iPhone SDK Reactions and Ongoing Questions

[akac]

Mmmm... business opportunity...

Apple, or 3rd parties could offer an optimization service.

That is why mobile developers will do a better job initially than desktop developers for iPhone apps. So for example, we are mobile developers with 8 years of experience. Maybe not 8 years of Cocoa experience, but one can learn a new API quickly. Its harder to learn a whole new way of thinking with writing software.

We are working on our press releases now for our iPhone software.

 

[OS X Dude]

I wold say that this is closer to the norm. There's no charge for writing apps for yourself and some friends, you just push the app through the SDK. Look at the App Store this way: If there was no App Store, how would you advertise/host/sell your app? On your own server? That'll cost a lot more than 99 dollars + 30% of sales?

With the App Store, anyone with an iPhone or iTouch can easily get access to your app. You'll likely find that sales that way will end up being a lot higher than they would if you had to do it yourself.

For large development companies, the 99 dollars becomes nominal and the 30% is no more than they would have to pay in overhead anyway.

Well, technically there is a charge for writing personal apps as you can't upload anything to any iPhone without the £50 developer thing. What I mean is I ain't a company - I'd do the odd freeware app here and there but mostly just cheap stuff. I personally don't have the money to pay Apple so maybe I should start out on OS X, or if that ain't free I will try Linux development. Then maybe f**k it and go with my trance band on a pub-tour

 

[i.mac]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

Homework to you:

- revisit the comments by SJ on the SDK. Extra credit if you are able to find the website with comments on your own. (cost: -15 points)

- revisit the presentation by SJ on Thursday. Extra credit if you can do this by yourself using your own initiative. (cost: - 10 points

- finally, revisit your own comments above, and give yourself a mark. Since you are making me write this, you start from a C grade. That is, a C is the highest grade you can make (without the extra credit). (cost: -5 points)

 

[gwangung]

If there is a hole in Apple's distribution plans it is the gap between:

1) IT developing and installing on a large enterprise "network" using an Apple-supplied tool-- presumably an in-house version of the iTunes store.

2) Independent developers selling/installing through the "public" iTunes Store.

Likely, there needs to be an additional distro/install method that satisfies the needs of small, (somewhat) closed ad hoc groups, say:

-- a group of family or friends that share common interests and needs for sharing data: schedules, messaging, contacts.
-- a club
-- a sports league.

Yes, I can see the hole here. You don't even have to be that informal--a small business to medium sized business could use something like this, but not reach "enterprise" sizes.

What are the solutions on other platforms?

 

[Eduardo1971]

I was surprized at the numerous significant announcements that were mentioned yesterday. I too; was expecting less from Apple. It seems like they really want the masses to use the iPhone. It is amazing how prevalent Palm Pilots are in the medical field-not it seems like physicians will have their one "go-to" device-no more carrying around their phones and Palm Pilots seperately.

Yesterday was a very significant announcement; Apple is really taking a 'take no prisoners' approach-they aren't messing around with their iPhone. I cannot wait for iPhone (hardware) 2.0!

 

[ShiggyMiyamoto]

Not sure if this was posted already, but has no reason not[\i] to release iChat for iPhone now that the SDK is public. Then again, they could be dev-ing it as we speak. iPhone 2.0 inclusive perhaps? If not, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

 

[OS X Dude]

The fifty pounds is not a hosting fee. It is the price you pay to become part of the developer network. It's also dead cheap compared to the same fees in other developer networks.

The 30% distribution/processing/hosting fee is also very fair compared to other similar situations. You are paying a minimal percentage to get access to a huge market and have Apple handle all the processing etc.

So by developer network you mean licenses, tools and the like?

I would still have preferred a 75:25 ratio though

 

[OS X Dude]

Yes, you are too damn inexperienced. There is no creative artist in the world, whatever their field, who gets 70 per cent of the sale price of their intellectual copyright. A writer is lucky to get 10 per cent of a book's cover price. Radiohead on average got about one pound fifty for every download of their new album, but that is still more than they would have got from the record company.

No wonder people go emo

It's an unfair world we inhabit.....

 

[rustyhurly999]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

My guess is that the iPhone with 3G will be released the same day the applications and games are released via iTunes. It would make more sense for them to wait and ship the new iPhones with the current firmware installed, right?

 

[jbernie]

As you can't buy an iPhone without the Camera & music/video player options it will still be frowned upon in medium to large IT Depts. Though there will still be execs who get them as they use their power to demand the device. For the average employee it will more than likely be Blackberrys or Windows Mobile.

That being said, i am very interested to see what people come up with for the accelerometer function. I liked the one thing from the event yesterday where they had the clear/reset done by shaking the iPhone.

The best thing about the SDK is the more people you have thinking of ways to use the device the more functions you can come up with.

 

[iSee]

The SDK really exceeded my expectations. I thought Apple would put developers in more of a sandbox.

There are distribution restrictions. But it's hard to get too upset because it is a great distribution channel:

• iTunes does reach *all* potential customers--right on their device--24x7.
• And 70/30 is a very reasonable split. In fact, unless you do a high volume, that's a great deal.
• The $99 developer program fee is nominal. I mean the Mac you are using for development probably cost at least 10 times that, right? You could maybe hire a programmer for 1 hr for that (if they liked you).

 

[Spades]

OS X Dude, if you're serious about selling your software, the app store is the best way to go. The charges are not much, especially for what you get. Apple takes care of all the distribution costs and you get free marketing through the store.

But...

There's no charge for writing apps for yourself and some friends, you just push the app through the SDK.

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

 

[mgm]

epocrates, great to see

As a physician, it was nice, and a bit surprising to see Epocrates present at the event. They have already done a iPhone specific web app for their site but it is slow, and for some reason you have to log on each time, so it's not user friendly.

But one of the first questions other physicians ask about my iPhone is wether or not this app is there, so it will be a huge help once it's a dedicated program


Now MercuryMD needs to do the same

 

[Sky Blue]

haha, so this is Arn saying "Stop whining in the forums, this is going to be huge"

I agree!

 

[ilogic]

Umm.. Time is not an issue?

To those who posted why June is so far off, when the SDK is available today.

The reason for the Delay is mostly testing the iPhone in the Exchange Environment and has less to do with the development process as the App Store is being tested but won't take that long since Apple has solid experience with the iTunes store.

The Exchange server functionality is critical because it needs to pass testing with enterprise size companies. I'm surprised that they will even release it in June.

Why not make it two different firmware updates? I don't know but I'm sure there is a reason for it... I respect that whatever reason that is, its a valid one.

Slingbox on the iPhone!!!!!

 

[usarioclave]

Pricing

That seems to me a little bit greedy on Apple's part - surely the £50/year is enough for Apple considering the amount of people who will develop for the platform?? Or am I just too damn inexperienced and this is fact the norm??

Sorry if the maths is complicated

Actually, Apple's program is a pretty good deal. Distribution of any application is an unbelievable pain in the behind, and in the mobile space it's even more difficult.

Besides the marketing, payment, and distribution infrastructure that you need to build (or support or contract), you need to get with the specific carrier to figure out how to get your apps onto the phone...and they may not let you.

Apple's pricing is actually relatively reasonable.

 

[spazzcat]

As I recall, Steve said SDK will be released late February and now he's making developers and iphone users wait until June. They are taking existing SDK Apple developers use and releasing to general developers so I'm not sure why he's making everyone wait for next Firmware update.

There is not wait developers can get the SDK today. Its just iphone users will have to wait, but this gives developers two to three months to build and test their apps.

 

[AlphaAnt]

That's turned out to not be true. It turns out the $99 charge is also required to load your apps onto the iPhone for debugging. And there's no word on if the apps will run untethered at all yet. Very unfortunate.

Alright, if that's the case then that's probably something I would moan about. So far, though, that's the only part of their plan that I have any qualms with, but I can get over it considering how polished the rest of the circumstances are.

 

[dicklacara]

I was surprized at the numerous significant announcements that were mentioned yesterday. I too; was expecting less from Apple. It seems like they really want the masses to use the iPhone. It is amazing how prevalent Palm Pilots are in the medical field-not it seems like physicians will have their one "go-to" device-no more carrying around their phones and Palm Pilots seperately.

Yesterday was a very significant announcement; Apple is really taking a 'take no prisoners' approach-they aren't messing around with their iPhone. I cannot wait for iPhone (hardware) 2.0!

Very savvy observation...

What the iPhone has done for usefulness of a many-function mobile device

and

What the SDK has done for Developers

and

What the enterprise features have done for the IT departments

and

What the iTunes distro model does for users (and developers and IT)

means that the iPhone will soon be ubiquitous...

...everything else will be an "also-ran"

 

[dashiel]

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

if at&t were smart they would develop their own voip application and give it away for free, but charge users $10 a month to use it. the $10 a month would also give the user unlimited wifi access at starbucks and at&t hotspots.

at&t wins because they get another revenue stream from iPhone users and possibly iPod touch users
starbucks wins because of the increases traffic to their stores
apple wins because it will add yet another reason to buy the iphone
consumers win because $10 a month for voip and such a widespread wifi network is a great deal

at has the insider access, lead time and connections to pull off cell-to-wifi hand off as well which someone like skype would have a harder time accomplishing.

 

[Peace]

if at&t were smart they would develop their own voip application and give it away for free, but charge users $10 a month to use it. the $10 a month would also give the user unlimited wifi access at starbucks and at&t hotspots.

at&t wins because they get another revenue avenue stream from iPhone users and possibly iPod touch users
starbucks wins because of the increases traffic to their stores
apple wins because it will add yet another reason to buy the iphone
consumers win because $10 a month for voip and such a widespread wifi network is a great deal

at has the insider access, lead time and connections to pull off cell-to-wifi hand off as well which someone like skype would have a harder time accomplishing.

Which would you pay. $10 a month for 2 years for VOIP via WiFi or $39.99 one time for VOIP ?

AT&T won't do this when others will develop the same thing for much less.

 

[iSee]

If there is a hole in Apple's distribution plans it is the gap between:

1) IT developing and installing on a large enterprise "network" using an Apple-supplied tool-- presumably an in-house version of the iTunes store.

2) Independent developers selling/installing through the "public" iTunes Store.

Likely, there needs to be an additional distro/install method that satisfies the needs of small, (somewhat) closed ad hoc groups, say:

-- a group of family or friends that share common interests and needs for sharing data: schedules, messaging, contacts.
-- a club
-- a sports league

Once these needs become obvious, there are several ways that Apple could accommodate them.

1) make the IT tool available
2) enhance the iTunes Client on your computer to handle this without going through the iTunes Store-- similar to how the Podcasts which are not listed in the iTunes store. These are downloaded, directly, by the iTunes Client on your computer (and synched to the iPhone).

I think what you are talking about can be accomdated by distributing the apps for free but requiring group members to authenticate somehow (log in).
So, if I want to make a special player trading client available to my fanstasy baseball league, I'd distribute it via iTunes for free. But users would still need to log in to make trades in my league.

So the app is public, but the data is private.

It's not like too many groups are actually going to be developing their own custom apps anyway. Most would prefer to download an existing one that suits their needs (there will be no shoratge of those!).

The "enterprise" model the app and data are both private.

There does need to be some kind of local distribution method for private beta testing. As demo'ed we could see apps being loaded on to the device via the SDK tools, so there's a least one way...

 

[jhande]

Well I'll give you a local reaction here: I sent my boss a link to the quicktime presentation, gave him a short synopsis including "there'll be a Notes client as well. Take some time and watch it in the weekend". A couple of hours later I hear Phil Schiller in his office . 3 hours later still, I hear Steve's voice, but this time from our COO's office.

They *will* be assimilated

 

[eastcoastsurfer]

I was thinking along the same lines... I'm sure AT&T's CEO dropped his coffee when he heard Steve say VoIp over WiFi was cool. I'll put money on it that he grabbed his iPhone and made an immediate call to Steve telling him "No, No, No!" Stay tuned....

I doubt it. The industry is headed towards a flat rate, unlimited voice calling as it is now. Some providers offer free voice to people on the same provider, others to 10 or special numbers, others as long as your are in your local calling area. Just recently the big providers came out the $99 all you can talk plans. Voice is becoming a commodity, now we just have to wait for data to do the same.

 

[EagerDragon]

Generally speaking I think the App store is a great idea. Thirty percent isn't bad considering it allows the programs to get to each iPhone and each iPod Touch easily...and you don't have to worry about hosting anything.

The one thing I wonder though is what about programs that are used for internal use? Meaning some companies might make programs they want on the iPhone, but don't want to mass distribute it. I've already thought of a couple programs that I might want to try and develop for the companies I work for, but they aren't ones that I'd want to stick on the App Store so anyone could use it. It'd just be for internal use only.

Did I miss something in the presentation because at this point it seems like everything has to go the App store?

Based on what I read, there is a program to allow companies to create iPhone applications that are not for general distribution. These will be internal or just for their customers.

So far I heard that it uses iTunes and that the companies are not happy about that part, but Apple is still working on that and it sounds like it will use some other method. Along the line they are building software for internal sites to host "company approved" applications. The intent is that the phone will be locked and that these apps (probably developed internally) will be pushed to all the iPhones the company has. It will be similar to what Blackberry offers for companies that want to control the applications and develop their own.

Thats what I heard but no known time frame, however they are moving fast so June/ Aug is likely. This is huge for Apple and they are working hard on that.