do what they want with it...obviously they will learn as they go and fix what needs to be fixed but they sure arent going to bow down to a bunch of whiney thread posts when the majority are happy with what they have and keep buying the product.

LOL so after paying 399 I don't own my cell phone

 

[Smith288]

People who reply with "its for the good of the user" implying a user is too stupid to be trusted with their own device make me cringe.

1984 like in terms of software development. Not a smart move...if true.

 

[RickJames69]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

can't you all,"Just get along"?

 

[parapup]

Nice of you to take out that part where I agreed with you so that you could insert your "mature" remark

Totally unintentional - I wanted to focus on how wrong it was for you to say it is OK for *everyone* to have Apple decide what they can do and what they cannot. That sounds too close to dictatorship.

I do have to disagree with you in that Apple is far far far from being a "far away clueless corporation" They seem to be doing rather well to have generated such a following to include yourself.

You are confused here. Obviously. They generated that following and cult by adhering to open standards and not forcing people and not acting like a monopolistic dictator. That is _past_. What they are doing with the iPhone is the _present_ and it is wrong to force people to do what Apple thinks is right with the iPhone that they own legitimately. The current stance of Apple is greedy - they want everything and they want others to have little. That never works.

What you do with and how you use your phone is your choice, I could care less if you have broke your phone and dont like ATT, that is your right. However, It is also my right to use the phone as it was designed and not be insulted for doing what I decide is right. No where has apple said it would limit, charge for or implement your so called "overlord" position. They are in there way attempting to make and maintain a (limited) bug free product and if they decide to control the distribution of 3rd party apps...Then IT IS their right.

Well similarly I could *not* care less about what you think is right and what you want to do with your iPhone. However the claims about bugfree product and it being Apple's right to control is utter crap. I don't have to explain the basics again - OSX is not any more buggier than it would've been with Apple controlling the apps it can run. The iPhone runs OSX. Technology is proven, mature and already implemented to achieve that without a manually intervening centrally controlling entity which is impractical.

We are not discussing *your* preferences and definitions of right and wrong, BTW. We are discussing people's general preferences and commonly used definitions of right and wrong.

 

[Eraserhead]

LOL so after paying 399 I don't own my cell phone

To be fair if I buy a car, I am restricted with what I can do with it. I need to have a licence and pass a test to drive it (which isn't free) on a road outside my property. I also have to have insurance which covers any possible damage which I do to other peoples property.

 

[Smith288]

Then stop thinking. This isn't something that can be solved.

Interesting quote. "Dont think because I dont believe you can come up with a workable solution. Now goosestep with me!" (ok, a little harsh but seriously? telling someone to stop thinking?)

To be fair if I buy a car, I am restricted with what I can do with it. I need to have a licence and pass a test to drive it (which isn't free) on a road outside my property. I also have to have insurance which covers any possible damage which I do to other peoples property.

I can also pimp it out to my hearts desire when I drive it off the lot. What's your point?

 

[EagerDragon]

Overall I think this is all great. Device support will come later for devices that are certified iPod/iPhone (Apple has a program for this).

If developers don't ask for the API for the device then Apple will not include it, it is just a matter of numbers and the device having been certified.
Small developers may have a problem as the checking done by Apple is probably not free.

As to thise saying that it is not necessary to do the checking .... If Apple says it is then it is, simple as that. Most developers allways think their S**t never stink as they are pperfect, Apple says we need to verify, so they get verified. Developers set the ego trip aside quick if there is good money to be made, those that won't will not be distributed.

 

[Eraserhead]

I can also pimp it out to my hearts desire when I drive it off the lot. What's your point?

The point is you require a licence to drive a car, whereas you don't require a licence to use the internet.

You also have to make sure the car stays roadworthy, otherwise its illegal, whereas if you install "Zombie Phone 1.0" you aren't liable for the damage that causes to other mobile phone users.

 

[SFC Archer]

LOL so after paying 399 I don't own my cell phone

I apologize for the mis-wording...Let me try again:

They are the inventors, designers and sellers of the iPhone and they can dam well sell it the way they want to and deside how to release "THEIR" SDK and way they seem fit....and not you or anyone else in this world can change that!

We can only accept what is given and learn to live with it and if you don't like the way "YOUR" iPhone does not work or the way that 3rd party apps are released then go get a different phone company or hack the stupid thing...I dont care.

 

[EagerDragon]

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.

There are 100 people in line to take the place of those that will not play Apple game. Sticking to rules set by you may not be cost effective, but that is your decision to make.

 

[Konstanty]

If Apple says it is then it is, simple as that.

The Fanboy's Creed.

 

[MacTheSpoon]

That doesn't make sense to me. If Apple is going to approve all software, then they should allow dock-based accessories; after all, if someone made something that they didn't like, like a radio broadcast unit that streams copyrighted media a la the Zune for instance, they could just reject the software for it.

 

[Spades]

This is not a computer. It is a phone and it needs to work.

It is a computer. If an app can make the phone portion stop working then the OS is flawed. Fix that. Don't force people into a walled garden because they're too lazy or incompetent to fix that. However, I do expect that OS X on the iPhone is designed well enough that an external app won't kill the phone portion.

That argument is out, either way.

 

[Tosser]

Oh, haha, you're so wrong. Let's see how your argument flys in the real world and how it adheres to me:

Amazing...and you are still bragging about your glorious iPhone to your peers everyday[…]

This is actually the worst part. But here goes. First of all, I'm far beyond the age where I "brag" about a phone. Sorry, but I'm not twelve. Second of all, I have chosen to _not_ buy an iPod Touch, let alone an iPhone, exactly _because_ of the crippling. Some people actually mean what they say, you know.

and yet you are so unhappy because you cant figure out how to make it work because its missing a few apps.

I was talking features, not necessarily apps. Get the facts straight. Disk mode for one, is propably the worst of the purposeful crippling.

..did your world stop revolving cause you had to type something instead of using copy/paste.

No, it just means I'm using something other than Apple's products. However, how Apple is doing business affects buyers of other hardware/software as it is right now. Simply because, if the arguments work with Apple, they work with other hardware and software pushers out there. And as a consumer, lockins and crippled products aren't a good thing. But I see you point: All the crippling is fine, since if you cannot live with products that has less features and uses than earlier similar products, one has to be an idjit. That makes sense.

Far from being a fan boy....I am and always will remain a PC user...I only state my opinion as it is my right to do so...

Haha, what is that? Some way of trying to protect yourself for being countered, playing hte freedom of speech-card? Seriously, though, it was you who mentioned fanboy, not me.

and if you had read in my (no offense intended) that you so conviently removed when quoting me...that I didnt intend to offend anyone, it was a generic statement.

Sorry, but whether I quote "no offense intended" or not, doesn't in any way, fashion or form influence whether the rest of your statement is wrong, right, fanboyish or not.
The statement is exactly the same, and whether the "no offense intended" was there or not doesn't mean that your quote was suddenly out of context.

Further, I like how you state your opinion was "generic". So you just put something out there, not really meaning it or having thought about it? A standard reply?
Sheesh …

Don't be a newspaper editor please.

You see, I quoted this too. Because you truly have a point: Without that last editor-comment, the rest of your post would be so very different.