Am I the only one who sees so many downloads as BAD.
BRING ON MAC VIRUSES AND TROJANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last I checked, Apple didn't let viruses and trojans into the AppStore.
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 Downloaded Over 100,000 Times
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Last I checked, Apple didn't let viruses and trojans into the AppStore.
I definitely agree with those saying that a huge percentage of downloads were probably people just downloading out of curiosity with no intention of releasing an app, or even no programming experience at all.
I dunno...maybe you should ask the millions of people who have bought games like that for cell phones and other platforms.
I would think the number of devs for whom $99 would be a hardship would be very low, especially when that charge is per developer and not per app. Even if you only charge a buck per copy of your app, you only have to sell 141 copies to cover that cost.
Considering that apple is going to host the downloads, the $99 may even be cheaper than what the webhosting would cost.
I dunno...maybe you should ask the millions of people who have bought games like that for cell phones and other platforms.
I would think the number of devs for whom $99 would be a hardship would be very low, especially when that charge is per developer and not per app. Even if you only charge a buck per copy of your app, you only have to sell 141 copies to cover that cost.
Considering that apple is going to host the downloads, the $99 may even be cheaper than what the webhosting would cost.
Depends on how serious they are.
I mean sure, they need to pay that $99 to even test it on a real device...but I'm sure that $99 is like nothing. I mean, even if they make freeware, a ton of developers who make good freeware (MobileChat, etc.) get a ton of donations from users. That'd easily cover $99. In fact there are many developers who get enough in donations to get a new Mac and such.
Other than that, $99 to test device, support, upload to appstore...I'm sure it's worth it.
(yeah, I'm going to pay
)If they are good apps charging $5 shouldn't be an issue - Getting your $100 back if you make something decent should be no problem
the only problem is like...what app can you really make? A ToDo List, Dictionary, TextEdit, etc. don't make sense to charge people $5 (there's gonna be a developer out there that makes a similar app for free).
And remaking games or big applications like Microsoft Word or Pages would infringe copyright unless you come up with your own...and if you can do that...why the deuce are you (not you specifically, but like the developer) making free apps/complaining about $99?
But like I said, donations are easy to get if you make a good enough application (heck, I remember free apps getting enough for the programmer to get the new Mac Mini...on donations alone).
I feel sorry for anybody who devotes their time to releasing for free what could be instead sold for $5. (Many free apps have at their heart some open source that cannot be sold thusly -- the contract you enter into by using open source states that any derivations of the source must also be free. This is the price you pay for the benefit of ready-to-port code).
Furthermore, you're vastly underestimating the software market. The value of software is in its targeting -- customizing an application to meet the exact needs of a particular market. Making it specific, not making it generic, and the more specific, the more you'll get for it.
A dictionary, you say, has no value. This may be news to the O.E.D. people, but w/e. Even if this statement is true, expanding the scope of the dictionary even a small amount can dramatically increase its value:
A dictionary that can accurately find a word you horribly misspelled.
A dictionary that offers additional insight and context beyond a simple definition -- say, literary references.
A dictionary for children.
A dictionary with pictures.
A dictionary for speakers whose first language isn't English.
A slang or trade dictionary.
A dictionary that contrasts the meaning of synonyms.
A dictionary that restricts its scope to only those words used in, say, Scrabble, or on the SAT or GRE.
A dictionary that offers random terms to help build your word power.
Etc, etc.
Any of these could be sold, some for quite a lot of money. I admit: my pilot iPhone app is going to be nothing more than a common raster drawing program, the sort of thing that's been done and redone since Bill Atkinson changed the name of LisaGraf to QuickDraw. But if I do my job, it'll be so fun to use, it'll be something you just have to have. It'll be worth way more to you than the $5 would have been.
When I'm finished, could somebody clone it, and offer it for free? Well, it'd be pretty crummy of them, and I don't know what they'd get out of it, but I guess they could. It's my job to keep my program fresh, exciting and bug free, and let me tell you -- with your $5, and the potential $5 of many other users, there's a lot more incentive to innovate than there is for the clone artist.
Software quality and features are differentiators on an iPhone just like they are on a desktop. There are always free alternatives, but are they really comparable?
Examples:
1) Photoshop vs. GIMP (Free): Photoshop is unquestionably more powerful than GIMP, and to those people who need the features, they will pay the extra cash.
2) TextMate vs. TextEdit (Free): TextMate is one of the most powerful text editors on the planet, offering scripting, syntax highlighting, project views, and more. Using TextEdit for programming is not possible (or at least extremely frustrating).
3) VoodooPad vs. Stickies (Free): VoodooPad is basically a Wiki (scratch) area, but yet people are willing to pay money for it because it is easy to use and powerful.
My point is that just because someone released a free ToDo list does not mean that you can't write a better one and make some money off of it. Software Engineering is not a commodity -- it's closer to a form of art.
That's a very close minded view of the software market. There are other ways to make money besides charging a fee to download your app.
Examples:
1) Google.com has always been free, and until a few years ago it didn't even have any ads. Instead, they built a -massive- user base and then used sheer market force (and innovation) to introduce a profit model (AdWords/AdSense) based upon their users.
2) Any of a myriad of open source projects give away their software for free but charge for a service contract or additional features. Examples: Asterisk, Red Hat Linux, MySQL, Xen.
3) The creators of many "donationware" products make decent money.
4) Firefox is a free, open source application whose creator, the Mozilla Foundation, makes millions of dollars per year by having Google as their default search in the toolbar.
Now, there are plenty of cases where selling your software (even for $5) is a good idea. But there are other ways to skin the cat, as they say - when you have a giant user base, it is amazing what you can accomplish.
anything that is market dominant is more likely to be the subject of attacks. Maybe you are too young to remember when MACs actually had viruses.
Moreover, do you seriously think everyone is going to use the iTunes store to download apps???
That's like saying everyone who buys an iPhone is going to get an ATT contract.
Ginseng works well for memory my friend:
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3870&Itemid=2
Slip-ups do happen; give a evil genius a challenge and she will beat it.
You are right, each language has it's own merits and problems. Having worked in both PC and Mac development environments, It's really personal choice that I prefer Objective-C.
Let's put it in perspective -- Most developers easily spend that much money on 2 books from Oreilly/Wrox/Addison-Wesley etc. per year. $99 opportunity cost is nothing compared to the time/cost investment spent staying current with software development trends or switching stacks. (Coders tend to be very free-market capitalistic/libertarian and generally have a good understanding of economics. See /. or other techie site for reference). Even if you can't turn a profit on your very small investment, it's still less than an afternoon's pay for people who generally make $100,000+.
So if someone creates an iPhone virus that only can get onto jailbreaked phones, will anyone really care or feel bad for those people?
As someone who lived with a PC for years, I will care and will feel bad for those people.
Sadly, it's heartless people exactly like you that will inspire the virus writers to make web-launched or email-launched viruses.
That was funny, LOL.
Most people will move to the App Store, including a lot of the people that make the free jailbreak software, the stragglers will move later as the population of users using a jailbroken phone will rapidly diminish. In the end there will be just a few straglers that will not get the virus as there is no incentive to create a virus that hits only a couple of thousand users. Right now there is a large group of jailbreakers, but most will be moved over by years end.
I work in the security side, and a few member of my team deal with PC malware, so I understand your point. Yet I would not feel bad as by their choice they are using or keep using a technology that opens them to those viruses and they did that by choice. Today there is a reason to jailbreak but after a few months of the App store being open, there will be less and less reason to remain jailbroken. Yes, there will always be people that for some reason or due to their twisted way of thinking revel against purchasing software. Those I would roll on the floor laughing when they get a virus or some other malware.
Most users that jailbroke was because they wanted options and some for curiosity. The App store will provide plenty of quality choices starting at the end of June.
Most people would not like to be left behind, they will switch. Even the developers, that 4.99 software can pay for the next Mac and a lot more.
Depends on how serious they are.
I mean sure, they need to pay that $99 to even test it on a real device...but I'm sure that $99 is like nothing. I mean, even if they make freeware, a ton of developers who make good freeware (MobileChat, etc.) get a ton of donations from users. That'd easily cover $99. In fact there are many developers who get enough in donations to get a new Mac and such.
Other than that, $99 to test device, support, upload to appstore...I'm sure it's worth it.
(yeah, I'm going to pay
Yes, it does - but I'm thinking about those people who want to create their own apps and have no interest in sharing - maybe their apps aren't suitable for other people. You've got to spend $99 to test an app on a real device, basically.
For some, $99 is a lot of money.
It seems strange that Apple won't let people create their own apps and upload to iPhone. Also, its always a good idea to test on a real device and not depend on an simulator.
whats the differnece betwwen sdk and jailbroken softwares besides the fact that 1 is apple-approved?
Jail broken software is not bound by Apple's restrictions, for example, multi-tasking.
Jailbroken software is that, just software.
The SDK means Software Development Kit. It is a combination of an editor, project manager, libraries, documentation, compiler, debugger and emulator.
The SDK is an extension of the current XCode environment used to develop Mac OSX applications and the OSX operating system it self.
Applications can be written with this or other tools and they can be free or for pay. So there are a lot of difference between them.
Your stripes are showing.
Apple policies have little to do with the actual SDK. If you want to get it in the iPhone there are ways. What Apple is doing is making it so easy that the majority of the people will find no need to jailbreak. Instead of fighting jailbreak head to head, they are providing an easy and economical way for developers and end users with the combination of the SDK and the App Store.
People are literally standing in line to pay the 99 dollars.
I been a developer for over 30 years, developers having an issue with the restrictions are just not thinking differently. The iPhone has events and call-backs so it does multi-tasks, but not necessarily in a way they are used to. It is a matter of time before the light bulb above their head light up and they see the way.
Your opinion. So, what you are saying is that we aren't allowed to say a valid bad word against Apple? Huh, such an open mind you have.
Wasn't Palm widely criticised for not having multitasking PDAs back in the day?
The iPhone is well suited for multitasking, Apple is applying an artificial restriction. End of Story.
And? Years of experience doesn't automatically make you great, or even good.
No Stella, I am saying your stripes are showing, Apple is not perfect and they do not have to be, however it would be refreshing to hear you give Apple a credit or two once in a while.
I been reading your posts for a long time now and they are almost exclusively frustrated and negative.
All I am saying is balance.
Sometimes they do good, sometimes they do bad, they are people and a corporation like any other whose main motivation is money. Which is perfectly ok for a company in the US. Perfectly legal and expected behavior.
I see some of Apple decisions and I sometimes think they are stupid, but 6 month down the pike I then find out that the way they did it was the right way due to how it fits with something else they had not yet announced.
None of us know where Apple is going or what products are in the pipeline, as such we have little to go on.
I prefer to be balanced and observe before going pro or against as like you I have little information.
Read your own writing, including how you just answered me and you just may notice how negative you are being.
Then you don't read enough on Macrumors because I do credit Apple quite a lot. I do consider myself being fairly balanced but get frustrated too by Apple's ( rather strange ) decisions. Apple's SDK was a step in the right direction, however, its lust almost penny pinching will drive away potential developers, and on to other platforms.
Whats wrong with finding problems with developers having to pay $99 to test their own software on the physical iPhone, or those who wish to develop their own apps and not distribute? These are valid criticism and certainly not biased. Apple are almost saying, if you want to develop on the iPhone then you must share your code. Maybe some people really don't want to do that.
Does anyone not find it strange that Apple won't let you upload your own code on to iPhone without jail breaking or paying $99?!
The iPhone has a lot of potential, however that potential is being crippled by Apple itself. Maybe the iPhone is still too immature to handle anything other than light multitasking, for example.
Sorry, the last paragraph was, and I apolygise for that.
Apps in June?
I'm just curious: everyone keeps saying that the iPhone/Touch apps will be out in June. Why not sooner?
I'm just curious: everyone keeps saying that the iPhone/Touch apps will be out in June. Why not sooner?
How many developers showed up at the last WWDC? Something like 5,000?
Definitely a lot of the downloads were by users who thought it was an upgrade, by curiousity seekers, Windows PC owners, and those who found out it won't work on their older Mac.
In any case, it's very disingenuous that Apple chose in their press release to claim all the downloads were to developers.
Interestingly, Google says there's been over 750,000 downloads of the Android SDK. And not even a device yet.