Leak: third-party iPhone apps to be issued through iTunes Store

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bluedalmatian View Post


    The only problem I can forsee with this is if Apple doesnt like a particular app (for example because its competes with & its better than one of theirs) they can totally block its distribution.



    Umm, now which software company does that remind me of \?



    That's what I was thinking. How much is Apple going to control what is allowed and not allowed? For example, instant messaging clients. Will those just be totally disallowed because they would take away AT&T profits from SMS messages? Or will it perhaps be hobbled by only working via Wi-Fi?



    Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but I look how controlling and limited the selection of iPod games is. It's taken a year and a half for the iTunes Store to amass a mere 30 games. And very few of those are actually original. To me, that doesn't bode well for the future of iPhone/iPod Touch apps at the iTunes Store.
  • Reply 22 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by caliminius View Post


    Perhaps it's not the best comparison, but I look how controlling and limited the selection of iPod games is. It's taken a year and a half for the iTunes Store to amass a mere 30 games. And very few of those are actually original. To me, that doesn't bode well for the future of iPhone/iPod Touch apps at the iTunes Store.



    My thoughts exactly...



    As far as I am concerned, Apple should be able to provide an SDK that lets developers write apps that are just as secure as any app that is written for OSX for a Mac.



    Frankly, I think that getting apps only from iTunes is a stop gap measure to ensure that the apps are "conforming" to Apple's standards, and that within a year you will see the ability to buy and install apps from many online sources.



    This just seems to go along with Apple slowly (I use that term advisedly since 4 million phones isn't all that slow) entering the market with a phone that only uses EDGE and is tied to a large carrier, and then moves to 3G, and then eventually to a much more open environment for iPhone sales.



    I would liken the whole thing to Apple's own stores. They are not the only place to buy the hardware/software, but they do account for a huge amount of Apple's sales.



    I believe that selling the apps only via iTunes will be similar to the beginning of Apple's own stores, and will probably still be the place where they sell a huge number of iPhone apps, but that eventually there will be other places to buy the apps and install them on your phone.



    Apple is methodically creating the iPhone marketplace the way it did with the iPod, and the way it has with the Apple Store. In a year or two, since the entire Apple universe seems to be moving to OSX, I believe you'll be able to find a lot more games, and apps, etc. for ALL of the hardware that runs OSX, and I believe it won't be only on iTunes.



    (If what I write does not come true, and you quote me a year or two down the road, I will disavow writing any of this and blame it on a malfunction of my Windows-based computer! ... yes, yes, yes, my next computer will be a Mac... I just can't afford a new computer yet, okay?)



  • Reply 23 of 52
    ajmasajmas Posts: 575member
    Being able to drag and drop install applications via the Finder onto the iPhone would be sweet. While using iTunes as the center for everything, I am starting to feel a proper synch API would be cool, so other applications can share in synching their data with the iPhone/iPod/iTouch.
  • Reply 24 of 52
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,605member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by psychodoughboy View Post


    I'm fine with a slightly closed system as long as I can get an iChat client that uses the data connection instead of SMS. If Apple doesn't supply that, I'll hold off buying an iPhone until it does. Or jailbreak the probable 32GB 3G model.



    would a 3G jail broken phone work on verizon? Or are the two not comparable tech wise even if both are 3G?
  • Reply 25 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Am I the only one who doesn't want a "totally open" phone? I'm all for 3rd party apps on phones, but with the always on nature of cell phones and increasing complexity of their OS I want some built-in stopgates against malicious and poorly written code. Has a horribly inept coder I'd hate to think that anyone could easily install code I wrote on their phone.



    My thoughts exactly. To counter the argument that the iPhone is running a version of OS X, so it is secure, the iPhone will have something the Mac doesn't: a large market share, which will make it especially attractive to malicious hackers.
  • Reply 26 of 52
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheBum View Post


    My thoughts exactly. To counter the argument that the iPhone is running a version of OS X, so it is secure, the iPhone will have something the Mac doesn't: a large market share, which will make it especially attractive to malicious hackers.



    Mobile phones haven't been that attractive for that just yet, maybe in a few years. Phones from any brand haven't really been targeted much yet. Even though iPhone might be big in its segment, there might only be 5 million of them right now, small compared to Mac's 20+ million installed base and a few hundred million Windows installed base.
  • Reply 27 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Mobile phones haven't been that attractive for that just yet, maybe in a few years. Phones from any brand haven't really been targeted much yet. Even though iPhone might be big in its segment, there might only be 5 million of them right now, small compared to Mac's 20+ million installed base and a few hundred million Windows installed base.



    Not to mention Symbian OS (S60 and UIQ). There are no "real" viruses in the wild for these two OS's and their millions more of them than the OS on the iPhone.
  • Reply 28 of 52
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    Not to mention Symbian OS (S60 and UIQ). There are no "real" viruses in the wild for these two OS's and their millions more of them than the OS on the iPhone.



    Thats because Symbian isn't 100% open either only approved and signed application have access to the most sensitive parts of the phone. The same way that Apple is doing. Other wise their would be trojens and spyware on Symbian phones.



    What can be done to get around this. Crack approved Symbian applications and distribute them for free with trojens and spyware hidden inside.
  • Reply 29 of 52
    This is a disaster.



    1 - This is nothing but a poorly hidden attempt to control what types of apps go on the phone. AT&T doesn't want VOIP on iPhone, Apple wouldn't want anything that would impact their bottom line (apps that compete with their 1st party offerings). This has nothing to do with security - as others have said, Symbian phones are fine, despite being fully open.



    2 - This is completely non-competitive with the Blackberry. Blackberry has an established protocol to install software over-the-air. Visiting a mobile website is a good way to install an app (signed of course) to a Blackberry, which is MUCH easier and encourages MUCH wider adoption than, say, forcing the user to sync up every time they feel like installing an app.



    Applications that are hoping to attract users will be deeply hurt by this.
  • Reply 30 of 52
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    would a 3G jail broken phone work on verizon? Or are the two not comparable tech wise even if both are 3G?



    Nope not today it won't. Verizon used CDMA technology and the iPhone uses GSM.



    Verizon has announced that its 4G data network will be a GSM variant called LTE (Long Term Evolution) That is more likely to be compatible with the iPhone. Verizon won't make the switch for another 3-4 years. By that time Apple's carrier contracts will be finished.
  • Reply 31 of 52
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Thats because Symbian isn't 100% open either only approved and signed application have access to the most sensitive parts of the phone. The same way that Apple is doing. Other wise their would be trojens and spyware on Symbian phones.



    What can be done to get around this. Crack approved Symbian applications and distribute them for free with trojens and spyware hidden inside.



    From what I can tell, Nokia requires signing, but not that a given app be approved directly by Nokia.
  • Reply 32 of 52
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    This is a disaster.



    Serve a little hyperbole this afternoon?



    Quote:

    This has nothing to do with security - as others have said, Symbian phones are fine, despite being fully open.



    Symbian phones are not completely open.



    SymbianSigned.com



    Quote:

    Applications that are hoping to attract users will be deeply hurt by this.



    Not really.
  • Reply 33 of 52
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    From what I can tell, Nokia requires signing, but not that a given app be approved directly by Nokia.



    Yes this is true but I'm just pointing out that Symbian does have a app signing process. If an app does not meet the requirements that Nokia has set for gaining approval then the app will be rejected. That is why it isn't 100% open.



    If Apple will restrict what apps can be approved based on their functionality we will all have to wait and see.
  • Reply 34 of 52
    imacfpimacfp Posts: 750member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by p0tat03 View Post


    This is a disaster.



    1 - This is nothing but a poorly hidden attempt to control what types of apps go on the phone. AT&T doesn't want VOIP on iPhone, Apple wouldn't want anything that would impact their bottom line (apps that compete with their 1st party offerings). This has nothing to do with security - as others have said, Symbian phones are fine, despite being fully open.



    2 - This is completely non-competitive with the Blackberry. Blackberry has an established protocol to install software over-the-air. Visiting a mobile website is a good way to install an app (signed of course) to a Blackberry, which is MUCH easier and encourages MUCH wider adoption than, say, forcing the user to sync up every time they feel like installing an app.



    Applications that are hoping to attract users will be deeply hurt by this.



    Why would you have to sync when you can download off the iTMS with a iPhone/Touch now? I don't think Apple cares if they are competitive with Blackberry or not.
  • Reply 35 of 52
    If you can only get apps on the phone through iTunes, it will also make it impossible for companies to write custom internal apps. At my company a lot of people have iPhones now, and it would be awesome to give them access to internal apps through their iPhones.
  • Reply 36 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by p0tat03 View Post


    This is a disaster



    2 - This is completely non-competitive with the Blackberry. Blackberry has an established protocol to install software over-the-air. Visiting a mobile website is a good way to install an app (signed of course) to a Blackberry, which is MUCH easier and encourages MUCH wider adoption than, say, forcing the user to sync up every time they feel like installing an app.



    Has anyone realized that there's the iTMS on the iPhone/iPod touch? Because they could just add another section to that version. Et voila, no more problems with plugging it into the computer.



    I'm sure there'll be a workaround to iTunes. maybe Installer.app will just stay around and serve as another source of 3rd party apps
  • Reply 37 of 52

    -

  • Reply 38 of 52
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iPhelim View Post


    Check, check, check, check, check it: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthre...=1#post4980184



    He's kicking himself.
  • Reply 39 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Yes this is true but I'm just pointing out that Symbian does have a app signing process. If an app does not meet the requirements that Nokia has set for gaining approval then the app will be rejected. That is why it isn't 100% open.



    If Apple will restrict what apps can be approved based on their functionality we will all have to wait and see.



    Not 100% true. There is a signing process but you can get around it. The signing process if mainly to tell the phone that this app has been signed, but I can turn off the checking for signed applications and tell the phone to simply accept anything I want to install.
  • Reply 40 of 52
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobaby View Post


    Not 100% true. There is a signing process but you can get around it. The signing process if mainly to tell the phone that this app has been signed, but I can turn off the checking for signed applications and tell the phone to simply accept anything I want to install.



    I hope as soon as the SDK is out - someone designs a way to use the alpha keyboard to find a contact for a phone call - it can't be difficult since you can do so for txting - it's too hard to flip through all contacts under any given alpha letter to find who you want to dial - my shortcut is to use the txt directory - send a one letter txt and then stay in text and hit "call"
Sign In or Register to comment.