digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Apple posts iPhone Human Interface Guidelines

arstechnica.com — Apple has released a new iPhone Human Interface Guideline document, offering developers more resources for getting their iPhone web apps just right. It also throws in some "interesting" language into the introduction.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • OS2Guy, on 10/10/2007, -31/+4Learn English grammar, please! You idiots with blogs who can't write a simple grammatical sentence end up looking like fools. Buired for just being lame.
    • afx1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12the ironing is delicious
    • erkokite, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Buried for forgetting a comma.
      • MadOtaku, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Of all OS2Guy's crimes against english, you chose the comma?
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Making fun of people in commas is NOT funny! They are people too. Just people with severe injuries that can't defend themselves...blah blah blah. Ok...coma jokes over
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2douche
    • willynilly, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1WTF? Give examples for people who aren't going to bother reading the *****.
    • DOGPARTY, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3oh go cry into your os/2 warp
  • thenumber8, on 10/10/2007, -4/+39An aside during the introduction states: "Currently, developers create web applications for iPhone, not native applications." It may be one simple word, but "currently" adds a whole lot of flavor to that sentence for anyone who cannot live by Web 2.0 alone.
    • stalefries, on 10/10/2007, -8/+24Prediction: Macworld 2008 we'll see an "official" SDK.
      • obey43, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5why would they wait till then, so frustrating
        • CATSCEO, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4The iPhone runs Leopard and they don't want to give away some of Leopard's secrets before its fully released.
          • unloud, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There are no more secret features left. It is to late in development to add any. Period.
      • psilanthropist, on 10/10/2007, -6/+13this is exactly the kind of crackpot rumor mongering that has created the apple rumors industry. from the one word "currently" you managed to infer that there will be an official SDK at Macworld '08.
        • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Apple rumours are never wrong.

          No wait that other thing.

          Apple rumours are gayer than a Queer Eye Special where they try and save Elton John.
        • Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1He isn't making up some rumor. He made a prediction based on Apple's diction and a bit of logic. The bit about having overheard a couple of Apple developers while in an elevator would have made it a rumor.
      • koko775, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Prediction: Macworld 2008 will see no such thing; they'll wait until WWDC.

        Take that.
      • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9BREAKING Prediction: Apple may or may not release a SDK for a product that might be called (or might not be) the iPhone (maybe). It's been said (perhaps) that it could be released (or delayed) until a gathering of large (or possibly small) numbers of Apple users commences (though this itself is just a rumor).
    • Glugory, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13Apple obviously doesn't even NEED to release and SDK. They just need to stay out of the way of all of the people who are already developing applications that make the bundled features of the iPhone look retarded.
    • superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4They do stay out of the way. The day Jailbreak was released you didn't see an update the same day to lock down the phone. Apple is releasing updates when TEHY have updates, and that it breaks Jailbreak is incidentlal - always remember the process of loading applications onto the phone involves acees through some kind of software bug, and bugs are exactly what updates are supposed to fix.

      As for an SDK, my guess is sometime after Leopard but the Macworld 2008 seems like a pretty good guess, giving them a little more time to get everything in order.
      • zybch, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5There is a word for people like you kendall. And that word is Apologist
        • superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6More like - Realist. And "Old School Hacker". Who knows what hacks do, and what you sign up for when you start using hacked firmware. You can't just install hacked firmware or OS'es and expect to apply updates the day a new patch is released by the vendor! Twll any console hacker than and you'd be laughed off the internet. What makes you think Apple should NOT fix known security holes in a product? They should leave that bug open forever?

          I plan to hack mine myself as soon as the most recent release is Jailbroken. But I have no illusions that when the next update comes down I'll wait to install it until the hacks work with it.
        • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2There's a word for people like you too zybch. It's just not polite to say it in mixed company
      • treed, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Why does the update delete the stuff I've already installed?
        • sholt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Well, if the update does a Restore process - it deletes EVERYTHING, and then puts a fresh system image on the phone.

          It only does a restore if it tries to do an update and fails. or you hit the restore button.
      • superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Sorry for the dupe, I accidentally doubleclicked submit (yeah I know digg is supposed to prevent that but...)
    • superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3They do stay out of the way. The day Jailbreak was released you didn't see an update the same day to lock down the phone. Apple is releasing updates when TEHY have updates, and that it breaks Jailbreak is incidentlal - always remember the process of loading applications onto the phone involves acees through some kind of software bug, and bugs are exactly what updates are supposed to fix.

      As for an SDK, my guess is sometime after Leopard but the Macworld 2008 seems like a pretty good guess, giving them a little more time to get everything in order.
    • TejInLA, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Saying 'currently' leaves them a way out if they ever change their minds, gives developers hope, but doesn't really mean anything.
      Who knows which employee actually wrote this document, and under what circumstances 'currently' was added to it.
  • RipThe5y5tem, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2Currently, developers create web applications for iPhone, AND AREN'T SUPPOSED TO CREATE native applications...

    You really cannot say don't create web applications
    • TejInLA, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Or perhaps they're trying to say all the hackers aren't real developers?
  • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2lOOk another one
  • ikamos, on 10/10/2007, -18/+3It's unlocked...wait there's an update..oh *****: locked again. "Kevin Rose dropped his iPhone!!!" "Steve Jobs just took a *****" - HOLY DIARRHEA! Sick of iPhone crap. Buried
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2Sick of people like you, buried.
  • seeinpixels, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4This is a nice find. A lot of good information in here, even if you aren't developing something for an iPhone.
  • consonance, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4What the hell is going on with Apple? I thought their platform was built around simplicity... but their most recent actions have confused the hell out of me.
  • DalamarS, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1Dugg for the simple reason that its news. It would be nice to read more into this than there is, but it's wait and see.
  • Weather, on 10/10/2007, -14/+4Yay! Another uninteresting article about a company only nerds care about. Welcome to digg I suppose.
    • f8tbrautmehere, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Welcome to my digg down hammer. Nobody forced you to read the article, or comment.
  • dagamer34, on 10/10/2007, -18/+4I say, iPHONE REVOLT GUYS. EVEN BIGGER THAN THE HD-DVD REVOLT. LET"S HAVE DIGG HEAR US LOUD AND CLEAR! NO MORE IPHONE STORIES!! WHO'SE WITH ME?!?!?!?
  • blackbrutha, on 10/10/2007, -7/+36For God Sakes Apple, Open Up the iPhone to developers. Jesus.
    • TopSlacker, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Buried for capitalising every word.
  • rogerbly, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Not open, but Apple has an iphone API that it gives to 3rd party developers. If you have an app you want to port to iphone/ipod, have you asked/pitched apple? It'll cost you $.
    • jeffchuck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2What are you talking about?
    • senatorpjt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Unless Google bought Apple without getting noticed, there are two supported native third-party iPhone apps I can think of.
      • yabos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Apple wrote the google maps thing themselves.
    • feelfree82, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Things have changed since they rolled out the update ver. 1.1.1
      Tell me if i m wrong...
      Amit
    • judsond, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've heard rumors that yahoo was developing things also, can't remember where. If true, they should open it to everyone.
  • xSEED, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2yeah they should. measure the obesity rate among little fat asses
  • potp, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1Can apple for once not say something and not sound like douche bags.
    "Human Interface Guideline"
    "Internet Communication Device"
    Making ***** thats not really that complicated seem overtly complicated or advance to their apple drones.
    • cave, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Funny thing is there's nothing complicated about either of those terms, they seem pretty straightforward to me.
  • iSnooze, on 10/10/2007, -8/+0We all know Apple always follow their own "Human Interface Guide"...

    /sarcasm
  • deadbaby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9I think it's entirely possible Apple is just waiting for the iPhone OS to reach a higher level of maturity and perhaps allow developers to publish and sell applications on the iTunes Store eventually. There's no good reason why they don't want third party apps on the phone however they DO want to figure out a way to make money off it.
    • asjk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Agreed. I've been wondering if they haven't sandboxing the environment for safety's sake before opening the device up to applications. I am positive that if the iphone was bricked or compromised had Apple sanctioned a totally open approach then people really would be screaming much louder.
    • znicket, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Apple got burnt by Newton and they are desperate to prevent it from happening again with the iPhone. That is why they have opted for stability and ease of use instead of opening up the iPhone for the myriad of applications that would be available and potentially dangerous to the user experience.
      Once the iPhone has established itself as a permanent player in the mobile phone market, Apple will gradually open it up for 3rd party developers.
    • bkemper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1in order to sell music for it, the Music industry probably forced them to make it difficult to install software, so as to avoid software that would make putting your own ripped music or ring-tones on it easy, or adding apps that allowed wireless file sharing. And ATT also probably had similar provisions in their contract with Apple, to ensure that it would not be easy to add ring-tones or VOIP clients or chat clients that would cut into their massive profits.
  • jeffchuck, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Direct link to the guidelines:
    http://developer.apple.com/documentation/iPhone/Co ...
  • tomis, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1So in other words Apple published guidelines on how to make websites specifically tailored to their web browser. Sounds rather like something Microsoft would do...
  • stealthboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Of course Apple SHOULD open the SDK, but the can't. They are most likely bound by their contract with at&t to not publish an available SDK. Think about it: I get the SDK and write two apps that would cut off revenue from at&t: iChat (no need for SMS), and Skype (no need for at&t voice service). I'm sure Apple wants an open SDK, and I'm sure they could (technically), but personally I think it's the contract with at&t that is screwing this all up.
    • EdwardsNH, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Skype would eliminate at&t voice service?! Ok, when wi-fi is available, sure. What about the other 99.9% of the time you need to use your cell phone?
  • marques99, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Web apps instead of native apps? Sure if the phone did not have a ***** 56kbs connection to the Internet (edge). Apple get a clue you ***** up on the edge and the only way to make this up is by allowing third party apps that can access the Internet to reduce on bandwidth.
  • runforcover, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Anyone else notice that this picture has a cingular sim...
    http://developer.apple.com/documentation/iPhone/Co ...
  • Drizzit, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Apple has perfected the ultimate cash cow.


    Develop Phone, negotiate contracts for 10% of revenues earned. Force all applications to require network usage to work

    Profit!
  • roywaits, on 02/02/2008, -3/+4How many ***** apple posts do there need to be?!? there is real news out there ya know...
    • flipmeat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Well, go to your profile and filter out Apple stories. **POOF**, they're gone!
  • xw6x, on 12/07/2007, -0/+0http://games.gwafi.com
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.