Five generations later, the iPod hasn't opened up any.
That depends on your definition of open. The iPod is open to music and video that was not purchased on iTunes. Which is a far more important than video games.
The iPod is not a communication/networking device like the iPhone. I don't see why it would need the same functionality.
Quote:
Here, Verizon has an exclusive contract in the tunnels. Jerks
Yeah that stinks.
Quote:
Reason-- you don't want to let someone detonate something using a cell phone as a trigger.
Uhhh OK? You are allowed to have cell phones. You just won't get a connection.
i think its a good idea steve keeps the apps through apple...makes the phone safer and more reliable..and i think the apps he will place on their will be very useful...im actually kind of glad its going this way
and im glad to hear the 3G network will be able to be started through only software, mean the technology/hardware is already in the phone so software will probably come by when actually needed, i just think that steve knows this will drain battery and isnt offering it just yet
Wrong. Symbian, Palm, and Windows Mobile phones allow anyone to write apps. The iPhone is just plain crippled.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless. I have tried several times in the past couple years to go electronic with Palms and ditch my old steno pad, but I always run into crap software that say's it will do what I want, but then gets in the way so badly it is slows me down. I'm going to watch to see if this device will finally do what I want/need.
I guess that's a bit of a tangent, now to get back on track - ALL the actual cool stuff on the iPhone used network or cell connectivity -- didn't it. I can see why Apple wouldn't want just anyone writing a network-enabled app, you could have all kinds of problems that would eventually come back to Apple as the platform provider. As long as Apple plays honest gatekeeper I have no problems with somewhat restricted 3rd party access. I would think under a scenario like that non-network enabled apps would be quite straight-forward to get approved.
Reason-- you don't want to let someone detonate something using a cell phone as a trigger.
Like an egg timer or travel alarm clock won't be just as effective in a place that is always crowded. Freaking stupid. Cell phones are used as triggers in areas where traffic is not constant. But hey, bureaucrats are usually ignorant so I shouldn't be surprised.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless.
That's funny. The supposed cutting edge computer geniuses over on Ars have their panties in a total knot over 3rd party apps on the iPhone. Many saying they use or develop apps for other phones.
This would be artificially crippling the phone. Hopefully Apple won't do it.
Yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing that Apple needs to be pushing hard. Letting the carriers dictate the limitations of handsets to protect profits is an ongoing crime. No one would sit still for ISPs demanding that your computer have crippled functionality so you had to give them more money to do basic things.
I'm really hoping that the iPhone will be successful enough to allow Apple to override whatever remaining bits of business as usual Cingular might be trying to cling to, and that the results spread like a virus through the industry.
Apple has told folks at the show that third party devs can contact Apple about developing for it and that all apps will need to be QA tested by Apple. Remember this device will be directly connected to a major chunk of critical US communications infrastructure, you don't want just anyone with direct access into it. This will reduce the number of apps available, an unavoidable fact. Hopefully the QA process doesn't cost too much or we will only see for-pay stuff from devs with deep pockets. My guess is WWDC will have an iPhone track that will answer the hows and constraints.
I think it has more to do with the fact that cingular doesn't want to lose out on things like ring tone revenue streams.
All this nonsense about bringing down their whole network is just that, nonsense. After this i will not be buying one. I can get a treo that does everything the iphone does as well as run third party apps on it and it doesn't cost me half as much. This is so stupid on the part of apple that i hope they flop with this.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless. I have tried several times in the past couple years to go electronic with Palms and ditch my old steno pad, but I always run into crap software that say's it will do what I want, but then gets in the way so badly it is slows me down. I'm going to watch to see if this device will finally do what I want/need.
I guess that's a bit of a tangent, now to get back on track - ALL the actual cool stuff on the iPhone used network or cell connectivity -- didn't it. I can see why Apple wouldn't want just anyone writing a network-enabled app, you could have all kinds of problems that would eventually come back to Apple as the platform provider. As long as Apple plays honest gatekeeper I have no problems with somewhat restricted 3rd party access. I would think under a scenario like that non-network enabled apps would be quite straight-forward to get approved.
There is quite a bit of speculation that at least widgets may be opened up to third parties at one point, but they definitely fall into the category of 'toy apps that usually only do cute things'. Still I think that some sort of additional offline functionality would improve the iPhone.
As to serious network-enabled apps, Steves point about interrupting phone service is valid. It's not a computer (according to Apple at least), and access to its primary function must be protected. Still, I feel like this problem could be overcome at an OS level if Apple really wanted to. Almost all mac users eventually must force-quit an application, and even an iPod must be occasionally reset. Other cellphones are certainly not infallible as well. I have to think that there are additional reasons for apple withholding access beyond the technical difficulties. I'm not suggesting any sort of monopolistic practices, but Apple's isolationism is getting fairly extreme.
Here's the one from Greg. Can't find the Jobs one in my browser history for some reason.
Anyway, on further thought it would seem that there is the possibility that Apple will allow third-party development, but with very tight controls, like the iPod.
I don't think Apple is going to let just anybody put software on their new phone. The way you mentioned will probably be the only way.
I just don't understand Apple and their apologists on this thread. I've installed plenty of apps on my Mac and it works fine. Yes, sometimes an app goes bad and I force-quit it - it sure is a good thing that OS X is so reliable and secure. I wonder where we could find such a reliable OS for a phone...
I hope I'm not breaking any rules or etiquette by making this blatant plug as my first post on these forums, but here goes.
If you're like me, you were very excited when you heard about the iPhone, then very disappointed when you heard the news that it was to be a closed platform with no user-installable applications. To attempt to persuade Apple to reverse this decision, I've created a petition which I plan to deliver to Apple Corporate with as many signatures as possible:
If you agree, please give it a read and consider signing.
Thanks!
Justin
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years How about first petitioning Apple for an "unlocked" iPhone NOT requiring any cell provider. Or, better yet, persuade Apple to put all the iPhone tech plus Skype and minus cellphone into the next iPod! Then we can start talking about third party app development.
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years How about first petitioning Apple for an "unlocked" iPhone NOT requiring any cell provider. Or, better yet, persuade Apple to put all the iPhone tech plus Skype and minus cellphone into the next iPod! Then we can start talking about third party app development.
So which other provider has rewritten their service software to provide the appropriate voicemail and conference calling protocols? The price Apple paid for Cingular to do that was a two year exclusive. Without a deal like that the iPhone would have been just another dead concept inside the closed doors of 1 Infinite Loop. I suggest a little patience. Don't buy the phone if you don't like Cingular.
What I think will happen is a major move over the next 18 months by other providers to try to add like service interfaces. But Apple owns the patents on the phone end so the service rollouts will wait until original iPhone ship + 2 years, when the exclusive period is over and Apple can introduce an unlocked version to an entire cell industry that want a piece of the successful pie.
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years How about first petitioning Apple for an "unlocked" iPhone NOT requiring any cell provider. Or, better yet, persuade Apple to put all the iPhone tech plus Skype and minus cellphone into the next iPod! Then we can start talking about third party app development.
Or you can wait until the iPhone is released in Europe when they are legally obliged to sell unlocked versions and then import it for whatever crazy price it is (Amazon Germany says ~$1200. Better yet buy it and then break your contract, works out to only $850 or so and unlocking is free to cheap)
I agree with 3rd party development and VOIP over WiFi, although adding it to the 6G iPod is unlikely (the MultiTouch screen on the other hand…).
The random access voicemail is nothing new, and I doubt the visual part of it is hard to add. Random access voicemail for consumers is something new however, and we should all thank Apple for pushing it.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things.
Beyond the fact that I have several apps that directly connect to the internet on my Treo (Verichat, Opera, Eudora, and MobiTV), there are a lot of other uses for apps. As a grad student, I find it a lot easier to put reference material on my Treo then carry a book around. I have three dictionaries and translators installed, as well as diagnostic software for my car. Just because you don't have use for a lot of PDA apps doesn't mean that others don't either.
Beyond the fact that I have several apps that directly connect to the internet on my Treo (Verichat, Opera, Eudora, and MobiTV), there are a lot of other uses for apps. As a grad student, I find it a lot easier to put reference material on my Treo then carry a book around. I have three dictionaries and translators installed, as well as diagnostic software for my car. Just because you don't have use for a lot of PDA apps doesn't mean that others don't either.
Sure, but just because you have a use for some specialized third party apps doesn't mean that iPhone sales are going to be substantially impacted if they're not there, or come later.
A lot of the criticism of the iPhone has been in the "if it doesn't do exactly what I want it to do it will fail" vein, which I guess is inevitable, but I think the iPhone is the kind of product that moves the whole "smart phone" category out of it's geek ghetto and into the hands of Mom and Dad. For that market, "three dictionaries" means exactly nothing.
Sure, but just because you have a use for some specialized third party apps doesn't mean that iPhone sales are going to be substantially impacted if they're not there, or come later.
True, but just because Mom and Dad probably aren't going to be putting apps on their iphones doesn't mean it isn't a worthy feature which will improve the product. There's two ways to market - look for a niche and then build a product to fit it, or build a great product and convince customers they want it. I think apple has done a good job on the first approach, but adding useful features (ie app support) can still make good business sense.
A lot of this assumption is jumping the gun a bit. At this point we don't know to what will be Apple's limitation or criteria that will allow apps to pass through their gates.
Its possible Apple will be fairly open and only check the software to insure it does not negatively affect the functionality of the phone. I imagine there will be a new paradigm in software use as the interface will revolve around directly touching the app and not as much a keyboard and mouse pointer. Apple will likely offer developers guidelines for optimizing software for this interface.
I agree that there will be all types of specialized apps for different professions and uses that Apple should allow onto the phone. It would be really short sighted for Apple to strictly lock everyone out.
Comments
I think this will be the case at the beginning. Over time it will open up.
Here in New York there is no coverage from anyone in the underground portions of the subway.
Reason-- you don't want to let someone detonate something using a cell phone as a trigger.
Five generations later, the iPod hasn't opened up any.
That depends on your definition of open. The iPod is open to music and video that was not purchased on iTunes. Which is a far more important than video games.
The iPod is not a communication/networking device like the iPhone. I don't see why it would need the same functionality.
Here, Verizon has an exclusive contract in the tunnels. Jerks
Yeah that stinks.
Reason-- you don't want to let someone detonate something using a cell phone as a trigger.
Uhhh OK? You are allowed to have cell phones. You just won't get a connection.
and im glad to hear the 3G network will be able to be started through only software, mean the technology/hardware is already in the phone so software will probably come by when actually needed, i just think that steve knows this will drain battery and isnt offering it just yet
Wrong. Symbian, Palm, and Windows Mobile phones allow anyone to write apps. The iPhone is just plain crippled.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless. I have tried several times in the past couple years to go electronic with Palms and ditch my old steno pad, but I always run into crap software that say's it will do what I want, but then gets in the way so badly it is slows me down. I'm going to watch to see if this device will finally do what I want/need.
I guess that's a bit of a tangent, now to get back on track - ALL the actual cool stuff on the iPhone used network or cell connectivity -- didn't it. I can see why Apple wouldn't want just anyone writing a network-enabled app, you could have all kinds of problems that would eventually come back to Apple as the platform provider. As long as Apple plays honest gatekeeper I have no problems with somewhat restricted 3rd party access. I would think under a scenario like that non-network enabled apps would be quite straight-forward to get approved.
Reason-- you don't want to let someone detonate something using a cell phone as a trigger.
Like an egg timer or travel alarm clock won't be just as effective in a place that is always crowded. Freaking stupid. Cell phones are used as triggers in areas where traffic is not constant. But hey, bureaucrats are usually ignorant so I shouldn't be surprised.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless.
That's funny. The supposed cutting edge computer geniuses over on Ars have their panties in a total knot over 3rd party apps on the iPhone. Many saying they use or develop apps for other phones.
That communication landed in the wrong place. Sorry about that.
This would be artificially crippling the phone. Hopefully Apple won't do it.
Yeah, that's exactly the kind of thing that Apple needs to be pushing hard. Letting the carriers dictate the limitations of handsets to protect profits is an ongoing crime. No one would sit still for ISPs demanding that your computer have crippled functionality so you had to give them more money to do basic things.
I'm really hoping that the iPhone will be successful enough to allow Apple to override whatever remaining bits of business as usual Cingular might be trying to cling to, and that the results spread like a virus through the industry.
Apple has told folks at the show that third party devs can contact Apple about developing for it and that all apps will need to be QA tested by Apple. Remember this device will be directly connected to a major chunk of critical US communications infrastructure, you don't want just anyone with direct access into it. This will reduce the number of apps available, an unavoidable fact. Hopefully the QA process doesn't cost too much or we will only see for-pay stuff from devs with deep pockets. My guess is WWDC will have an iPhone track that will answer the hows and constraints.
I think it has more to do with the fact that cingular doesn't want to lose out on things like ring tone revenue streams.
All this nonsense about bringing down their whole network is just that, nonsense. After this i will not be buying one. I can get a treo that does everything the iphone does as well as run third party apps on it and it doesn't cost me half as much. This is so stupid on the part of apple that i hope they flop with this.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things. Hell it's the same with the PDA's, most of the apps are damn near useless. I have tried several times in the past couple years to go electronic with Palms and ditch my old steno pad, but I always run into crap software that say's it will do what I want, but then gets in the way so badly it is slows me down. I'm going to watch to see if this device will finally do what I want/need.
I guess that's a bit of a tangent, now to get back on track - ALL the actual cool stuff on the iPhone used network or cell connectivity -- didn't it. I can see why Apple wouldn't want just anyone writing a network-enabled app, you could have all kinds of problems that would eventually come back to Apple as the platform provider. As long as Apple plays honest gatekeeper I have no problems with somewhat restricted 3rd party access. I would think under a scenario like that non-network enabled apps would be quite straight-forward to get approved.
There is quite a bit of speculation that at least widgets may be opened up to third parties at one point, but they definitely fall into the category of 'toy apps that usually only do cute things'. Still I think that some sort of additional offline functionality would improve the iPhone.
As to serious network-enabled apps, Steves point about interrupting phone service is valid. It's not a computer (according to Apple at least), and access to its primary function must be protected. Still, I feel like this problem could be overcome at an OS level if Apple really wanted to. Almost all mac users eventually must force-quit an application, and even an iPod must be occasionally reset. Other cellphones are certainly not infallible as well. I have to think that there are additional reasons for apple withholding access beyond the technical difficulties. I'm not suggesting any sort of monopolistic practices, but Apple's isolationism is getting fairly extreme.
Here's the one from Greg. Can't find the Jobs one in my browser history for some reason.
Anyway, on further thought it would seem that there is the possibility that Apple will allow third-party development, but with very tight controls, like the iPod.
I don't think Apple is going to let just anybody put software on their new phone. The way you mentioned will probably be the only way.
Hey all..
I hope I'm not breaking any rules or etiquette by making this blatant plug as my first post on these forums, but here goes.
If you're like me, you were very excited when you heard about the iPhone, then very disappointed when you heard the news that it was to be a closed platform with no user-installable applications. To attempt to persuade Apple to reverse this decision, I've created a petition which I plan to deliver to Apple Corporate with as many signatures as possible:
iPhone Third Party Application Support Petition
If you agree, please give it a read and consider signing.
Thanks!
Justin
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years
So which other provider has rewritten their service software to provide the appropriate voicemail and conference calling protocols? The price Apple paid for Cingular to do that was a two year exclusive. Without a deal like that the iPhone would have been just another dead concept inside the closed doors of 1 Infinite Loop. I suggest a little patience. Don't buy the phone if you don't like Cingular.
What I think will happen is a major move over the next 18 months by other providers to try to add like service interfaces. But Apple owns the patents on the phone end so the service rollouts will wait until original iPhone ship + 2 years, when the exclusive period is over and Apple can introduce an unlocked version to an entire cell industry that want a piece of the successful pie.
I was excited when I heard about the iPhone and then very disappointed when I heard it was "locked" and required me to pay homage to Cingular for at least two years
Or you can wait until the iPhone is released in Europe when they are legally obliged to sell unlocked versions and then import it for whatever crazy price it is (Amazon Germany says ~$1200. Better yet buy it and then break your contract, works out to only $850 or so and unlocking is free to cheap)
I agree with 3rd party development and VOIP over WiFi, although adding it to the 6G iPod is unlikely (the MultiTouch screen on the other hand…).
The random access voicemail is nothing new, and I doubt the visual part of it is hard to add. Random access voicemail for consumers is something new however, and we should all thank Apple for pushing it.
Not apps that take advantage of phone functionality, just little toy apps that usually only do cute things.
Beyond the fact that I have several apps that directly connect to the internet on my Treo (Verichat, Opera, Eudora, and MobiTV), there are a lot of other uses for apps. As a grad student, I find it a lot easier to put reference material on my Treo then carry a book around. I have three dictionaries and translators installed, as well as diagnostic software for my car. Just because you don't have use for a lot of PDA apps doesn't mean that others don't either.
Beyond the fact that I have several apps that directly connect to the internet on my Treo (Verichat, Opera, Eudora, and MobiTV), there are a lot of other uses for apps. As a grad student, I find it a lot easier to put reference material on my Treo then carry a book around. I have three dictionaries and translators installed, as well as diagnostic software for my car. Just because you don't have use for a lot of PDA apps doesn't mean that others don't either.
Sure, but just because you have a use for some specialized third party apps doesn't mean that iPhone sales are going to be substantially impacted if they're not there, or come later.
A lot of the criticism of the iPhone has been in the "if it doesn't do exactly what I want it to do it will fail" vein, which I guess is inevitable, but I think the iPhone is the kind of product that moves the whole "smart phone" category out of it's geek ghetto and into the hands of Mom and Dad. For that market, "three dictionaries" means exactly nothing.
Sure, but just because you have a use for some specialized third party apps doesn't mean that iPhone sales are going to be substantially impacted if they're not there, or come later.
True, but just because Mom and Dad probably aren't going to be putting apps on their iphones doesn't mean it isn't a worthy feature which will improve the product. There's two ways to market - look for a niche and then build a product to fit it, or build a great product and convince customers they want it. I think apple has done a good job on the first approach, but adding useful features (ie app support) can still make good business sense.
Its possible Apple will be fairly open and only check the software to insure it does not negatively affect the functionality of the phone. I imagine there will be a new paradigm in software use as the interface will revolve around directly touching the app and not as much a keyboard and mouse pointer. Apple will likely offer developers guidelines for optimizing software for this interface.
I agree that there will be all types of specialized apps for different professions and uses that Apple should allow onto the phone. It would be really short sighted for Apple to strictly lock everyone out.