digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Let OS X developers at the iPhone. Please

43folders.com — I feel like Apple was abandoning an opportunity to make this more than a phone, and more that an iPod, and even — let’s be frank about the elephant in the room — much more than a Palm or a Pocket PC. There’s the potential here for some serious George Jetson ***** and it would be a pity not to capitalize on that as early as possible

Who dugg this? Made popular Jan 24, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

153 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • rstarr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42Dugg for "some serious George Jetson *****"
  • Spamiclese, on 10/12/2007, -7/+31I'm hesitant to trust any company named troll anything. :-/
  • cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20There's certainly an elephant in the room, but its not the one you think. Stop. Take a breath, and think about it. The reasons Apple has closed off the iPhone from 3rd party development is manifold, but there is one reason that unites them all. It is the same reason iPod is closed. It is the same reason Apple will not let you purchase music through the iPhone, and the same reason Apple will not let you purchase music through the Apple TV. It is the same reason Apple insists all calling the iPhone a "reinvention of the phone" and not... and not... A COMPUTER. Say it with me now... DRM. I thought you could. Currently, the content licensing agreements that Apple is using to leverage its hardware, allow Apple to play media on ANY number of iPods, iPhones, and Apple TVs, but only allows users to authorize up to 5 computers. COMPUTERS. Hold the phone. That's right. I said it. What distinguishes any of these devices from simply being called "computers"? For Apple's sake, there needs to be utmost clarity on this or it will suffer a windfall of lawsuits.

    If the iPhone was "open", not only might someone craft the very solution Apple is legally required to disallow, they would also quickly get Apple into MORE serious trouble with Cisco, by immediately providing VOIP into the iPhone, making iPhone an immediate competitor to Cisco's product, and a sore spot for Cingular.
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Plus I know the BlackBerry has completely free development kits. You can get them at the official site.

    And one thing I'd love to see is Skype for the iPhone. To have everything it already offers + unlimited calls to anywhere in the US/Canada for $15 would be just awesome.
  • RedHatMatt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18For me, no third party applications is a deal breaker.

    In my opinion the 'no third party apps' provision was forced by AT&T, so that Skype or Vonage won't port a version of VOIP for it.
  • ScornForSega, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16"No carrier is happy about those things at all, it eats away at SMS revenue and voice calling."

    As well it should. SMS is a complete ripoff and everyone except teenage girls knows this.
  • streetstealth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"Jane! Stop this crazy thing!"

    "I can't, George; it's a closed platform."
  • Firehed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Skype is probably the single actual reason that Apple (or, more likely, Cingular) has so far said no third-party development for the thing. Of course with an expensive data plan (for when you're not in a WiFi zone) plus the margins on the hardware that have been rumored, I think the extra sales would make up for the lower call charges.
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Is anyone else going to say "dugg for some serious George Jetson *****"?

    Man... just digg up the person who already said what you're thinking, no need to flood the comments with repetitive garbage.
  • FearNLoathing, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I'm thinking the ***** will hit the fan around WWDC next year.
  • shuffle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Good luck getting carrier approval for that... Apple's locked in carrier partner will fight any voip client development tooth and nail - I'd be surprised if they don't have an agreement with Apple already ixnaying such a product spec.
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Instead of spamming a petitiononline link, why not just sign it yourself an extra 500 times?

    Either way, it's going to be meaningless in Apple's eyes.
  • GeneralAntilles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Especially when you're looking at the OS X development community, which is one of the best on the planet.
  • AgentAce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7So don't buy it. The loudest message you can send is the sound of your wallet being closed and put away without purchasing it.
    When they don't meet their quarterly sales target on the iPhone, ideas will start flying around the board room regarding how they can make the iPhone more marketable to the consumers and I'm sure that allowing third-party development will be one of them. They're going to try everything they can to get us to buy their product, otherwise they'll have to take it off of the market and waste all of the investment they put into R&D, QA, marketing, etc.
  • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7So, Linux is so much better than BSD because...?
  • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6A gesture based interface with a virtual keyboard is a pretty big advance beyond the Palms we have today.

    I left the Palm world back when they moved into the Treo - I liked the keyboard but not the space it took up at the expense of the display area and also device size. To me the iPhone is simply the next generation Palm that Palm never did build. Can you imagine if Palm had really kept going with PalmOS development instead of stagnating as they have? I could easily see Palm having built the iPhone a year or two ago if they had made the effort! But instead they sidetracked with Windows mobile integration.

    The iPhone is a great size, has a really big keyboard, and has a real browser along with WiFi capability. To me the whining about Cingular is almost pointless, as I plan to mostly use it with WiFi and just use a few things like Google Maps or simpler browsing when out where I use Edge. And I do appreciate making use of a data network with a wider reach since I travel to places that are off the 3G radar.

    You've seen in messages here about how a number of existing Blackberry and Treo users are anxious to switch. Can you not extrapolate that out to see there will be real demand for the iPhone, and that a lot of people are not very happy with any smartphone offered today?
  • Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I refuse to buy one unless it will run WoW
  • jmbillings, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"If Apple let developers into the iPhone, then anyone with ulterior motives could create malicious code, stealing contacts, personal info, mail settings...ANYTHING."

    Doesn't stop software being written for other devices? I've dicked around in Java for my SE handset, not done much, but you can access most stuff in the phone. The handset simply pops up and says "this application is trying to access data, allow?"
  • skidmark, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9How about NOT letting any developer at the iPhone. My vote is for "approved" developers. If you look at the designs of many of the Dashboard Widgets that are out there, a large majority look and behave horribly. There are a few shining stars, created by good developers.

    I say Apple puts together an "iPhone Authorized Developer" program.
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -13/+18Did you even watch the keynote presentation about it? Don't be so ignorant...

    I have a new BlackBerry & I've used many different Palm/Windows Mobile devices and the iPhone just blows them all away.
  • solidhubris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5All we need is for the next iPhone to transform into that bubble-domed flying car.
  • Quix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6iPhone story appears. CBTF appears, complains about iPhone story appearing. Rinse, repeat.

    Seriously, man, just skip the stories you don't care about. It's not that hard. The trolling grows tiresome.
  • shuffle, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14Blows away a blackberry? Yeah, ok. Have you used one yet? An iphone, I mean of course. No? Hmmm. I'm betting it doesn't blow a BB away. It may rival it (in a lot of ways) but BBs really do what they do well... and they have had a lot of time on the market to refine what they do. I don't think the iphone will 'blow it away'. Not by a long shot.
  • drjones78, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@m3mn0n

    "And one thing I'd love to see is Skype for the iPhone. To have everything it already offers + unlimited calls to anywhere in the US/Canada for $15 would be just awesome."

    Actually I would hazard a guess, that Skype (and VOIP + IM in general) is the big reason why the iPhone is closed. No carrier is happy about those things at all, it eats away at SMS revenue and voice calling. A device that has the potential for success like the iPhone is a major coup in reclaiming "control" of their networks. Apple is happy to live with that concession, because they, like everyone else, love their vendor lock in. I'm sure, as has been pointed out before, that they will probably license out 3rd party developers to make applications, just as long as they pay their license fees, and as long as Apple gets to have exclusive distribution rights through iTunes. They get a cut of everything, and get to pick and choose what apps make it on the iPhone, helping their pocket books and keeping the carriers happy. Sucks doesn't it?

    Of course, the carriers still charge you for data plans to access any IP based service, so they get money either way, whether you use VOIP or make regular calls. But if they can keep you paying for calls + txt messaging AND internet usage they get everything.
  • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is part of the same issue as network neutrality and DRM. Companies increasingly want to control what we do and how we do it. The iPhone is a closed platform because they're afraid they'll lose revenue opportunities to VOIP, streaming media, messaging, or an iTunes competitor. The iPhone looks really slick but we need to send a strong message we won't tolerate being told what we can and can't do with our property.
  • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The thing is, just because there is a poor quality widget out there doesn't mean you have to use it. But it is nice to at least have the option. I don't need one company deciding what I can or cannot do on my device.
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"I seriously don't know what 3rd aprty apps you guys want on the iPhone."

    Games... software that uses SDKs to extend the functionality of vanilla apps... sort of like Firefox add-ons but for iPhone apps.... there is a lot of possibilities

    But yeah, I'd have to say the #1 reason I want it is for Skype/Vonage. =)
  • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I want apps that allow me to read the variety of ebook formats that I have. pdf, txt, doc, html, lit and whatever that palm doc format is. And that's just for starters.
  • jmbillings, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"I seriously don't know what 3rd aprty apps you guys want on the iPhone."

    You might have everything built in, but think about it - rephrase your post as "I seriously don't know what 3rd party apps you guys want on Windows, it's got Outlook Express built in which does POP3, and if people want to check the weather they will just fire up IE..."

    People like choice, some people like something a little extra or more customisable (the main reason I use FF is not through some MS hatred but simply because of the amount of extensions I can use with it to make it "mine")
  • swindmill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Jobs has been perfectly clear about why he has chosen to not allow just any third party app on this phone, and his reasoning is not bad. He has also said that third party apps will be allowed, but will have to go through apple.
  • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Name a single large-scale app that Apple makes that doesn't have a come-uppance from a 3rd party developer, Mac or PC, and you'll see why open developer kits are great (THINK: any product Adobe has made, ever).
  • AgentAce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I've developed a few applications for the Nextel handsets. Development was easy due to it being Java based and Nextel's sponsorship of an online development community.

    There are a plethora of available mobile phone development options through Java, Windows Mobile and others. Some articles have even popped up over the past few months about a Linux-based mobile phone.

    It's unfortunate that Apple isn't allowing third-party development for their iPhone (and I'm quite certain that it's due to terms of the agreement Apple has with Cingular and not their unwillingness to allow development), but it's not the end of the world. I'm assuming that once the iPhone gains market share in the mobile market, whatever terms they have will be renegotiated and we'll start seeing an iPhone SDK available. Once this exclusive deal with Cingular/AT&T/Cellular Satan ends, who knows what will become available to us.
  • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Final Cut Pro

    Aperature
  • m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11It doesn't really matter if I haven't used one yet. I know exactly what features it has and I've seen them in use. And in a side-by-side comparison against other mobile devices, like I said, the iPhone blows them away.

    And yes, that includes the $700 CrackBerry I have.

    And for the record, I'm far from an Apple fanboy. I got an iPod and that's about it. I'm an XP/Fedora user.
  • Invid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Not sure why people are digging you down...that was my first thought as well.

    Not sure it's a deal breaker yet though. We'll see when the phone is available.
  • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The iPhone is running OSX, but a modified (and obviously very simplified) version of Aqua. It's still OS X in terms of supporting things like Core Animation and probably other graphical frameworks.
  • jmbillings, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Fair enough - it's your phone and your data and you're well within your rights to want to protect it, but other people will allow a level of trust for versatility. You trust the operating system to not pinch your credit card details every time you type them into a website for instance? And I use a 3rd party app to sync my contacts between Outlook and my phone, again, I'm trusting it to do that safely and not steal all the email addresses I have for spam lists and so on.

    Yes, there is a lot of dodgy software out there but there is also a lot of simple, good stuff that does a job people want. Most other devices/systems leave this decision up to the user - not giving the user that chance is a bad point in my book.

    I also understand your "support" point earlier in the thread - again, a valid point and i've done support in my time and suffered exactly this problem (i.e. conflict between Norton and a virus is hanging the machine but because the user only knew how to click the icon for our package, it's us that gets called) but every company will have to deal with this issue so I don't see why Apple feel they can use it as an excuse.
  • BionicAntboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Letting anyone develop for the platform hasn't hurt Palm or WM5. A closed ecosystem is the number one reason why I'll be holding off on an iPhone (the fact that I have to wait for Rogers to get it in Canada is the other). :)
  • spindrift, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Let them at it", as in, painting a mental image of a slavering horde of developers being held back by a gate, with the shiny iPhone sitting on a pedestal in the middle of a bunch of spotlights.
  • balinx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The article fails completely to mention that as far as we know, the iphone will contain a fully featured version of Safari.

    I assume you will be able to detect it is running on an iphone by querying the user-agent string.

    So, - if you please, - you can write web applications that are customised specifically for the iphone!

    The article fails to mention the problems of opening up full on development for the iphone, and some of the reasons why J2ME is so good on regular phones (ie, the java sandbox that protects the rest of the phone).

    So, WRITE A WEB APPLICATION USING DHTML!
  • BionicAntboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What I don't understand is why people assumed it would be the "real" OS X on the iPhone, much as back in the day when Microsoft claimed that Pocket PC was "having Windows in your pocket" or whatever the exact phrase was.

    Or are people seriously contemplating putting Shake or Final Cut Pro on their phone?

  • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Third party apps are really only used by smartphone owners that I have seen, to make up for deficiencies in the software that ships with the phone. If Apple can do a better job on the software and computer integration in the first place, it would seem real demand for other apps would be more limited. Apple has covered most of the bases you would buy apps for.

  • totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Does anyone have any reliable statistics about this supposed wide-spread usage/need of 3rd party apps on smartphones? Obviously the Digg/Slashdot/blog crowd wants them, but they aren't necessarily indicative of the market as a whole.

    Personally, I doubt most people bother, and just use what MS Mobile/Palm give them when they sign up, which is what Apple is banking on.
  • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't think it really is, actually, although it has stuff BSD doesn't, mainly because if you want to add stuff to Linux and distribute it, the new stuff can be merged back into Linux.

    It's weird, but because of that, GPL = better hardware support, app support, fixes, kernel features which = more popularity (which admittedly in turn = more security "testing" and more idiots running it)

    Personally, I quite like BSD, but at least if I spend a year trying to hack a driver together on linux because the vendor is keeping the spec "top secret", the hardware vendor can't just release a closed-source fork of my kernel with support for that hardware included and not contribute it back.

    I'll be sticking with my truly Free Software kernel myself, but each to their own. :)
  • griz, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9It all depends on weather you want to drive a Honda or a BMW.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Without the ability to install iTerm or anything else, I won't be getting one anytime soon.
  • kenjura, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You would need the best VoIP protocol on the planet. Cingular's 2g network runs anywhere from 0.01 to 20 KB/sec, with an average of 10 with excellent reception. (The 3g network is said to be orders of magnitude faster, reliably as fast as 802.11g, though I don't have the ability to verify this firsthand in my area.)

    Despite the fact that you can carry on a clear conversation on the phone itself with minimal signal, the bandwidth is just not sufficient for VoIP. Do a little research into the difference between packet-switching and circuit-switching and you'll know why this is. Packet-switched networks are part of the future 4g designation, and will require much better infrastructure than we have now, with bandwidth superior to even 3g (let alone the iPhone's 2g). Wikipedia can tell you more; I'm sure you'll find the right pages with a search or two.

    That being said, it's unlikely VoIP is the reason. The same logic could apply to any smartphone, or just about any phone that can run 3rd-party apps at all. No, it seems far more likely, as many people have already noted, that it has everything to do with iPod DRM. It's in Apple's best interest to promote DRM. At this point, it isn't even the RIAA anymore. (Do I need to back this up? I read Digg...I assume you all do as well.)

    And the cherry on my flamebait sundae: Apple is now, has been for a long time, and will probably continue to be every bit as evil as Microsoft is, Google claims not to be, and the fanboys think it isn't. If you define "evil" as "capitalist". But damn if they don't know how to do evil right.
  • zmigliozzi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ m3mn0n

    As amazing that would be, cingular would drop the phone in a heartbeat.
  • b612, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7do you not know apples market strategy with all non computer products (i.e. ipod)

    keep the funtions to a min. so they can slowly release one upgrade at a time so they don't have to decrease the price.

    Ever notice that the ipod is a year behind in functionality compared to other DAPs
  • shockingbird, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Online petitions accomplish absolutely nothing.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 153 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
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.