ert3 said:
Well for one way to make your self look like a tool.
Nice!
Two you must honestly have no idea how much simpler it is to develop an application when every customer you send it to has the same exact specs short of differences in memory capacity.
Well, you are assuming that everyone will indeed have the same hardware which is unlikely if you look at the evolution of the iPod. Even so, not all developers will produce apps that share resources nicely, and I don't want to have to evaluate every app for myself, especially if I've already paid for it (and I doubt the typical consumer wants to either).
Third, I heavily doubt apple is going to screen for how well an application works. They are probably going to screen for how much damage it does to their partners, and weather or not it does damage to your phone.
If you're right and Apple won't be screening for application quality, then I will definitely be humming a different tune. I can't imagine Apple turning a blind eye to the technical characteristics of an application.
I bet you're right that Apple will also screen for apps which may damage their partners. For example, I doubt Apple will 'okay' a Voip app, considering it would counter the interests of AT&T. This is a business, and Apple won't screw their business partners while they still depend on them. What do you expect?
Fourth, Apple could use this as a means to prevent applications like a linux or windows CE installer. They amy also prevent you from installing say a future mobile iChat alternative.
Well, installing operating systems such as Linux or WinCE is never something the SDK was designed to achieve. Apple wouldn't have to enforce this via certification because the SDK is technically unable to provide such capabilities in the first place.
As for an iChat competitor, I doubt that they will limit the market to one app per niche. They know that (a) people want choice and (b) competition breeds the best product. Again, if you're right, I'll definitely
change my stance on this. I just don't see Apple doing this though.
Fifth, This gives apple an excuse to cut back on first party support. (This long without MMS and they call it a smart phone though it lacks a word processor) Just let some third party rake in royalties while they save man power.
Hmm, this sounds like an argument against the SDK in the first place. Not sure how this relates to the application certification process. Care to clarify?
sixth, Lord knows what features they will charge for when they allow users to begin installing third party apps. iPod touch users had to pay for maps and email. What if my dream of iWork for iPHone comes true but at a Hefty 80 dollar price tag. They could begin charging for just about anything that was not in the 1.1.3 update and isn't vital to phone usage. (20 bucks for MMS?).
I have a feeling that Apple will only be setting prices for applications they create. Do you see Apple setting prices on 3rd party software for the Macintosh platform? If anything, this gives Apple the power to restrict vendors from overcharging to distribute their iPhone apps. M$ might try charging you $80 for Office Mobile.
Seventh, No matter what this creates a barrier for all the apps to bottleneck into. Apple can only certify so many apps at a time and its almost a garuntee that more apps will be offered than they can handle in one day. This will lead to delays as developers submit and resubmit projects waiting for apple to finally says ok.
I do see your point here. There's almost positively going to be more demand for certification than Apple engineers. However, I believe that the quality of the device should be put before all else. If, in the future, Apple decides to further open the platform, they can do so. But, if they start with a fully open SDK and it ends up harming the user experience, then it becomes much harder to introduce constraints and take away what developers have already been granted.
Eighth, Its still 3rd party support if only Adobe, Game loft, EA, and any other big name software developer gets their hands on the SDK.
Technically, yes it's still considered 3rd party support. But I see what you're saying here, and I sincerely hope that Apple gives all applications a chance at certification.