iPhone SDK Reactions and Ongoing Questions

[darkblu]

I was surprised to find out the iPhone uses the PowerVR (tiled rendering) architecture. From what I can tell, it is a "Lite" version which probably doesn't have the vertex processor.

the non-lite MBX does not have vertex processing abilities either - there is a separate (IP) part, the VGP, that goes with the MBX series (among others) which takes care of vertex processing, but from what is known on the subject, VGP is not in the iphone.

I suspect it will fall somewhere between the DS and the PSP in terms of performance, probably closer to the DS. I've seen reports on the net of the iPhone having some sort of vector floating point unit; not sure if this is true, but it would be awesome if so, especially if supported with GCC inline asm or intrinsics!

the ARM1176JZ(F)-S found in the iphone does have SIMD, but nothing is clear about it. i'd be very surprised it did not help with dot products, but it may turn out to be narrow (2-way, vs 4-way needed).

Well, we'll have to wait until summer to find out, unless of course one of the licensed developers breaks their NDA and tells us first!

same boat here.

ed: about the comparison of iphone to ds and psp - i'm seeing it much closer to the psp, and in some cases clearly surpassing even that.

 

[OS X Dude]

AHHHHH - My SDK has 2 hours left of download time from 10 hours and my connection speed is fallin rapidly - if i pause it from the downloads window in safari, can i pick up the SDK download from the point it's at now tomorrow????


Many thanks

 

[arkmannj]

Yes.. Option+Click seems to allow pinch as well as rotation.

Where did you find that gem of info?

I just kept thinking to myself "There's gotta be a @#$ way to do this!" and kept trying different things.


Edit: 300th Post

 

[arkmannj]

Quoting myself here...Simulator: Shift+Option+Click seems to allow 2 finger drag, where the touch points stay a fixed distance apart

Also, some apps do allow rotation-- WhichWayIsUp. But this appears to be enabled by the app... seems odd, especially when Kalimba displays in Landscape but the simulator insists on being held in portrait.

To bad Apple doesn't have a 3 dimensional circle/sphere thing (one of those spheres that show all three axis) to be able to click and drag to simulate moving the phone around.

 

[dicklacara]

To bad Apple doesn't have a 3 dimensional circle/sphere thing (one of those spheres that show all three axis) to be able to click and drag to simulate moving the phone around.

Actually they do... in some of their Pro apps, in Core Image, Quartz Composer, even in a graphing calculator that displays formulae in 3D

 

[razorianfly]

Will applications purchased or freely downloaded from the App Store sync back up?

I was quite content with what was announced by the roadmap event. Even being the owner of the iPod touch, when I bought the device I bought it knowing apple would blow me away with new features, but as with pervious iPod's, I thought I was going to have to buy an entirely new model of ipod, for the privilege. I'm just glad this isn't the case. The way I see it, it's new functionality which I didn't have before hence me dropping $20 for the January Software Update hours after it was announced. As along as Apple don't show their greed by placing the price point of the 2.0.0 update at more than $50, I'll probably drop it - the functionality deserves it.

I have one question about the whole event. When the Wifi iTunes Music was announced, Steve made a big deal of the purchased tracks from it 'syncing back up to your iTunes library' after syncing. There was no mention of this for purchased applications. Anyone who bought the Jan update and has restored since, will be aware that iTunes needs a physical 'iPod application' file (.ipa) to re-apply the application pack after the device has been restored. I hope this is the case with the App Store and anything downloaded from it, otherwise, I can see people spending hundreds of £/$ through the App Store worldwide, and if something goes wrong, restoring their device, and everything they purchased/downloaded is gone. Surely Apple will put in place a 'Back to my Library' sort of feature, right?

R-Fly

 

[samab]

Exactly. Anyone who has been in retail knows that a 30% gross margin is a VERY reasonable retail markup. Plus, with a market space at this level of development there is no competitive landscape preventing a developer from asking as much as it likes, adjusting later as needed. Finally, this includes instant visibility in a worldwide store with millions of potential customers. It's a gift horse in my view.

It may be reasonable in other industries, but when you compare it with other mobile platforms --- it is not that great. While you are going to face more competitive landscapes in other mobile platforms, you are also going to expose to hundreds of millions (or even billions) of mobile users.

 

[gwangung]

It may be reasonable in other industries, but when you compare it with other mobile platforms --- it is not that great.

Not that bad either. Other mobile developers have cited higher figures. True, there are lower figures, but its not that out of line (for example, the entry barrier for Apple is considerably lower).

Generally, folks who tend to focus in on a single industry tend to get tunnel vision. They forget they can learn lessons from other industries.

 

[pixelpixi]

As expected, Apple is exerting editorial control on applications that appear on the iTunes App Store. Explicit restrictions are quite reasonable...

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

 

[gwangung]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable."

Yes it is...when you're the publisher. Your interests aren't the only ones at stake...

 

[OS X Dude]

If I ported Firefox to the iPhone - presuming Apple didn't kill it - would I be allowed to charge for it?

 

[winterspan]

If I ported Firefox to the iPhone - presuming Apple didn't kill it - would I be allowed to charge for it?

You would have to look at the license and see if it's GPL/LGPL/MIT/etc, but I would assume absolutely not. At least not firefox, but you could use the code base and make your own browser based on Gecko/XUL and probably charge for it, except you would need to contribute back source modifications you make to the components. As far as one individual porting something like that, I say good luck.
Mozila is working on a mobile Firefox already, and I'm sure they'll be porting it to the iPhone very soon. I would see if you could officially contribute to their project.

 

[arkmannj]

Actually they do... in some of their Pro apps, in Core Image, Quartz Composer, even in a graphing calculator that displays formulae in 3D

Cool, is there a way to turn this on in the iPhone/Aspen simulator so we can (virtually) move the fake iPhone/iPod-Touch around and test how applications are reacting to 3d movement/accelerometer feedback ?

 

[michelle21]

I shall hold you to this and try it tonight - God help you if I end up confused and unable to sleep!!! lol

Ok, but I've been known (fondly called that gal with no life!) to stay up as much as 24 hours working on client projects.

So my taste may differ.

BTW

I find apple tv to be a great self training tool.

I went through the quantum physics university series they had on Itunes last summer.

 

[dicklacara]

Cool, is there a way to turn this on in the iPhone/Aspen simulator so we can (virtually) move the fake iPhone/iPod-Touch around and test how applications are reacting to 3d movement/accelerometer feedback ?

It's not a matter of just "turn this on". The programmer(s) who wrote the Aspen simulator would have to incorporate other programmers' code Gasp!

I suspect that these various Apps are written with XCode and (mostly) Objective-C... so it shouldn't be too difficult... they might do it, but they wouldn't like it!

 

[arn]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable."

I don't allow illegal, malicious or pornographic content on this site, and I don't expect Apple to allow it on their store.

arn

 

[dicklacara]

Ok, but I've been known (fondly called that gal with no life!) to stay up as much as 24 hours working on client projects.

So my taste may differ.

BTW

I find apple tv to be a great self training tool.

I went through the quantum physics university series they had on Itunes last summer.

Don't know much about this programming stuff, but I learned conversational Portuguese and how to cook a rabbit in the hills of Tuscany

 

[winterspan]

Blocking porn and monopolizing distribution?

I don't allow illegal, malicious or pornographic content on this site, and I don't expect Apple to allow it on their store.

arn

That is just fine.. It's your website and I'm sure you don't wish to scare away advertisers who in turn don't need the Family Research Council beating down their door (thats another topic entirely... Tony Perkins definitely makes the idiot list)

The problem with Apple is that they are monopolizing the distribution channel. I'm assuming they are not going to let you download binaries from a website and install onto your iPhone through iTunes. If that's the case, censorship is ********. I can understand the case against illegal material, and anything harmful to the user or device itself such as malware.

But restricting access to Adult/Mature software???? That's a total load of ********. They could just place parental controls on the Itunes account which requires a credit card if they are worried about it. But to disallow software involving porn entirely, while at the same time maintaining absolute control over app distribution? That's a terrible practice. What are they, the ****** "morality" police? Consumers surely don't need Apple playing Jerry Falwell in their lives! Now for myself, I rarely look at pornography, and I don't see the draw of native applications involving porn, but its about principal!!

Seriously, am I the only one that thinks this is unbelievably wrong? it's similar to the situation of denying terrorist "suspects" the right to due process and a trial by peers because it'll "help save lives". Or the ILLEGAL wiretapping of citizens without FISA court oversight, again, " 'cause it saves lives". Not to turn this into a political tirade, but I'm so sick of seeing people in this country giving up on their principals??????

 

[olternaut]

As long as it's locked in to both a carrier and a store it is not a computer, but an Apple revenue generating device. Now some people may decide that this is worth the cost, but I would never mistake it for a computer.

Short of greed their was no reason to lock it from installing 3rd party apps from their computer without a signature. It would be like iTunes not allowing you to rip your own CD's to load on the iPod.

Good grief people! You gotta start looking at this long term. You think Jobs really cares about the iffy performance of 3G? Yes, he will release a 3G iphone but he isn't that excited about it.Because even 3G isn't up to Steve's standards. And while he will do his song and dance on stage saying how excited he is by it. He is much more interested in 4g Wimax/LTE networks coming sooner than all of you realize. Haven't any of you been keeping an eye on the 700mhz auctions? Nationwide wifi baby!

 

[arn]

The problem with Apple is that they are monopolizing the distribution channel. I'm assuming they are not going to let you download binaries from a website and install onto your iPhone through iTunes. If that's the case, censorship is ********. I can understand the case against illegal material, and anything harmful to the user or device itself such as malware.

I was just pointing out to the original poster that there are such things as "reasonable" editorial control.

arn

 

[winterspan]

Good grief people! You gotta start looking at this long term. You think Jobs really cares about the iffy performance of 3G? Yes, he will release a 3G iphone but he isn't that excited about it.Because even 3G isn't up to Steve's standards. And while he will do his song and dance on stage saying how excited he is by it. He is much more interested in 4g Wimax/LTE networks coming sooner than all of you realize. Haven't any of you been keeping an eye on the 700mhz auctions? Nationwide wifi baby!

Well with restrictions on the SDK such as for "applications that "hog" bandwidth",
and the inability for applications to even have write access to the filesystem, It won't matter how fast a cellular network gets, there won't be anything to take advantage of it. Look how the USA providers already strip the front-facing video calling camera out of their phones. EVDO 3G is plenty fast in both directions to handle this use.

I really wish it to not be true, but just wait....

1) Video conferencing camera not included in 3G iPhone
2) SlingPlayer denied access to iPhone app store because of "bandwidth hog" label.
3) Unique location based application denied from app store because of "privacy implications"
4) IM/VOIP with live video transmission denied because of "bandwidth hog"
5) VNC/remote desktop application denied because of "bandwidth hog"

I REALLY hope this type of crap doesn't happen, but we've seen Apple make some dumb moves recently.

I think they need to keep the iTunes distribution model -- it's a great idea -- but DO NOT make it the exclusive way to get Apps onto the iPhone. I HATE any form of monopolistic crap like this.

 

[chillywilly]

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

I was just thinking about a company like Playboy, which already has done some mobile offerings. Guess Apple won't let them publish any of their programs, should they decide to offer any.

 

[chillywilly]

I just kept thinking to myself "There's gotta be a @#$ way to do this!" and kept trying different things.


Edit: 300th Post

Cool info. I will remember that one once I start tinkering with the SDK.

And a fellow Utah Mac user, too.

 

[winterspan]

I was just thinking about a company like Playboy, which already has done some mobile offerings. Guess Apple won't let them publish any of their programs, should they decide to offer any.

Editorial control of any sort is not "quite reasonable." The iPhone is just a computer. Why would anyone think it's reasonable for a computer maker to have editorial control over what applications a user can run? People should be livid at such censorship. I certainly am.

As I wrote above, the real problem is that Apple can ONLY do one thing:
1) Make iTunes store the single point of distribution
2) Choose the content allowed in the Itunes App Store

Instead, they are telling you that you can ONLY use applications that their store provides, and that they are going to censor your access to certain applications, like some ****** morality police. IT'S REALLY UNBELIEVABLE! What arrogance they have! Tell me what apps are allowed on a computer I own? Are you kidding me?

If they are worried about minors, it's very easy to setup a parental control in the Itunes store... Don't they already have something like this for M rated songs? They could also provide a primary app store, and an uncensored or adult section. Now I'm not a big porn fan, and I don't see many use cases for porn in a native application, but again, it comes down to the principal of it.

I really hope this is not an issue that people see as "frivolous", and something which gets attention. Although seemingly minor as a practical matter, it needs to be changed.

 

[chillywilly]

If they are worried about minors, it's very easy to setup a parental control in the Itunes store... Don't they already have something like this for M rated songs? They could also provide a primary app store, and an uncensored or adult section. Now I'm not a big porn fan, and I don't see many use cases for porn in a native application, but again, it comes down to the principal of it.

They already tag songs with EXPLICIT tags. Why not do the same for iPhone apps.