Intel Macs only!!???!!! WTH! I'm pretty sure my G4 can still handle coding!
It is not the coding and compiling, the issue is probably the emulator and debugger, they run Intel code only.
I have the same issue but I understand.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPhone SDK Details, First Look
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is not the coding and compiling, the issue is probably the emulator and debugger, they run Intel code only.
I have the same issue but I understand.
91% of a 1000 sales versus 70% of millions of sales, ummmm 70% wins.
This is a great deal, the product is in every iPhone face, prospects don't have to remember some obscure web site and I do not need to do marketing or fight for shell space. Brilliant.
You keep with DoCoMo, ill go with iTunes.
That's got to be the dumbest thing I have ever read.
DoCoMo has close to 48 million imode users. Qualcomm has something like 400-500 million CDMA users that can use BREW.
Apple has 2.5 million iphone users that are legitimately connected to the official carriers.
Version 2.0 is going to burn jailbreak to a crisp. Most developers will move over to use the SDK. It is completely free to learn and create applications and test them in the emulator. Once they get to the final stage, they signup for the $99 dollars official program, fill out some forms, and start the last stage of testing in the real phone. After that they register the application, set a price and bingo wait for the checks to arrive.
You are quick to insult, use your imagination man.
Obviously everyone is an idiot if they don't think your way.
How many millions of installations you have?
I sell other peoples software and keep 30% (though in my situation its not me setting the rules and im not in a situation to elaborate)
Anyhow, i wonder what the development time on docomo is compared to cocoa? Probably a lot longer, hence less profit.
Comparison experiences
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=478544&cid=22667626
John Carmack from id (doom, quake fame)
http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=478544&cid=22669142
Well, the name of the iPhone simulator in the SDK is "Aspen Simulator".....
Have to agree, they do get interchanged often. But, when doing development, and switching between integration environments, it helps to use "simulator" for software, and "emulator" for hardware. Both can include a CPU.
edit: well, in this case, the Aspen Simulator does not include CPU simulation - apparently, it is limited to simulating the h/w interfaces to the screen (tap, swipe, flick, rotate (through menu)) edit: opt to pinch, multi-touch, network, audio (I believe) edit: no audio, and GUI, except OpenGL ES isn't supported. The code, when built to run on the simulator is i386, not ARM. But, I'll still stand by my generalization on the use of the terms...
Come June Apple is not going to be able to make iPhones quick enough. I expect applications galore as soon as they open the gate.
This is huge, lets see what the stock does tomorrow.
This is huge, lets see what the stock does tomorrow.
It's enough that Qualcomm has paid out over a billion dollars to developers.
http://brew.qualcomm.com/brew/en/about/brew_today.html#pub_dev
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)
your choice is to by another platform, like a dingleberry, or a palm. No one is forcing you to buy an iPhone and the supporting infrastructure that makes it a great product. Get off your soap box.
irun5k said:
your choice is to by another platform, like a dingleberry, or a palm. No one is forcing you to buy an iPhone and the supporting infrastructure that makes it a great product. Get off your soap box.
No, it is interesting to everyone who wants to develop for mobile phones.
The business model is the important part. Qualcomm has the same business model as DoCoMo (and if you look at DoCoMo in Europe, the European carriers takes a cut as well).
Nokia has been trying this same business model for a number of years now. Nokia launched Preminet in 2004 to have the same business model as Qualcomm.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5424317.html
In 2005, Nokia killed off Preminet because they wanted too much %age for revenue share.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/20/nokia_brew_battle/
Then in 2006, Nokia relaunch Preminet as Nokia Content Discoverer.
http://www.intomobile.com/2006/06/2...n-relaunched-as-nokia-content-discoverer.html
I am going with Apple.
You are telling us how great Qualcoom is, but looks like they are not selling anything of yours as you did not answer the questions of how many applications you sold with them.
Tell you what, I am going with Apple, hope you get rich with Qualcomm.
The thing is, I like Apple, and I just don't want to see them turn into a poorly regarded organization with draconian tactics. I think their successful future depends on them opening up ever-so-slightly.
By successful future, I mean 5, 10, 20 years from now. And by success I don't mean just profit. Microsoft makes a lot of money, but I don't know that I'd call them completely successful. Most of the world runs Windows but when was the last time you heard someone talk about how truly great Windows is? The way people brag about Macs around the water cooler- this is the kind of thing that needs to be preserved here.
It may not be a bad thing when Jobs steps down some day. Not that he hasn't done a great job, but new ideas can't hurt. A CEO who is a little more open, a little less secretive, and has a little less of a God-complex couldn't hurt.
I never said how great Qualcomm is and I am not a software developer.
I simply said that DoCoMo and Qualcomm has an established business model that Apple is trying to copy. You are in the US, so you should be familiar with Verizon Wireless Get It Now --- VZW gets 10%, Qualcomm gets 10% and the developers get the remaining 80%.
Interesting model, but no I moved off Verizon a while back because all they did was cripple my phone and sell me a similar service to what was originally on the phone but for a price.
I like what Apple is building here and as to number of units, wait until June and see them babies fly of the shell faster than they can make them.
Look at tomorrow Apple stock price, and also check out RIM stock price.
Man, this is HUGE.
Also notice they said they were not there to talk about hardware, so we will be hearing about iPhone Take 2 before June ant that is going to cause a lot more sales. We are looking at 12 to 15 million units by end 2008 and climbing even further next year.
That's like the kettle calling the teapot black. The iphone is 10x more crippled than any Verizon phone.
i certainly would not call their tactics draconian. cautious maybe
being secretive is all part of the extreme innovation process. it also ad's to the 'cool' factor, people like to dream and guess, allow everyone(or anyone in my experience) to know everything about you and intrigue/hype/coolness or whatever you want to call it is lost.
Sadly I get the impression that Steve Job's is on his way out. He was skinny, he delegated much, and openly talking of successors, this all appears to be preparation to me.
So why are you here trolling?
You don't like Apple plans and obviously you think Verizon phones and services are better.
Or is it that you just like going against the grain of this forum and subject?
Never mind, I am no longer interested in this conversation.
Goodbye
And I would refer you to John Carmack's comments. Distribution channel is BIG. I understand why non-business people minimize it, but, really folks, distribution like that is HUGE.
Basically, Apple's in the ball park with Qualcomm, substantially more expensive than DoCoMo (and, substantially cheaper than material distributors, of course). I'm wondering what expenses are involved in each.
distribution channel..
Here's a few things to think about:
1. I think I read this somewhere on MacRumors - When you go to a traditional store do you think the price you pay goes entirely to the developer? Although there is no storefront here, servers, storage and datacenter costs (power and cooling), people to run those datacenters and bandwidth usage are not free or cheap.
2. 99$ a year is not bad considering the developer does not have to pay or run a website and does not pay for bandwidth or storage for the website.
3. Let's look at what Microsoft charges to be a developer: Visual Studio Professional or Teams with MSDN subscription is $2,499-$10,000, VS standard with no MSDN is $600 -$1000. Windows mobile sdk is free but you must purchase a version of VS to use it.
Apple charges nothing for xcode and ADC access is free for most content. ADC Premier is $3499 AND you get a ticket to WWDC and 10 Hardware discount. ADC Select $499 1 hardware discount. iPhone SDK is free ($99 a yr if you want support and to publish) and you must use xcode (which is free)
I think that Apple's model isn't bad at all.
1. I think I read this somewhere on MacRumors - When you go to a traditional store do you think the price you pay goes entirely to the developer? Although there is no storefront here, servers, storage and datacenter costs (power and cooling), people to run those datacenters and bandwidth usage are not free or cheap.
2. 99$ a year is not bad considering the developer does not have to pay or run a website and does not pay for bandwidth or storage for the website.
3. Let's look at what Microsoft charges to be a developer: Visual Studio Professional or Teams with MSDN subscription is $2,499-$10,000, VS standard with no MSDN is $600 -$1000. Windows mobile sdk is free but you must purchase a version of VS to use it.
Apple charges nothing for xcode and ADC access is free for most content. ADC Premier is $3499 AND you get a ticket to WWDC and 10 Hardware discount. ADC Select $499 1 hardware discount. iPhone SDK is free ($99 a yr if you want support and to publish) and you must use xcode (which is free)
I think that Apple's model isn't bad at all.