Apple's new iPhone software may let users share applications

[AppleInsider]

Apple's forthcoming iPhone Software 3.0 may introduce features that let users share their purchased applications with family or friends, a move that would give iPhone and iPod touch owners a greater say over which apps deserve the spotlight in the overly-congested App Store.

Citing a "a person familiar with the technology," BusinessWeek reports that the forthcoming software update "includes features that, if activated by Apple, may let users share software with one another." The publication goes on to speculate that such a feature could even be expanded to allow iPhone users to generate a commission "when they've induced someone else to make a purchase."

The ability to try applications before buying them has been a sore point with App Store shoppers. In an attempt to address this, some app developers have released "lite" versions of their apps that are free or close to free and include only a few levels or features of the full-fledged version.

This, however, adds a few more steps to the purchasing process for a potential buyer, since a second trip to the App Store must be made to purchase the full version. Additionally, the user will probably want to delete the lite version from the iPhone to free up memory and avoid confusing the two apps, which often have similar icons.

With the tens of thousands of apps available in the App Store today, shopping for interesting and useful applications can be a challenge. Friends and family often share common interests, and the ability to learn of a new application, obtain it directly from a friend or family member, and try it out could present a more streamlined approach to app shopping in many instances.

Apple has seeded five betas of iPhone Software 3.0 to date in which numerous discoveries pertaining to future software and hardware features have been made, but Wednesday's claim is the first to suggest application sharing capabilities will be amongst the software's highlights.

Apple reportedly declined to comment on the matter, with spokesperson Jennifer Bowcock stating that, "We’ve made no announcements at this time."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[NeilM]

You can already share purchased apps with family iPhone users on condition that they're on the same iTMS account. For instance my wife and I both have iPhones, use a common family iTMS account, and can each download the same apps for a single payment.

[chronster]

Jennifer Bowcock's got herself a pretty easy job.

[chronster]

Originally Posted by NeilM

You can already share purchased apps with family iPhone users on condition that they're on the same iTMS account. For instance my wife and I both have iPhones, use a common family iTMS account, and can each download the same apps for a single payment.

I think that's illegal and considered piracy. I read at gizmodo that Apple will be ending this soon.

When you buy an App, you're buying a license to use that app. That app can only be used on the device intended. What people are doing is letting their friends go into their account and download all their apps without paying for it. Someone paid for it at least once, but the app can be tossed around to anyone at that point. Pretty stupid and obvious loophole if you ask me. It's amazing Apple didn't prepare for this.

I guess part of the lure of the iPhone was if you upgrade your phone to a different model (8gig to 16gig for instance) then you can bring your apps with you. Don't know how this will work now. I guess you have to register the phone with the itunes account, and only one phone can be registered with the account at a time...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it is this new "share" method would simply be like linking a friend to an app. Like, "Look at this cool app. Here I'll send it to you so you can buy it."

[el3ktro]

Originally Posted by chronster

that's illegal and considered piracy. Apple will be ending this soon.

I don't think so. Afaik Apple explicitly allows all your music, videos and apps to be used on up to five devices.

[trirnoth]

I hope they call it squirting.

[TheWatchfulOne]

Originally Posted by el3ktro

I don't think so. Afaik Apple explicitly allows all your music, videos and apps to be used on up to five devices.

Apple allows you to use your iTMS purchases on up to five computers. There is no apparent limit to the number of devices (iPhones; iPods; etc) that can be synced with those five computers.

[el3ktro]

Originally Posted by TheWatchfulOne

Apple allows you to use your iTMS purchases on up to five computers. There is no apparent limit to the number of devices (iPhones; iPods; etc) that can be synced with those five computers.

Ah ok, even better!

[stevesabol]

Originally Posted by TheWatchfulOne

Apple allows you to use your iTMS purchases on up to five computers. There is no apparent limit to the number of devices (iPhones; iPods; etc) that can be synced with those five computers.

For any iTunes store account, 5 Mac/PC computers can be authorized to play DRM'd media/apps.

An unlimited # of iPods/iPhone can sync with each of those 5 computers.

Those iPods/iPhones are married to a specific library for each category. I don't know what happens if you mix store accounts across those categories. For example, I sync movies on a computer with sjobs@apple.com as my store account and I sync apps on a computer with sjobs@gmail.com.

You can, however, have multiple store accounts associated with a library. But that counts that 1 computer for both accounts. This allows my wife and I to have separate accounts in the store but the media/apps are usable on both our phones. However, the updating on-the-phone for apps only works on the phone that has the primary account for that app. Updating and transferring from iTunes works fine.

This encourages "Family" use of media/applications but should make it difficult/impossible for me to give my friends copies of my DRM'd media/apps.

[Jozsoo]

Originally Posted by chronster

Jennifer Bowcock's got herself a pretty easy job.

Yeah, absolutely. Wonder why Apple maintains that position.

[Jerseymac]

Originally Posted by trirnoth

I hope they call it squirting.

There is no question, Microsoft knows how to be cool.

I can't wait to start Binging! LOL!

[addabox]

Originally Posted by TheWatchfulOne

Apple allows you to use your iTMS purchases on up to five computers. There is no apparent limit to the number of devices (iPhones; iPods; etc) that can be synced with those five computers.

Which is an interesting thing to consider. The "computers/devices" distinction comes from iPod days, when it was clear that the computer was the hub and the device was relatively dumb.

But iPhones already have the computational heft of full blown desktops of some years back, and given how people hang onto their Macs, I wouldn't be surprised to see households where the "device" is literally more powerful than the "computer."

At which point the only reason to keep treating the desktop or laptop as the primary device is the big keyboard and screen and access to local storage, and all of those things may well become accessible to iPhones in the form of peripherals.

So I have to wonder how much longer Apple will keep treating their mobile offerings as tethered subsets of their laptops and desktops. It's a convenient way to conceptualize usage, but it might not make much sense any more.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by el3ktro

Ah ok, even better!

I already share my applications with friends. How is this news? Because it'snow more than 5?

[json]

Hmm.... first there are reports that we might have to pay again to re-download an already purchased application to the same device we bought it with the first time and now there is information that we might be able to share applications between devices....

Yes I know that the two functions are not mutually exclusive, but still it sounded mildly ironic....

And no, I am not complaining, it was just a reflection.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by stevesabol

For any iTunes store account, 5 Mac/PC computers can be authorized to play DRM'd media/apps.

An unlimited # of iPods/iPhone can sync with each of those 5 computers.

Those iPods/iPhones are married to a specific library for each category. I don't know what happens if you mix store accounts across those categories. For example, I sync movies on a computer with sjobs@apple.com as my store account and I sync apps on a computer with sjobs@gmail.com.

.

You snatched up the SJOBS account names? OSSUM!

[jnoel]

I do this on my Zune today with tunes, would love to do it with my iPhone and its apps. I am tired of the "send me the list of all the cool apps you use" request.

[NasserAE]

The ability to try applications before buying them has been a sore point with App Store shoppers. In an attempt to address this, some app developers have released "lite" versions of their apps that are free or close to free and include only a few levels or features of the full-fledged version.

This, however, adds a few more steps to the purchasing process for a potential buyer, since a second trip to the App Store must be made to purchase the full version. Additionally, the user will probably want to delete the lite version from the iPhone to free up memory and avoid confusing the two apps, which often have similar icons.

I think the in App purchase in 3.0 will solve this problem. Developers can give away say a game with first or/and second levels for free or almost free and then charge for additional levels by using the in app purchase in iPhone 3.0. No more "lite" version, you buy/get the full version and decided whether you want to pay for more or not.

[NeilM]

Originally Posted by chronster

I think that's illegal and considered piracy.

Not only is that not the case, as you'll have seen from the subsequent posts, but as far as I can tell there's not even a way around it. We each sync our iPhones to our own Macs, but as long as we have a common iTMS account it's not possible to pay each time.

In fact I had fully expected to pay for each app to each iPhone, and honestly, coughing up $1.99 a few extra times isn't going to make much of a difference to the iPhone cost of ownership picture. And believe me, once you've bought something like the Adobe Creative Suite, you're not going to spend too much time worrying over the typical iPhone app's cost.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by NasserAE

I think the in App purchase in 3.0 will solve this problem. Developers can give away say a game with demo levels for free or almost free and then charge for additional levels by using the in app purchase in iPhone 3.0. No more "lite" version, you buy/get the full version and decided whether you want to pay for more or not.

I love the idea, but hope that it’s more robust and versatile than perviously explained. For instance, there are, for example, GPS apps, where I may only want a certain city or state or country for a reduced rate, but then later want to add more regions, but don’t necessarily want to keep them all on my iPhone when I want the app present. For instance, if I traveled Europe for a summer I would want a TomTom app that covered Europe, but back in the states I just want my US maps.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by Jerseymac

There is no question, Microsoft knows how to be cool.

I can't wait to start Binging! LOL!

Bada-bing!

[addabox]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I love the idea, but hope that it’s more robust and versatile than perviously explained. For instance, there are, for example, GPS apps, where I may only want a certain city or state or country for a reduced rate, but then later want to add more regions, but don’t necessarily want to keep them all on my iPhone when I want the app present. For instance, if I traveled Europe for a summer I would want a TomTom app that covered Europe, but back in the states I just want my US maps.

Are there examples of what you're looking for on the market now? That is, do GPS app sellers typically offer regional editions of their wares, with maps that can be treated as off-loadable files for the app?

I have no idea, which is why I'm asking. Is there any way on an iPhone to download and store files that aren't apps per se, but intended to be stored and used by an app, as in the case of specific maps and GPS? Or would app makers have to treat each region as a separate app?

[NasserAE]

Originally Posted by solipsism

I love the idea, but hope that it’s more robust and versatile than perviously explained. For instance, there are, for example, GPS apps, where I may only want a certain city or state or country for a reduced rate, but then later want to add more regions, but don’t necessarily want to keep them all on my iPhone when I want the app present. For instance, if I traveled Europe for a summer I would want a TomTom app that covered Europe, but back in the states I just want my US maps.

Good point. I believe when you buy through the in-app store the newly purchased content becomes part of the app (I might be wrong).

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by addabox

Are there examples of what you're looking for on the market now? That is, do GPS app sellers typically offer regional editions of their wares, with maps that can be treated as off-loadable files for the app?

I have no idea, which is why I'm asking. Is there any way on an iPhone to download and store files that aren't apps per se, but intended to be stored and used by an app, as in the case of specific maps and GPS? Or would app makers have to treat each region as a separate app?

I think the multi-app access is not allowed for security reasons. I recall the developer who made the app with copy/paste using a common area for the clipboard so other apps could also have a common copy/paste setup, but Apple disallowed it.

Originally Posted by NasserAE

Good point. I believe when you buy through the in-app store the newly purchased content becomes part of the app (I might be wrong).

I think so, too, which is why I hope they improve upon it.

[mrtotes]

Originally Posted by NasserAE

I think the in App purchase in 3.0 will solve this problem. Developers can give away say a game with first or/and second levels for free or almost free and then charge for additional levels by using the in app purchase in iPhone 3.0. No more "lite" version, you buy/get the full version and decided whether you want to pay for more or not.

In-app purchase is for paid apps only. So a developer can't give away the first 2 levels and charge for the next 8. Free apps remain free. (About 2.40 in the video below.)
http://multimedia.play.it/m/video/22...app-buying.htm

I expect most games in 3.0 will be 59p then the levels will be more as I can't see anyone want to paid full price right away now this model is out there.

I do wonder how this will affect the cost of games on other platforms.

cheers!

mrtotes

[ivan.rnn01]

five more squirrels will be put on ad hit counter wheels where only one is running right now.
I think Apple should call up AdMob and ask seriously "Where's my profit share?"

[NasserAE]

Originally Posted by mrtotes

In-app purchase is for paid apps only. So a developer can't give away the first 2 levels and charge for the next 8. Free apps remain free. (About 2.40 in the video below.)
http://multimedia.play.it/m/video/22...app-buying.htm

I expect most games in 3.0 will be 59p then the levels will be more as I can't see anyone want to paid full price right away now this model is out there.

I do wonder how this will affect the cost of games on other platforms.

cheers!

mrtotes

I missed that part. However, charging $0.99 is almost nothing. This is useful for games with higher cost in my opinion. I would like to add in-app store to my apps but large number of my apps buyers are still using 2.2 because if they upgrade they will lose their iPhone unlock.

[Abster2core]

Originally Posted by teckstud

I already share my applications with friends. How is this news? Because it'snow more than 5?

Not on an iPhone you don't. As you have indicated a number of times, that you don't own or would buy one.

[NOFEER]

can someone explain this reference to html for video in this article

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=217701668

"enable web video with html 5"

would this allow hulu et al??? is this separate from what youtube does now???
thanks

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by NOFEER

can someone explain this reference to html for video in this article

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...leID=217701668

"enable web video with html 5"

would this allow hulu et al??? is this separate from what youtube does now???
thanks

Yes it would. The initial Safari 4.0 start page and YouTube for the iPhone uses this HTM video feature. I could be wrong, but I think that many of these video sites, like Hulu, will not be too fond of HTML5 video until it can ensure that commercials can be played and the content as protected as it is with Adobe Flash.

[addabox]

Oh man.

[addabox]

oops.

[brucep]

Originally Posted by jnoel

I do this on my Zune today with tunes, would love to do it with my iPhone and its apps. I am tired of the "send me the list of all the cool apps you use" request.

Whats a zune ??

[jnoel]

Originally Posted by brucep

Whats a zune ??

It's an unsuccessful Media Player brought to market by Microsoft. They do however have a great feature called ZunePass which is an all you can eat music subscription service. It's the sole reason I own the Zune.