The iphone has already been cracked and the market for third party apps is already establshed outside of Apple's control. Sorry Apple, but this genie won't going back in the bottle.
The hacks are becoming more and more sophisticated as developers burrow down toward the iphone hardware. Look for a complete third party bootloader shortly that will remove Apple's control of pretty much everthing that is put on the iphone. The apps so far are mainly "hacker quality" but are improving. The clarity the SDK will bring to some of the more obscure areas will accelerate the development of quality apps.
The iphone - whether Apple wants this or not - is becoming an open development platform. If Apple does not clue into this they will lose this market to iphone clone competitors with the same cluelessness that lost them PC market dominance in the mid '80's and the PC GUI market in the early '90's. But what the hey - Jobs seems to like single digit market share percentages so maybe this is all part of his "master plan" :-)
Hacks are hacks.
I won't run'em.
And I'll bet the sdk developed apps probably won't either.
Sure, you can keep hacking away, but they most useful thing a hack accomplishes is avoiding paying for the software. Something TRUE developers are NOT in favor of.
Everybody said iTunes wouldn't work for music either.
They're going to blow by Walmart into #1, so I wouldn't be betting the iPhone will fail because Tetris isn't availble to the hackers.
Sure, you can keep hacking away, but they most useful thing a hack accomplishes is avoiding paying for the software. Something TRUE developers are NOT in favor of.
I'd describe myself as a "true developer" - have been for nearly three decades. You've probably downloaded lot's of independent apps to your PC (and perhaps one or two of my own ). The iPhone is a complete PC in a small format. Apps will be developed, folks will use them. As far as getting paid - it's quite easy to lock an app to a specific phone. See the post in the comments here for my preferred method - http://cre.ations.net/blog/post/114-...anges#comments .
But you bring up a valid point. I'm sure Symantec, MacAfee, etc will be quick to create iphone virus/firewall/protection apps to keep our phones safe.
If it was actually true that Apple wants the apps distributed through iTunes or just approved by Apple, it would be understandable. It's a smart move on Apple's part. There are plenty of corporate IT Microsoft PC types who would love to see the iPhone tank. We know the type! Maybe Apple has a right to protect its interests, and protect its consumer base as well.
I disagree. Selling exclusively through the iTunes store will virtually guarantee that the apps are actually paid for, instead of pirated. This gives the developer a secure revenue stream, which should help keep prices down for the consumer. Everybody wins.
In the Palm and Windows Mobile market, piracy is rampant, so the majority of the apps are way overpriced for what they deliver. $20-$50 for "baby" software, as Steve would put it. Compare iPod games, for instance, with the average Palm OS game. The same game that's $25 for the Palm platform is $5 for the iPod. Ever wonder why?
But then there's no model for shareware or freeware software developers other than with the current crop of apps that require you to hack you iPhone.
It is not all about cell network security. Someone can build a program for the iPhone that can call a certain toll phone number in the background. Another programs can steal your address book, log your activities, forward your email.. etc. You have to keep in mind that so far the iPhone don't have an anti-virus and might not have one anytime soon. Thats why it is safer to use iTunes for now. It might be a annoying, but I think it is the best move for now.
But you bring up a valid point. I'm sure Symantec, MacAfee, etc will be quick to create iphone virus/firewall/protection apps to keep our phones safe.
This may seem like a stupid question/remark : if you condone for an AV scanner to be distributed "officially" [and i doubt that those guys want to sideload], you indirectly condone "unofficial" 3rd party apps that will find their way onto the iPhone.
Oh yeah and
I guess there goes my Skype client for the 3G iPhone
I don't know how they did it, but twice I know of the entire blackberry empire went down when they tried to update their software.
That was the blackberry back-end that was being updated. Sure, if you screw up the back-end, it will bring down the network, just as already happened with AT&T and iPhones.
But that ain't the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
It is not all about cell network security. Someone can build a program for the iPhone that can call a certain toll phone number in the background. Another programs can steal your address book, log your activities, forward your email.. etc. ...Thats why it is safer to use iTunes for now. It might be a annoying, but I think it is the best move for now.
And how is Apple planning on preventing trojans from infecting a phone? Are they going to demand all source code and scrounge it for every possible task it does? Will then indemnify the end-user if a trojan gets passed their system and ends up on your iPhone and steals your contact info? There's no 'real' security against a trojan.
I have no problems having to go through Apple as long as:
1) Apple does not refuse to allow an application to be use just because they don't like what it does. Examples: Allowing a bluetooth device to use the iPhone to get to the Internet, Allow me to play other types of media that the iPhone does not currently support, you get the idea. Apple should only check that applications do not harm the phone or steal data. They should keep their hands off everything else and not try telling us what we want. I know they already try to tell us what we want
2) Does not take longer than a couple of weeks to approve or disapprove and application and if disapproved supply the reason why and what needs to be done to get it approved.
If Apple doesn't allow an application because they don't like it I see class action law suite coming their way and as much as I love Apple I hope they loose them.
What I hope is that early on Apple will keep much closer track on Apps but as time goes on they will loosen their hold. Anything short of that is unacceptable.
Let's say you're a developer with the iPhone SDK. How do you test your app before going to the iTunes store? Emulators are NOT sufficient. So, I bet there would be a way for anyone with the SDK to put apps on the phone. (If not, and you're stuck with the emulator, then...yuck.)
So, I bet if you're technically savvy, you can play with the SDK and muck with your iPhone. If you're not technically savvy, or if you don't want to play with the SDK, you're left with iTunes for your apps.
No matter how Apple tries to limit what apps go on the iphone, as soon as there is a way to do it officially, there will be a way to do it unofficially.
I personally think it's stupid and a bit naive to centralize the software distribution around itunes. Some of the most useful apps are just little ones that do a very specific task. To have those kind of things go through an approval process just add unnecessary delays and affects the quality of the software as it takes time for updates to be approved. If updates aren't approved then the quality assurance is meaningless.
I really wish Apple would stop trying to do things their own damn way and look around at what actually works. Palm have a completely open developer kit and you can put whatever apps you like on it. I have never heard anyone saying that the platform is unstable or insecure. Apple are just using this as another excuse to get people using itunes.
Is itunes going to eventually turn into a sort of Amazon store?
People who purchased Blue Harvest on DVD got a second DVD with the video in MP4 format. However, to add it to iTunes, you had to enter a code at the store, which would decrypt the MP4 file, and then re-encrypt it with your iTMS key. Assuming the app passes muster with Apple, a signed version of it could be made available on a company's intranet, with the same distribution mechanism: enter a key, and then iTunes would download the actual code from the intranet site, and lock it to your iTunes account.
It's doable. Not convenient, but doable.
Most everything is doable. Whether Apple allows you to 'do' it is another story.
The whole point of the DVD crap you mentioned was just making sure they kept their precious movie from being sent all over the world via the internet (because we know it is impossible to rip the content directly from the DVD).
Why should a company, or, more importantly, an individual, have to spend any time at all dealing with Apple just to make an application for a phone? More importantly, if you're a developer and have a great idea for an app, will Apple not 'bless' it because they (or one of their partners) have a similar app? Will they refuse to 'bless' an app that cuts into their revenue streams (like an app to download/install music from Amazon?).
And if you develop a quick app for your own use (say an app to talk to your web server to perform quick status checks), do you have to basically PAY YOURSELF (with a stipend to apple) to install it on the phone?
Is this something we can look forward to in OS X.6?
I prefer this method. I've paid for several programs for my PC, etc... that have turned out to be duds. I'm hoping Apple will have some measure of QC over these apps.
I haven't said anything about the network crashing..that's implicityly your scenario. I'm jus saying that Apple is partnering with AT&T and security and safety for all should reign supreme versus turning the iPhone apps into the Wild Wild West.
I think everyone needs to just relax and take a chill-pill.
Does apple get a cut of every pod-cast that is on iTunes?
No.
Why would you guys think that applications distributed on iTunes would require paying Apple for those?
Does Apple limit podcats on iTunes that they don't agree or like?
No.
Why would you guys think Apple wants to get in the business of evaluating applications to "see if they like them"?
Let's all sit back and stop having hissy fits.
You guys that want to live in the hacker world, will always have a place.
On the other hand, if you want to build your fist little app and make a bunch of money, you have a way to advertise and get it out there in a centralized place.
The notion that Apple would do this in any other way, can only come from people that don't understand Apple and what Apple has accomplished by avoiding MicroSoft and the disaster riddled path that COM was............
Oh, and for you people that want REAL exchange support(whatever that would be)?
I have no problems having to go through Apple as long as:
1) Apple does not refuse to allow an application to be use just because they don't like what it does.
2) Does not take longer than a couple of weeks to approve or disapprove and application and if disapproved supply the reason why and what needs to be done to get it approved.
If Apple doesn't allow an application because they don't like it I see class action law suite coming their way and as much as I love Apple I hope they loose them.
What I hope is that early on Apple will keep much closer track on Apps but as time goes on they will loosen their hold. Anything short of that is unacceptable.
I dont mean to be rude here : but what are you smoking. Or was is that toad from earlier. No disrespect : but that aint gonna happen.
Why ?
Because they will use iTS as conduit to distribute. IOW they control the distribution channel. Same thing if yuour product is not listed at (say) WalMart or Best Buy. That's just plain old tough on you but there is nothing you can do about it.
It's their OS and as much as you BOUGHT the phone you LICENCED the OS. Sure you can try class action and all sorts but ultimatively they will prevail. The Inc. in Apple stand for Incorporated, meaning a corporation. They are not altruistic AT ALL. Different ? My ar-e. Companies exist to make money and Apple makes 25ct on the dollar which is exceptional.
So much for openness and community access to allow for very interesting applications to be developed, including things that would allow physical keyboard input.
If this is true, I'll be developing for Android exclusively.
And how is Apple planning on preventing trojans from infecting a phone? Are they going to demand all source code and scrounge it for every possible task it does? Will then indemnify the end-user if a trojan gets passed their system and ends up on your iPhone and steals your contact info? There's no 'real' security against a trojan.
I believe thats what Apple have been saying since they released the iPhone. They are concerned about security and stability. You don't have to go through the whole source code to know if a program actually have a trojan or a virus. All programs will be built using Apple iPhone SDK and I am sure that they will have a quick way to check for viruses programed using it.
Hopefully this will prevent all of the crapware similar to what we see on Windows from entering the iPhone. I'm sure Apple (and by extension-- the Mac Geniuses) doesn't want to deal with customer issues caused by poorly written iPhone software. I'm all about adding new apps to the iPhone but honestly... I don't want to complicate it too much. I love simplicity which is why I use a Mac
I think everyone needs to just relax and take a chill-pill.
Actually, you need to use a better analogy. There is nothing Apple could do to charge for podcasts. They don't develop, host, or pay for them. Plus, you still could get them from other sources and stick it on your ipod (like the good ol' days), since Apple can't keep you from putting an MP3 on your device.
However, change 'podcast' to something that actually is very similar to what we have now: 'iPod Games'
Does apple get a cut of every game that is on iTunes?
Yes.
Why would you guys think that applications distributed on iTunes would require paying Apple for those?
Because there's no free games now. Ergo...
Does Apple limit games on iTunes that they don't agree or like?
Yes.
Why would you guys think Apple wants to get in the business of evaluating applications to "see if they like them"?
To make sure that someone doesn't make an app that will cut into their own money-making deals.
Comments
The iphone has already been cracked and the market for third party apps is already establshed outside of Apple's control. Sorry Apple, but this genie won't going back in the bottle.
The hacks are becoming more and more sophisticated as developers burrow down toward the iphone hardware. Look for a complete third party bootloader shortly that will remove Apple's control of pretty much everthing that is put on the iphone. The apps so far are mainly "hacker quality" but are improving. The clarity the SDK will bring to some of the more obscure areas will accelerate the development of quality apps.
The iphone - whether Apple wants this or not - is becoming an open development platform. If Apple does not clue into this they will lose this market to iphone clone competitors with the same cluelessness that lost them PC market dominance in the mid '80's and the PC GUI market in the early '90's. But what the hey - Jobs seems to like single digit market share percentages so maybe this is all part of his "master plan" :-)
Hacks are hacks.
I won't run'em.
And I'll bet the sdk developed apps probably won't either.
Sure, you can keep hacking away, but they most useful thing a hack accomplishes is avoiding paying for the software. Something TRUE developers are NOT in favor of.
Everybody said iTunes wouldn't work for music either.
They're going to blow by Walmart into #1, so I wouldn't be betting the iPhone will fail because Tetris isn't availble to the hackers.
Sure, you can keep hacking away, but they most useful thing a hack accomplishes is avoiding paying for the software. Something TRUE developers are NOT in favor of.
I'd describe myself as a "true developer" - have been for nearly three decades. You've probably downloaded lot's of independent apps to your PC (and perhaps one or two of my own
But you bring up a valid point. I'm sure Symantec, MacAfee, etc will be quick to create iphone virus/firewall/protection apps to keep our phones safe.
Any guesses on if they will immediately phase out the Edge compatible Iphones or offer them at lower price points (even further)?
I disagree. Selling exclusively through the iTunes store will virtually guarantee that the apps are actually paid for, instead of pirated. This gives the developer a secure revenue stream, which should help keep prices down for the consumer. Everybody wins.
In the Palm and Windows Mobile market, piracy is rampant, so the majority of the apps are way overpriced for what they deliver. $20-$50 for "baby" software, as Steve would put it. Compare iPod games, for instance, with the average Palm OS game. The same game that's $25 for the Palm platform is $5 for the iPod. Ever wonder why?
But then there's no model for shareware or freeware software developers other than with the current crop of apps that require you to hack you iPhone.
Explain how an app can crash a network.
It is not all about cell network security. Someone can build a program for the iPhone that can call a certain toll phone number in the background. Another programs can steal your address book, log your activities, forward your email.. etc. You have to keep in mind that so far the iPhone don't have an anti-virus and might not have one anytime soon. Thats why it is safer to use iTunes for now. It might be a annoying, but I think it is the best move for now.
But you bring up a valid point. I'm sure Symantec, MacAfee, etc will be quick to create iphone virus/firewall/protection apps to keep our phones safe.
This may seem like a stupid question/remark : if you condone for an AV scanner to be distributed "officially" [and i doubt that those guys want to sideload], you indirectly condone "unofficial" 3rd party apps that will find their way onto the iPhone.
Oh yeah and
I guess there goes my Skype client for the 3G iPhone
I don't know how they did it, but twice I know of the entire blackberry empire went down when they tried to update their software.
That was the blackberry back-end that was being updated. Sure, if you screw up the back-end, it will bring down the network, just as already happened with AT&T and iPhones.
But that ain't the point.
It is not all about cell network security. Someone can build a program for the iPhone that can call a certain toll phone number in the background. Another programs can steal your address book, log your activities, forward your email.. etc. ...Thats why it is safer to use iTunes for now. It might be a annoying, but I think it is the best move for now.
And how is Apple planning on preventing trojans from infecting a phone? Are they going to demand all source code and scrounge it for every possible task it does? Will then indemnify the end-user if a trojan gets passed their system and ends up on your iPhone and steals your contact info? There's no 'real' security against a trojan.
1) Apple does not refuse to allow an application to be use just because they don't like what it does. Examples: Allowing a bluetooth device to use the iPhone to get to the Internet, Allow me to play other types of media that the iPhone does not currently support, you get the idea. Apple should only check that applications do not harm the phone or steal data. They should keep their hands off everything else and not try telling us what we want. I know they already try to tell us what we want
2) Does not take longer than a couple of weeks to approve or disapprove and application and if disapproved supply the reason why and what needs to be done to get it approved.
If Apple doesn't allow an application because they don't like it I see class action law suite coming their way and as much as I love Apple I hope they loose them.
What I hope is that early on Apple will keep much closer track on Apps but as time goes on they will loosen their hold. Anything short of that is unacceptable.
Let's say you're a developer with the iPhone SDK. How do you test your app before going to the iTunes store? Emulators are NOT sufficient. So, I bet there would be a way for anyone with the SDK to put apps on the phone. (If not, and you're stuck with the emulator, then...yuck.)
So, I bet if you're technically savvy, you can play with the SDK and muck with your iPhone. If you're not technically savvy, or if you don't want to play with the SDK, you're left with iTunes for your apps.
</wild guess>
I personally think it's stupid and a bit naive to centralize the software distribution around itunes. Some of the most useful apps are just little ones that do a very specific task. To have those kind of things go through an approval process just add unnecessary delays and affects the quality of the software as it takes time for updates to be approved. If updates aren't approved then the quality assurance is meaningless.
I really wish Apple would stop trying to do things their own damn way and look around at what actually works. Palm have a completely open developer kit and you can put whatever apps you like on it. I have never heard anyone saying that the platform is unstable or insecure. Apple are just using this as another excuse to get people using itunes.
Is itunes going to eventually turn into a sort of Amazon store?
People who purchased Blue Harvest on DVD got a second DVD with the video in MP4 format. However, to add it to iTunes, you had to enter a code at the store, which would decrypt the MP4 file, and then re-encrypt it with your iTMS key. Assuming the app passes muster with Apple, a signed version of it could be made available on a company's intranet, with the same distribution mechanism: enter a key, and then iTunes would download the actual code from the intranet site, and lock it to your iTunes account.
It's doable. Not convenient, but doable.
Most everything is doable. Whether Apple allows you to 'do' it is another story.
The whole point of the DVD crap you mentioned was just making sure they kept their precious movie from being sent all over the world via the internet (because we know it is impossible to rip the content directly from the DVD).
Why should a company, or, more importantly, an individual, have to spend any time at all dealing with Apple just to make an application for a phone? More importantly, if you're a developer and have a great idea for an app, will Apple not 'bless' it because they (or one of their partners) have a similar app? Will they refuse to 'bless' an app that cuts into their revenue streams (like an app to download/install music from Amazon?).
And if you develop a quick app for your own use (say an app to talk to your web server to perform quick status checks), do you have to basically PAY YOURSELF (with a stipend to apple) to install it on the phone?
Is this something we can look forward to in OS X.6?
Explain how an app can crash a network.
No.
I haven't said anything about the network crashing..that's implicityly your scenario. I'm jus saying that Apple is partnering with AT&T and security and safety for all should reign supreme versus turning the iPhone apps into the Wild Wild West.
Does apple get a cut of every pod-cast that is on iTunes?
No.
Why would you guys think that applications distributed on iTunes would require paying Apple for those?
Does Apple limit podcats on iTunes that they don't agree or like?
No.
Why would you guys think Apple wants to get in the business of evaluating applications to "see if they like them"?
Let's all sit back and stop having hissy fits.
You guys that want to live in the hacker world, will always have a place.
On the other hand, if you want to build your fist little app and make a bunch of money, you have a way to advertise and get it out there in a centralized place.
The notion that Apple would do this in any other way, can only come from people that don't understand Apple and what Apple has accomplished by avoiding MicroSoft and the disaster riddled path that COM was............
Oh, and for you people that want REAL exchange support(whatever that would be)?
Go ahead, buy a windows phone.........
I have no problems having to go through Apple as long as:
1) Apple does not refuse to allow an application to be use just because they don't like what it does.
2) Does not take longer than a couple of weeks to approve or disapprove and application and if disapproved supply the reason why and what needs to be done to get it approved.
If Apple doesn't allow an application because they don't like it I see class action law suite coming their way and as much as I love Apple I hope they loose them.
What I hope is that early on Apple will keep much closer track on Apps but as time goes on they will loosen their hold. Anything short of that is unacceptable.
I dont mean to be rude here : but what are you smoking. Or was is that toad from earlier. No disrespect : but that aint gonna happen.
Why ?
Because they will use iTS as conduit to distribute. IOW they control the distribution channel. Same thing if yuour product is not listed at (say) WalMart or Best Buy. That's just plain old tough on you but there is nothing you can do about it.
It's their OS and as much as you BOUGHT the phone you LICENCED the OS. Sure you can try class action and all sorts but ultimatively they will prevail. The Inc. in Apple stand for Incorporated, meaning a corporation. They are not altruistic AT ALL. Different ? My ar-e. Companies exist to make money and Apple makes 25ct on the dollar which is exceptional.
If this is true, I'll be developing for Android exclusively.
And how is Apple planning on preventing trojans from infecting a phone? Are they going to demand all source code and scrounge it for every possible task it does? Will then indemnify the end-user if a trojan gets passed their system and ends up on your iPhone and steals your contact info? There's no 'real' security against a trojan.
I believe thats what Apple have been saying since they released the iPhone. They are concerned about security and stability. You don't have to go through the whole source code to know if a program actually have a trojan or a virus. All programs will be built using Apple iPhone SDK and I am sure that they will have a quick way to check for viruses programed using it.
I think everyone needs to just relax and take a chill-pill.
Actually, you need to use a better analogy. There is nothing Apple could do to charge for podcasts. They don't develop, host, or pay for them. Plus, you still could get them from other sources and stick it on your ipod (like the good ol' days), since Apple can't keep you from putting an MP3 on your device.
However, change 'podcast' to something that actually is very similar to what we have now: 'iPod Games'
Does apple get a cut of every game that is on iTunes?
Yes.
Why would you guys think that applications distributed on iTunes would require paying Apple for those?
Because there's no free games now. Ergo...
Does Apple limit games on iTunes that they don't agree or like?
Yes.
Why would you guys think Apple wants to get in the business of evaluating applications to "see if they like them"?
To make sure that someone doesn't make an app that will cut into their own money-making deals.