digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

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

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • 7of7, on 10/12/2007, -55/+28Or you could just develop for the many Windows Mobile devices which are open to developers.
    • vokiel, on 10/12/2007, -33/+9Or you could just develop for this thing: http://www.trolltech.com/products/qtopia/greenphone which is supposed to be open, but quite frankly I find the SDK pricing to be puzzling http://www.trolltech.com/products/qtopia/greenphone/greenphone_pricing.

      I have no idea what the "development device" refers to. If it's the phone, then 695$ is an arm, a leg and the iPhone itself.

      What's the SDK pricing for the Windows Mobile phones?
    • Spamiclese, on 10/12/2007, -7/+31I'm hesitant to trust any company named troll anything. :-/
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Ryosen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@vokiel
      []What's the SDK pricing for the Windows Mobile phones?[/]

      According to Microsoft, you need the Standard Edition of Visual Studio. I believe they run about $300.

      On Palm devices, you can code in C directly to the SDK or use Java (J2ME), both of which are free. As for the Windows devices, there are commercial development tools available. I have written several apps for the Palm and it is fairly simple for an experienced developer.
    • drjones78, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@scorn4sega

      Yep. I know more than a few people who didnt even realize they get charged for txt messages. I think the average is about 10 cents per message.. its insane.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • StarManta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"No carrier is happy about those things at all, it eats away at SMS revenue and voice calling. "

      I could be wrong, but isn't the rate for data much higher than the rate for voice?

      SMS, sure. but most "unlimited data" plans (I can't see iPhone owners getting less than unlimited data) include unlimited SMS anyway...
    • signal15, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Except then you'd be running Windows Mobile, which is totally horrid to use. All of my coworkers with WM phones have nothing but problems with them.

      As for a VoIP client... My Nokia E61 has a built in SIP client which works great with my Asterisk system at home. I can sit at a coffee shop anywhere in the world and have my home phone line available to me, even out of the country.

      In addition, if Apple wants the phone to be a success among business users, a 3rd party blackberry and/or an Intellisync client will need to be developed for it. I think the phone looks great, but I'm not going to tote around 2 phones.
    • digboy99, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Nice. Someone simply compares the iphone to its competitors and he gets buried. You guys are too funny. Always in favor of free speech unless it exposes your own. Then you try to silence them.
    • zmigliozzi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ m3mn0n

      As amazing that would be, cingular would drop the phone in a heartbeat.
    • phantom_mullet, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'll wait it out until they release Parallels® Phone™ so I can run Windows Mobile through virtualization. :)
    • taintparty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Someone wants to see Skype for the iPhone? What a stupid idea. You're going to buy a $600 phone that can't pretend to do VoIP unless you're at a WiFi hotspot or at home, pay $50/month for a plan with Cingular (ugh),pay for Skype, and pay for your home internet connection to use Skype there.

      Either you haven't thought this through, or you have so much cash lying around you can't think of a dumber way to waste it. iFanboys are even dumber than PS3 fanboys, Digg is proof.
    • popularme, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Dear Apple,

      please keep it closed.

      Thank you.
    • kenjura, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@signal15: "Except then you'd be running Windows Mobile, which is totally horrid to use. All of my coworkers with WM phones have nothing but problems with them."

      Signal15, if all your friends jumped off a bridge...

      Seriously, Windows Mobile is kind of meh (I've actually used it, to hell with what my friends think). I'm willing to believe the iPhone interface and platform are probably better. But it'd have to be a whole lot better to make up for the lack of 3rd-party support.

      Question to the fanboys: you do realize what speed Cingular's 2g network runs on? I'm using it right now. Regardless of reception, I can't pull more than 16-20 KB/sec, and when I'm not standing next to a cell tower, I'm lucky to get 5 KB/sec. I heartily agree that a full-screen browser is superior, etc etc etc, but what the hell's the point when you're getting speeds that would be suboptimal on dialup?

      While you're all playing with your iPhones, I'll be merrily prancing along with my Cingular/Samsung SYNC on its 3g network, and if you so much as mention your "big" screen I'll show you how big I can get Firefox on my MacBook Pro while tethered to said 3g network.

      Give me 3g and an open platform, and I'll buy an iPhone in a second.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1kenjura,

      you have every right to comment and digg down certain comments, but christmas treeing an entire thread?
    • willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2If Apple choses to be hostile to developers, why would you want to help them by creating software for their platform?

      I say if they wanna be closed and not play, then they can just take their ball home too. There are plenty of other platforms that are open to developers.
      Just ignore apple
  • FearNLoathing, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I'm thinking the ***** will hit the fan around WWDC next year.
    • sfgeek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I pay 5 bucks a month for unlimited SMS on Sprint. It seems like everybody else is getting hosed. My bill usually shows about 1200 SMS messages per month in and out.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Probably a good prediction.

      iPhone was a heroic effort. Jobs called out the extraordinary effort in his presentation. Probably everything non-essential to getting the product out the door was off the schedule.

      That said, it is possible iPhone will remain closed for a long time. It's OK to make proprietary derivatives of BSD.

      I think iPhone will be opened to developers. It's too good not to go for it. XCode would be instantly the sweetest mobile developer platform if that happens.
    • 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@sfgeek

      too bad your voice minutes isnt the same $5 unlimited calls

      it's not like the carriers are doing anything with the profits, except gobbling them up

      t-mobile was the only one to bid in new bandwidth
  • Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -18/+5How about no. People will just fill up the phone with apps that will just beachball the phone. 2nd gen maybe.
    • 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).
    • Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Look at all the Dashboard widgets out there!! The weather.com widget seriously slows down my system.

      Apple doesn't want the perception that the phone is slow and buggy!
    • Refrag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Final Cut Pro

      Aperature
  • kevin45, on 10/12/2007, -23/+13How is the iPhone "much more" than a Palm phone? My Treo is just fine for business class use, and can play mp3s as well. I even have mp3 ringtones that I loaded myself.

    iPhone just seems like a ***** of hype, the standard Apple affair.
    • 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.
    • griz, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9It all depends on weather you want to drive a Honda or a BMW.
    • 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.
    • Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -11/+13@m3mn0n

      Wow dude, you already have an iPhone? or are you just making that judgement based on video?

      I'm just waiting for the day an article gets submitted by you fanboys claiming that Steve Jobs' ***** tastes like a candy cane, and I'm sure you all would line up to suck it.
    • kevin45, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Whats so better about it other than flashy touch screen effects? After the screen gets all scratched or greased up it won't be so pretty. Safari or not, cell browsing is still fairly slow. WinMobile 5 IE is fine for checking my gmail or rss feeds to stay somewhat up to date, if I need to. If I need to jot some notes, Word works just fine.

      How fast are you going to type if you need to use the screen to type on?
    • 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.
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Does your Treo run Linux or BSD Unix? On your Treo, can you use two fingers to zoom in and out on an image, web page, or other document?
    • Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3So what features does it have the other phones don't? A larger hard drive, and a touch screen. The touch screen is a deal breaker for me. Maybe if they made a version of this with a key pad, that way I did not have to worry about scratching it.

      And as for your $700 crack baby, I'm not sure where you got it, but you may have overpaid.
    • kevin45, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3"Does your Treo run Linux or BSD Unix? On your Treo, can you use two fingers to zoom in and out on an image, web page, or other document?"

      who really cares if you can use your fingers instead of a stylus? its not worth paying another $600 for a phone and switching down to a crappier provider. plus, my treo does have touch screen, yes.

      i dont find myself needing to zoom much, if at all.
    • Quix, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5"How is the iPhone "much more" than a Palm phone?" - kevin45

      I'll refer that question to my two buddies who have Treos, hate them with a burning passion, and can't wait to get iPhones.
    • kevin45, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1That really doesn't answer anything.
    • phaed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1and yes the treo does run linux

      http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/06/linux-on-treo-650-gets-real/
    • 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?
  • rstarr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42Dugg for "some serious George Jetson *****"
    • solidhubris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5All we need is for the next iPhone to transform into that bubble-domed flying car.
    • streetstealth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"Jane! Stop this crazy thing!"

      "I can't, George; it's a closed platform."
  • CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -15/+5Yay more about the iphone. :|
    • 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.
    • Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow, still more comments about the iPhone.
  • mjar81, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7dugg for the phrase: "potential here for some serious George Jetson *****"
  • hydoskee, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Dugg for "George Jetson *****". That sounds like something Ghostface Killah would say, who, by the way, should get on Digg. His opinions are ones I'd like to read.
  • franksands, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3"Let OS X developers at the iPhone. Please". I think you're missing a verb here, you know, like: "let them work with the iPhone".
    • 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.
  • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
  • urbanaut, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Dugg!
    10 points for the line, "There’s the potential here for some serious George Jetson *****..."!
  • bazmail, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1the iPhone and steve Jobs can bite my shiny metal ass. Who cares if mac developers get at it or not. Mac sucks. Linux Rules. The end.
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7So, Linux is so much better than BSD because...?
    • phaed, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3..because it does not have Apple disease written all over it
    • 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. :)
  • 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
    • skidmark, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Functionality? Do you know what that word means? Apparenty not.

      Dugg down for being an idiot and not having a shift key.
  • 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.
  • kolbygoodman, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I prefer "some serious Capitan Picard *****"
  • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2How is it going to be closed? I mean, if it's OS X, can hacking it really be prevented?
  • ozziek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Fatal mistake not allowing devs to be developing applications NOW ready for launch day. 3rd party develop is what made the Psion so successful (before they screwed the pooch by not doing colour screens etc when microsoft was and lost the share) and what makes Symbian devices and Pocket PC/Palm so successfull. If it was left to the manufacturer etc you'd get jack ***** in new apps.

    If it really was 5 years ahead of it's time it would have 3rd party support and an SDK, more memory, replaceable memory/battery and 3G.
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And GPS. There's some killer stuff you could do with it if it had GPS. Probably they'll keep the current feature set for a few months, and then in November drop the price by $100 and come out with a more capable phone for the price of the current phone.
  • writerboyVSgod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2iPhone + Apple Remote Desktop (or Timbuktu) = A Real Change in the Way I Live My Life
    • Soulhuntre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It sure has mine. Remote desktop via my Treo is a awesome feature for consultants on the go. Add in how easy it is to use the 700w as a modem for my laptop and an unlimited data plan and life is good.
    • jarcoal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1yeah you'll become gigantic
  • jasonpoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am sure someone will make it possible to install some 3rd party app on the iPhone...just the matter of time.
    But I'm more curious about what the "mini" OS X could do besides those wow functions showed in Steve's keynote.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You mean like third party "hack" or something? Now, _that_ would be a serious security risk on phone, customer using the phone and the network.

      That is the real security, usability problem. Not the third party apps. If a $500 "smart phone" needs a hack to enable third party applications, I wouldn't buy it at first place.
  • 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?

    • aragami, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1because on the iphone site and i believe steve jobs said it runs on osx

      but im pretty sure its a optimized version of it for mobile devices like windows mobile


      except closed to developers...
    • Rice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The phone is running iPhone OS X not Mac OS X.
    • 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.
  • 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.
    • 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). :)
    • 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.
    • 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1who would want to develop for a dead-end palm or windows mobile platform ?

      do some dev for mini opera, and symbian,

      and hopefully approved dev licenses for the iphone
  • abes, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3There is an online petition .. right now the number of signees is a bit small, but with the power of dig, maybe we can get the number higher.

    http://www.petitiononline.com/iphone/
    • 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.
    • abes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It's not exactly spam (and I'm not the one responsible for the petition, it's a simple google search) -- people complain, so instead of whining and bitching about it, they can actually do something. Will Apple actually care about the petition, who knows? But at least it's a form of getting your voice heard. Other people have suggested in addition to the petition to file a bug-report with Apple. That's a bit more work.

      Whether you care enough to do this, that's up to you. But seriously, it takes 5 seconds to put your name there. If Apple ignores it, the fact you don't your 5 seconds back -- which I guess is 5 seconds you could've used to do some more whining.
    • shockingbird, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Online petitions accomplish absolutely nothing.
  • 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.
    • 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.
    • ogden, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think the main motivation for not allowing 3rd parties is not Skype/VOIP. IMHO Cingulars data service is ALREADY legendary for its sloth. The Cingular network simply cannot handle a million little computers out there sucking up data 24/7. It wasn't designed for that, period. Cell tower bandwidth and capacity is an *EXTREMELY* finite resource.

      3G is the only thing that has a chance of supporting data traffic of this nature so don't expect any traction on 3rd party apps until there's a 3G iPhone, and even then Cingular will want to stop you from actually using the service you're paying for, so don't expect too much

    • EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That's a bogus argument. Cingular already offers a dozen PDA/Smartphones based on the Palm, Windows Mobile, and Blackberry platforms. Most of them are not 3G capable, but all allow third party development. This is purely a move by Apple/Cingular to lock out third party developers and protect their revenue streams.
  • diggitydale, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1But...but...its Cingular :(
    • nicc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2and here in central VA I would be crying if it was Verizon, Sprint/Nextel, T-Mobile or Alltel.
      every locality will have better reception/service with one provider compared to another.

      for you, Cingular may be worst. for me, Cingular is the best option.
      at least Cingular doesnt cripple their phones like Verizon does (no Bluetooth PIM synching, WTF?!)
  • Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I refuse to buy one unless it will run WoW
  • mattjumbo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think Apple and Cingular woule be wise to go ahead and simply allow a Skype VOIP app or maybe develop one themselves. There is no way to realistically avoid it anyway.

    Look at the homebrew for the PSP and DS for Pete's sake. The iPhone doesn't come out until June and it has an iPod dock connector for input.

    Not only will there be a VOIP app hack, I'd bet it will be out there within a week after the iPhone is released.
  • kurtcocain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Boy, I thought I had bad grammer. This guy's use of the English language is atrocious.
  • DearSergio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"There’s the potential here for some serious George Jetson *****" - Agreed.
  • kday, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5***** you Jobs! The iPhone looks like it very well could be an awesome device, but until you let me put Apps of my choice on it, I'm not going to get one. Hell, if the iPhone was an open platform, I may even bite the bullet go with Cingular/AT&T.

    Face it, there are developers that can make better Apps than you. Just look at Adium. It blows your crapware iChat away in every aspect. Look at Quicksilver.... you can only wish your poorly implemented Spotlight could perform like it. Look at Picasa. While it's not available (yet) for the Mac platform, it is better, faster, and more efficient than your iPhoto. I want these talented developers to make Apps for my iPhone. I'm sick of all the DRM elitist ***** you guys have been up to lately. If I'm going to pay that much for a phone (and I would), let me do what I want with it! You can only abuse your cult followers for so long until they move somewhere else.
    • plgonzalez, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4are you crazy? take an anger management class buddy... chill out!
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4No, YOU face it--He's doing this the smart way. Letting any Tom, Dick, and Harry code an app would open the iPhone to WAY too many vulnerabilities and unleash millions of complaints which wouldn't even be related to the iPhone itself.

      Apple: Thank you for calling Apple, how can I help you?
      Caller: Yeah, I gots the iPhone and I tried installing [enter generic app name here] and it erased my contacts/calendar/text files.
      Apple: You'll need to contact the developer of that app for support.
      Caller: But you made the phone. It's your problem!

      And I am sorry, but Adium is cool and all, but it isn't the second coming of Christ. I find iChat completely usable. Adium is a toy. Why do I need to read RSS in my chat app? Hell, all I had to do to get Adium's other toy features was add the Chax Plug-in.

      As for Picasa---That's a Google app. It's Windows only, as you said, but since I use both platforms...you're wrong. iPhoto (and even Apeture) is, by far, a much cleaner, more usable, and better looking app.

      But yeah...like the comment above...try easing up on the anger. It's a phone.
    • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2We have had smart phones out there for years. Security has never been an issue.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1archer75,

      You're wrong.

      Remember how Paris Hilton's Contact list and pictures were stolen?

      How about the CIA agent who was fired for using his personal phone for work related ventures and had THAT information stolen by that very same hacker?

      It can and DOES happen. Regularly.

      Phone companies don't always let it go public for obvious reasons. It would be detrimental to their bottom line.
    • catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3That hack was done by social engineering if I remember correctly.
    • kday, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@therealduckie

      About Picasa. Picasa is available for linux and windows. I use both OS's, and I like it better than iPhoto, so let's agree to disagree here.

      Also, since the iPhone's OS is OS X (unix based), security shouldn't be a problem (assuming the security model is implemented correctly). Apple can just set the permissions so third party apps can't access your contact list. Simple as that.

      And about AdiumX.... Are you really trying to say that iChat is better? Give me a break. AdiumX is great because of its extensibility. Sure, a lot of plugins and scripts that are basically toys, but thats the thing... you can make these plugins/applescripts do whatever you want. AdiumX also connects to 10+ chat services. I find this extremely useful.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1kday,
      Like I said--I used Picasa before. However, Picasa doesn't find every camera I plug into it. Picasa isn't blended into/intertwined within my OS for usability in other apps. Picasa has a clumsy and cluttered GUI.

      As for Adium--I have GoogleTalk, Bonjour, and AIM services available out-of-the-box with iChat. Why would I need anything else? I gave up my MSN and Yahoo accounts ages ago. No matter how anyone tries to rationalize it, there is no need to have '10+ chat services'. That's ridiculous. Maybe I am biased after relinquishing my old accounts, but it's insane to have 10+ chat clients going all at once. I used to use Trillian and Gaim. I know what it was like.
      Also, I have 'Chax' installed and I have tabbed messaging, I can change fonts, incorporate iTunes, archive old chats, use Growl notifications, and MUCH more.
      I installed Adium to see what the big deal was about last year, then again 2 months ago and it still doesn't have anything I NEED that iChat doesn't already have.

      I guess my other bias is my sickness of all things market based. Like how they have 23896 kinds of friggin' salad dressing or 8732 kinds of toilet paper. Some things just don't need to have varying versions of the same thing.
      Of course, we do live in a world where some people are stupid enough to need directions on Shampoo...but I digress.

      I appreciate that you like those apps. More power to you. I just think simplification in a world gone mad with technology isn't a bad thing.
    • anachronoks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The worst part is, they know they can get away with it. Just look at the DRM on the iPod... Apple makes the record industry proud.
  • Vektuz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Hahaha...

    Apple would probably love to let OSX developers on it.
    But since they "Bent over backwards" to please Cingular, that's never, ever going to happen. Cingular, however, will happily 'licence' you the ability to run widgets, for a premium...
    • mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1But Cingular is now AT&T, so... yeah well, that probably won't make any difference.
  • brewster13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The phone isn't even finalized yet, 6 months to go, so what you know about its' features will be changing. Apple is going to leave things closed until they sell the first few million iPhones (and recoup their investment) to people who don't need all of this extra stuff that everyone seems to want to add. The vast majority of people who use cell phones do not use any of the crap that you people want it to do! All of you pundits who say it is stupid that Apple doesn't do this or that right now, have no knowledge of how Apple will maximize the profitability of the iPhone roll out. And what's with the petition? Oh, yes, I am sure that Steve Jobs needs all of us nerds to help him make a better product and as soon as he is made aware of it he will change his mind about opening up the iPhone system. If you haven't learned how Apple markets its' products you haven't been paying attention over the past several (iPod) years. And if you think these little discussions will have any effect on changing how Apple markets any of its' products you are really out of touch with reality. Just like I am, in thinking that this posting will stop people from making foolish demands and wanting to change what they think the iPhone should do.
  • inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Dugg me down, but I'm already tired of hearing about the iPhone
  • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Not going to happen.

    One word---

    SECURITY

    If Apple let developers into the iPhone, then anyone with ulterior motives could create malicious code, stealing contacts, personal info, mail settings...ANYTHING.

    Even if the developers, who are salivating at the opportunity to code apps for a highly popular and soon to be VERY available portable device(i.e. they see the potential for $$$), didn't create the malicious code, they could inadvertently create hackable apps which could have vulnerabilities---therefore, again--security.

    This same argument was made when iTunes was launched. Same reaction from Apple---NO!
    • 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?"
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1jmbillings,

      You proved my point.

      "you can access most stuff in the phone."

      That's NOT a good thing when security is at hand. Especially in todays age of identity theft.

      And if I buy the iPhone, I don't want to click 'allow' every time I run an app. I want it to just work...period.
    • 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.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2First, thanks for being open to rational and KIND debate.

      Second--Knowing what I do, now, about the iPhone, it does EVERYTHING I need in a phone/portable device and then some.

      I know the CrackBerry crowd will try really hard to deny the validity of the iPhone because they have some sick love for those atrocious and awkward devices, but iPhone really is a much better device. I mean, that's like arguing that a Plymouth K-Car is better than a Cadillac DeVille. Good enough is not good enough.

      What could anyone possibly want other than what the iPhone already has? BESIDES TOYS.

      That being said, I know Apple will think ahead(see also: Wireless N in Mac Books). They will offer new apps when the release date comes. Probably Widget related, mostly, but I imagine things like 'Preview.app' will make it in, as well. They might, after some time, offer third party developers some sort of licensing with about 230596 pages of legal/liability issues in the clause, but not until the iPhone has been proven on the market.

      And yes, I worked for Palm, @home, and HP customer support some years ago(before India became USA 2.0) and many people are generally clueless about 'Tech'. Most phone rooms cost companies more money than their advertising and payroll budgets combined. Apple wouldn't be wrong to shun those kind of calls. It's smart business.
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2All of that said, it's perfectly possible to have a robust permissions system on a closed platform which will be connected to someone's phone account (they can be rigorously controlled).

      From my own personal POV, I won't be buying one if I can't easily write software for it, because even in the very restricted Java environment you get with current devices, most of the fun/practicality of owning such a device is being able to do all sorts of cool stuff to interact with your other stuff. But hey, that's me. :-)

      As for the stuff you could want that it doesn't do, well I've got to be honest and say that wouldn't be the case for me either. Apart from the storage space,screen and presumably swish media UIs, you're going to Sony Ericsson device a lot more featureful - especially considering the rather feeble camera.

      I had no idea before I got my SE phone that I would enjoy the ebooks, podcasts, movies, games, blogging, photography, email, IM, contacts/organiser syncing with my PC, all-in-one remote, streaming to my TV/stereo, and loads of other stuff I do with it - especially with a little ingenuity, but it has changed the way I use my tech - I used to just think "a phone is a phone is a phone". My only regret is the small capacity of sony memory sticks - but I think I would end up missing a lot of stuff the iPhone doesn't do.

      I hope your iPhone works out the same way for you if you get one anyway. :)
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"especially with a little ingenuity"

      Being a former Axim user, I know that reality ALL to well...and I have to say--I'm ready to NOT have to deal with tinkering to get a device to do what I want.

      I toyed around with WM5.0 so much that I eventually gave the device away because I was wasting time configuring, trying new tweaks, and all that other nonsense just to do common tasks any other computer does in 2 clicks.

      And yes, I most certainly WILL enjoy my iPhone...once I have it. ;)
  • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Apple is such a control freak. We have tons of other smart phones out there and more freedom with what we can do with them because developers have access to them. And no issues with malicious code.

    For me, Apple restricting this is a deal breaker for me. I want something that can replace my PDA and this just can't do it.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2That's fine and all, and I wish you luck in the 'button' world...but was there a reason you felt the need to digg anyone down who didn't agree with you?
  • pirotess, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All I hear is whining from people who can't ride off of Apple's coattails. If they think it's something the iPhone really needs then they should make a competing product.
  • cezar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Without the ability to install iTerm or anything else, I won't be getting one anytime soon.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Who is to say Apple doesn't include Terminal in the iPhone? Seeing as it runs OS X, I would imagine it is still part of the underlying OS.
    • ilgaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'd call it (and did) "Apple's choice'" and it is up to customer of iPhone to demand third party apps or not.

      What made me mad is credible newspapers quoting Steve Jobs saying horrible, wrong things such as "Nobody wants Java", "Third party apps can bring down network" etc.

      People, there are 100.000.000 (100m) Symbian devices out there running real C code and billion+ J2ME phones/devices and soon Blu-Ray, HD-DVD 3rd generation stuff.

      Nothing has brought down any network and my java hating C coder friends all have SSH J2ME apps installed to their phones using them to manage very critical servers in case of emergency.
  • 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!
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2What else would one need, other than Safari, as a web app?

      Or are you speaking of those people who need seperate apps for things like RSS, Podcasts, and Web pages?

      I never understood why, when you have FireFox or Safari, someone would want 1286 other apps that do EXACT the same thing that already exists on the system within ONE app. Too much clutter and it isn't productive.
    • superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Not to mention it will support widgets, and I do not think it unlikley that Apple will let you load your own custom Dashcode creations. Essentially the same thing, using the Safari engine for a small and highly customized widget that's really web based.
  • monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think you'll have to wait 2 years for that to happen.
  • phaed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Dont expect Steve Jobs to give his loyal fan(boy)s any control over what they want to do with their own devices. He is a diagnosed Control Freak. Either take what he gives you or buy something else. Thats always been Apples motto.
  • 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.
  • Topher06, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0As I said before, Apple is not going to want some 3rd party developer show them up on one of their premium products. Someone that developes a better iPod interface then Apple, or a better iPhone interface would look really bad for Apple. If anything, eventually Apple will allow 3rd party developers to license products for use on the iPhone, like the games currently on the iPod, but I don't think Apple will ever open up the iPod/iPhone products for 3rd party development, not on purpose anyways.

    Given that the iPhone uses OSX, and OSX at its heart is an open source OS, I am sure some brilliant dweeb with no life will find a way to insert custom applications into the iPhone, give it some time.
  • 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.
    • therealduckie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I used to belong to Aximsite.com and most of the popular 3rd party apps were buggy, vulnerable, and bloted...so noone used them on a widespread basis.

      It was usually only the 'WOW' factor that made people install these apps. For instance 'WOW! I can run Doom 1.0 on my portable!'

      Something like FileMaker, which has a decent user base on Palm portables, would be helpful to some...but like you mentioned--most of the requests/replies/whining is from kids who want toys, games, and RSS readers, not productive apps.
    • Dataplume, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Most of which you can get through the web anyway. Google RSS Reader, Shockwave.com, Youtube. The thing is I prefer Apple keep the development process a highly guarded secret. It will keep ***** software off the platform and force developers to use the web. Use the Web! USE THE WEB! DO IT! JUST USE THE ***** WEB!!! GOD DAMN IT WHY CAN'T YOU ***** USE THE THE WEB!!! DO YOU NOT KNOW THERE IS A WEB! WELL THEN USE IT! Besides if an app is that damn good, I want to access it from any of my devices and computers.

      Sorry, I have anger issues. ; ) Have fun making apps on the web!
    • 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.

  • pevensen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I think we should get a banner together for the next MacWorld or WWDC for the keynote that reads "Yes, Steve, we DO want our phone to be an open platform!" and have people hold it up in the first row or so.
  • Dataplume, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Why? Why do you need to develop for the iPhone? Are you going to make some great app thats better than anything Apple has to offer? Doubtful. Even if you were, why the hell would you want to write a bad ass app for a single device when you can write one bad ass app that can run on multiple platforms. If Safari ends up supporting java and flash (Which you can bet your ass it will!) you can develop a modern web application that will put your app on every platform not just the iPhone. In fact if you think really hard about it, it seems that is what Apple is trying to get developers trained to do. The future is web. The web is open. The OS is no longer the focus. And we all know god damn well that there is no way Apple can stop the convicted. It will be hacked, It will have web, and chances are good that widgets will port.

    Speaking of open, if every one is so bent on having an open platform then do what I did, and call your congress man or woman and let them know how you feel about the state of "Network Neutrality" and that you don't want any company to control the internet! ***** worrying about the iPhone!
    • BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1People like open platforms because with a mobile device like that, about 99% of all the amazing things you could do with it (the "George Jetson *****" of the description) will never be realised without that.

      We've seen that with almost every such platform ever created.

      If you create a versatile technology cell that's to be carried around in the pocket, then stop anyone else developing for it, you end up with a stunted, crippled, crushed platform from a technological standpoint, like a portable games console which has not been hacked.

      For instance, with some platforms like the psion and palm, we had a glorious time where a bunch of people who understood and wanted these things used the same platforms at the same time - and It Was Good.

      It goes without saying of course that you would need strong permissions management with phones because the device is effectively connected to the user's bank account and the network's bank account, but we already do that with Java on mobile devices and it works well.

      It also goes without saying that Apple may never be able to realise that.

      Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure that most people will be happy with 1% of the device's potential, and I know that people intelligent enough to write/use 3rd party apps are a beknighted minority that isn't in a position to demand anything.

      We're just saying it would be better. Not that it'll happen, not that most people will understand it, not that business will like it, just that it would be technologically better. Believe me, the people who are saying this are often well-used to people disagreeing with them out of fear and superstition, so if nobody listens, "*shrug*, your funeral".
    • jschrab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think you may lose your ass there, Dataplume.

      http://weblogs.macromedia.com/md/archives/2007/01/does_apples_iph.cfm

      So I've asked John Markoff, who audio-recorded our interview with Steve Jobs, to play back the relevant exchange for me. Here it is:
      ---
      Markoff: "What about all those plugins that live within Safari now, like Flash or like Java or like JavaScript?"
      Jobs: "Well, JavaScript's built into the Phone. Sure."
      Markoff: "And what are you thinking about Flash and Java?"
      Jobs: "Java's not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It's this big heavyweight ball and chain."
      Markoff: "Flash?"
      Jobs: "Well, you *might* see that."

      The emphasis on "might" is mine. Of course, if they do add Flash (they almost HAVE to eventually), then the backdoor to a lot of things opens up.
    • pevensen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The web is only an option if you are online or if you can save an app locally (which I kind of doubt you will be able to do on the iPhone). I don't want to sit on WiFi or on my wireless data service all day and eat up the battery life.

      Everything I've read says that the iPhone will NOT support Java. Steve said Java was to big and unwieldy.

      I don't necessarily need to be able the develop for the iPhone; I want other developers to be able to. I currently have a Treo and use at least 4 3rd party apps every day. Will Apple develop those apps for the iPhone? Maybe in some cases, but definitely not in others.
  • moghua, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0If you want an open phone, why not get an OpenMoko based phone? The Neo1973 is coming out in a couple of weeks, is like half the price of the Apple phone and is not locked to any specific provider.
    • pevensen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1We don't just want an open phone, we want an open iPhone. The Apple iPhone is extremely cool.

      If I just wanted any old open phone, I will stick with my Treo.
  • vinchBR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i haven´t read the comments.. but here is my .02:

    is pretty simple why apple won´t let anyone install 3rd-party software on the iphone... ans it´s called VoIP...
    according to Apple the iPhone has awsome connection capabilities, web-browser the whole shebangs...
    so if they allowed people to use the iPhone as a VoIP phone, they wouldn´t find any company in the world that would back-up the release.... it´s simply because of this...

    imagine the first software to ever be made for an iPhone is a Skype... so everywhere you have a WiFi connection you don´t use the cellphone and used skype ´cause it would be cheaper...

    that´s it =D
  • jpwillms, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Like Jobs said, it will never happen. Apple loves control. I really often get confused why they are the good guys and Micro$oft is the bad guys. ie. crazy DRM, closed systems (ie. ipod), and so forth.

    They are definitely the connoisseurs of cool though. I love my iPod, and I'll likely buy a macbook to replace my toshiba satellite.

    Word.

    j | sumolabs.com
  • RandomInsano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dugg for "There’s the potential here for some serious George Jetson *****"
  • jdillingham, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I personally agree with AgentAce and probably a lot more people. Vote with your dollars and don't buy it. I already have a great HTC Wizard Smartphone that has done more than I thought I could do with it. The iPhone, if not opened to third party devs, will be boring in my opinion and only offer mediocre Apple-Cingular approved software. Things that truly make an OS shine are small yet valuable 3rd party apps. For instance I found a nice gem that allows me to play NES roms on my phone. It made my phone much more appealing to me and fun. Also I found a third party app that plays divx movies. That combined with a nice 1gig storage card = iPod Video replacement.

    In a nutshell, if you don't like it, don't buy it until they allow third-party development. The iPhone will truely be amazing if and only if they allow that.
  • foxmajik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Dug for superior use of funny metaphors.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
  •  

    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.