If this is true it will be bad for small company developers like myself. Hope it isn't true. No problem with itune distribution, but I find it hard to believe that they will judge which apps are worthy like a bunch of nazi's. I do not think this will happen, but you never know. They make smart decisions and really stupid decisions at apple.
No problem with itune distribution, but I find it hard to believe that they will judge which apps are worthy like a bunch of nazi's.
They already are, and if some of the Apple shrills will come forth they will admit to it (fat chance of that happening). No, I am not a developer I just know many a developer. I would not call Apple Nazis though, just too much Big Brother. Lords of Rings comes to mind...precious.
Sorry, but there is no way to scan a program for a trojan. An address book type app would of course use APIs to get data from the address book and to send emails. But what can Apple check to make sure there's no sending email to nefarious spammers? Stick in a time delay for this to happen, and Apple won't even see it as traffic on the network, most likely.
Please read correctly. I said you don't have to go through the source code to make sure there are no trojans or viruses, there are many ways to avoid them. Apple may accept only "trusted" developers though iTunes. I don't think Microsoft, IBM, google.. etc will be embedding their software with trojans or viruses.
They say that it costs over a billion dollars to bring a new drug to market today. Years of research, in vivo/in vitro studies, Phase I, Phase II, Phase II and Phase IV clinical trials, etc., and yet never a guarantee that it will be effective, safe or even succeed. A particularly uncertain venture with new chemical entities with unique modes of action. And once approved, it still is required that the developer continue to support its claims of effectiveness and safety as long as they are selling it. In the US we have the FDA to help monitor the situation, but the responsibility is still in the hands of the developer.
This scenario is not far from that which has occurred with the iPhone and what one should hope to happen with any application for which it is designed to be used on. Not that it is a life threatening concern, but for the primary reason that Apple stated was their only priority right from the beginning. Above everything else, the iPhone must work as a phone. Everything else is secondary.
Pharmaceuticals to software? Are you out of your bloody mind in making this comparison? Really now. Did you load the wrong syringe today?
I really don't believe this article ... yet, but again ... you never know. I think that there can be a system in place for everyone to distribute iphone software similar to the "podcast" concept with the "podcast" becoming an iphone app. I think an "itune" model is in place for free and open software development ... similar to free and open podcast content. I'll be watching closely next week.
Why all the venom folks? Let the itunes drones pump their $$ into the Apple machine. The iPhone is already open and quality apps are starting to appear.
And I bet the first true iPhone clones are 6-12 months away. Reminds me of 1985 and the Leading Edge PC (first true IBM PC clone)
Thank God most people in the real word and regular consumers don't really give a damn about most of the issues being raised here, it's just people who like to come on these boards and complain about everything does, I'm sure y'all are the intended market for Apple, just based on some unamed source we have all these people coming out to write a whole bunch of foolishness, anyways we'll find out on Thursday what Apple has in store for us.
Your "counter culture" attitude is exactly why Apple has to do this. Unlike a computer Apple has to make sure the iPhone platform is stable and "safe" for the phone network as well. I think the smart thing to do is start out conservative and work you way on up.
I think thats bullshit.
The same argument could be made for computers then. Are you saying Apple should control exactly what apps we put on our macs? Oh, and we can only get our apps from iTunes?
All in the name of safety. Whatever, sounds like a corporate version of 'homeland security' to me.
Download an unauthorized app on your Mac and Apple bricks it... how well do you think that would go over?
I can see how it's fine for some developers, however, it's software, and dev's should be able to sell it off their own sites using their own pos systems.
Who knows, maybe this is just a stall tactic until they can develop the iPhone and iPod Touch more.
*pos is 'point of sale' btw... not 'piece of shit'... or maybe it could be that too... take your pick.
I remember the day it happened, the Internet was nearly brought to its knees. Billions of dollars of lost productivity. If it happened with iPhones, Apple could be liable for huge damages. So I think their tight control is a pretty smart move.
How about actually reading the links you post? "The U.S. GAO put the cost of the damage at $10M?100M." Last I checked $100M is not billions of dollars. "Robert Morris was tried and convicted of violating the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. After appeals he was sentenced to three years probation, 400 hours of community service, and a fine of $10,050." Hmmm ... I missed where Digital Equipment Corp was held liable for damages (since it was their computers the worm ran on) ... probably because they weren't.
Don't get me wrong here. Mac is great. I've had them since -89. iPhone is good. Touch is good. Lot of other good products over the years. Job has unarguable had a lot to do with what Apple has been able to offer and what Apple is today. But...
Jobs is a control freak. He fumbled when there was a change for MacOS to become THE operating system. Jobs wanted to have total control and Microsoft became the dominant operating system provider.
Now Apple has a good phone, certainly not the best in hardware sense, but very innovative in software respect. The platform might have a good chance to gain some respectable market share. It seems however that Jobs is going to let his inbuild need for total control to blow this opportunity also.
Keeping the platform closed will push away a lot of developers and innovation. Something Apple needs to make iPhone to become a real hit product. It will also very effectively keep iPhone out of the large scale enterprise market.
Who will put serious amount of resources and/or time in developing a SW-product for a niche phone, when there is no certainty whether the final product will ever be allowed run on the platform it is developed for? Some sure will, but too many wont.
Granted - but what if you were dependant on the *d*a*t*a* bit of the network. Granted it will be a long time before anyone will get a SLA on that - but still. imagine a dDoS of some sort and you are the poor service technician who tries to synch his PDA ? The words shaft and ed springs to mind....
Granted that this is an issue the would concern more the WinMob fraction then anything/-one else but MS is not tied commercially to any network. I guess if an iPhone app (official) brings down the AT&T data network => they would sue for liability and too right too.
Dude you do not understand. I am talking about the IN part of the cell network. Not the Internet. Cell networks use the Internet or have access to it via gateways, routers, etc... I cell network is not dependent upon the Internet to exist. You can make calls all day long and not use one drop of data. How would your iPhone crash this IN cell network. IT CAN'T. You bought into the Apple - AT&T lie. If a cell network approaches saturation it will route around or simply drop those calls based on call precedence. You can not crash a cell network with an application. END OF STORY.
Don't get me wrong here. Mac is great. I've had them since -89. iPhone is good. Touch is good. Lot of other good products over the years. Job has unarguable had a lot to do with what Apple has been able to offer and what Apple is today. But...
Jobs is a control freak. He fumbled when there was a change for MacOS to become THE operating system. Jobs wanted to have total control and Microsoft became the dominant operating system provider.
Now Apple has a good phone, certainly not the best in hardware sense, but very innovative in software respect. The platform might have a good chance to gain some respectable market share. It seems however that Jobs is going to let his inbuild need for total control to blow this opportunity also.
Keeping the platform closed will push away a lot of developers and innovation. Something Apple needs to make iPhone to become a real hit product. It will also very effectively keep iPhone out of the large scale enterprise market.
Who will put serious amount of resources and/or time in developing a SW-product for a niche phone, when there is no certainty whether the final product will ever be allowed run on the platform it is developed for? Some sure will, but too many wont.
Yes Apple don't know what they're doing because they won't allow you to install crap programs, the iphone is a hit prooduct with or without your programs, why don't you go and design your own phone and turn it into a hit.
Please read correctly. I said you don't have to go through the source code to make sure there are no trojans or viruses, there are many ways to avoid them. Apple may accept only "trusted" developers though iTunes. I don't think Microsoft, IBM, google.. etc will be embedding their software with trojans or viruses.
You do not understand the concept that there are two totally independent networks. One being the Internet and the other being the cell network. They exist completely independent of each other. Do you understand this? No application on the iPhone can crash a cell network.
This is all academic anyway. F/W 1.1.4 was hacked and able to unlock the iPhone. So, I will pick and choose where I get my apps. From the hackers (many are very good and I bet you Apple will be copying their code) or from iTunes. Hackers give us a choice.
The same argument could be made for computers then. Are you saying Apple should control exactly what apps we put on our macs? Oh, and we can only get our apps from iTunes?
All in the name of safety. Whatever, sounds like a corporate version of 'homeland security' to me.
Download an unauthorized app on your Mac and Apple bricks it... how well do you think that would go over?
I can see how it's fine for some developers, however, it's software, and dev's should be able to sell it off their own sites using their own pos systems.
Who knows, maybe this is just a stall tactic until they can develop the iPhone and iPod Touch more.
*pos is 'point of sale' btw... not 'piece of shit'... or maybe it could be that too... take your pick.
Not any different when the first cell phones were introduced or the Mac for that matter. How about the XBox or the Blackberry. Even Nokia today has some phones that won't let it. Let's see, I can't put unleaded gas in my car.
You do not understand the concept that there are two totally independent networks. One being the Internet and the other being the cell network. They exist completely independent of each other. Do you understand this? No application on the iPhone can crash a cell network.
Brother, you have real issues. I was not talking about cell network crashes. Please read my first post on page 1 before replying to a post.
Comments
No problem with itune distribution, but I find it hard to believe that they will judge which apps are worthy like a bunch of nazi's.
They already are, and if some of the Apple shrills will come forth they will admit to it (fat chance of that happening). No, I am not a developer I just know many a developer. I would not call Apple Nazis though, just too much Big Brother. Lords of Rings comes to mind...precious.
Think about it- ever since it's been launched all I hear are people bitching and whining!
Sorry, but there is no way to scan a program for a trojan. An address book type app would of course use APIs to get data from the address book and to send emails. But what can Apple check to make sure there's no sending email to nefarious spammers? Stick in a time delay for this to happen, and Apple won't even see it as traffic on the network, most likely.
Please read correctly. I said you don't have to go through the source code to make sure there are no trojans or viruses, there are many ways to avoid them. Apple may accept only "trusted" developers though iTunes. I don't think Microsoft, IBM, google.. etc will be embedding their software with trojans or viruses.
They say that it costs over a billion dollars to bring a new drug to market today. Years of research, in vivo/in vitro studies, Phase I, Phase II, Phase II and Phase IV clinical trials, etc., and yet never a guarantee that it will be effective, safe or even succeed. A particularly uncertain venture with new chemical entities with unique modes of action. And once approved, it still is required that the developer continue to support its claims of effectiveness and safety as long as they are selling it. In the US we have the FDA to help monitor the situation, but the responsibility is still in the hands of the developer.
This scenario is not far from that which has occurred with the iPhone and what one should hope to happen with any application for which it is designed to be used on. Not that it is a life threatening concern, but for the primary reason that Apple stated was their only priority right from the beginning. Above everything else, the iPhone must work as a phone. Everything else is secondary.
Pharmaceuticals to software? Are you out of your bloody mind in making this comparison? Really now. Did you load the wrong syringe today?
All this ranting and raving! Thank god 1G iPhone is one of the few Apple products I don't own.
... all I hear are people bitching and whining!
It's referred to as "constructive criticism."
They already are,[/I].
I really don't believe this article ... yet, but again ... you never know. I think that there can be a system in place for everyone to distribute iphone software similar to the "podcast" concept with the "podcast" becoming an iphone app. I think an "itune" model is in place for free and open software development ... similar to free and open podcast content. I'll be watching closely next week.
And I bet the first true iPhone clones are 6-12 months away. Reminds me of 1985 and the Leading Edge PC (first true IBM PC clone)
Your "counter culture" attitude is exactly why Apple has to do this. Unlike a computer Apple has to make sure the iPhone platform is stable and "safe" for the phone network as well. I think the smart thing to do is start out conservative and work you way on up.
I think thats bullshit.
The same argument could be made for computers then. Are you saying Apple should control exactly what apps we put on our macs? Oh, and we can only get our apps from iTunes?
All in the name of safety. Whatever, sounds like a corporate version of 'homeland security' to me.
Download an unauthorized app on your Mac and Apple bricks it... how well do you think that would go over?
I can see how it's fine for some developers, however, it's software, and dev's should be able to sell it off their own sites using their own pos systems.
Who knows, maybe this is just a stall tactic until they can develop the iPhone and iPod Touch more.
*pos is 'point of sale' btw... not 'piece of shit'... or maybe it could be that too... take your pick.
This is probably the most famous:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_worm
I remember the day it happened, the Internet was nearly brought to its knees. Billions of dollars of lost productivity. If it happened with iPhones, Apple could be liable for huge damages. So I think their tight control is a pretty smart move.
How about actually reading the links you post? "The U.S. GAO put the cost of the damage at $10M?100M." Last I checked $100M is not billions of dollars. "Robert Morris was tried and convicted of violating the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. After appeals he was sentenced to three years probation, 400 hours of community service, and a fine of $10,050." Hmmm ... I missed where Digital Equipment Corp was held liable for damages (since it was their computers the worm ran on) ... probably because they weren't.
They say that it costs over a billion dollars to bring a new drug to market today. Years of research, [blah, blah, blah]
The pharmaceutical industry spends more on advertising than they do on producing new drugs.
Jobs is a control freak. He fumbled when there was a change for MacOS to become THE operating system. Jobs wanted to have total control and Microsoft became the dominant operating system provider.
Now Apple has a good phone, certainly not the best in hardware sense, but very innovative in software respect. The platform might have a good chance to gain some respectable market share. It seems however that Jobs is going to let his inbuild need for total control to blow this opportunity also.
Keeping the platform closed will push away a lot of developers and innovation. Something Apple needs to make iPhone to become a real hit product. It will also very effectively keep iPhone out of the large scale enterprise market.
Who will put serious amount of resources and/or time in developing a SW-product for a niche phone, when there is no certainty whether the final product will ever be allowed run on the platform it is developed for? Some sure will, but too many wont.
Granted - but what if you were dependant on the *d*a*t*a* bit of the network. Granted it will be a long time before anyone will get a SLA on that - but still. imagine a dDoS of some sort and you are the poor service technician who tries to synch his PDA ? The words shaft and ed springs to mind....
Granted that this is an issue the would concern more the WinMob fraction then anything/-one else but MS is not tied commercially to any network. I guess if an iPhone app (official) brings down the AT&T data network => they would sue for liability and too right too.
Dude you do not understand. I am talking about the IN part of the cell network. Not the Internet. Cell networks use the Internet or have access to it via gateways, routers, etc... I cell network is not dependent upon the Internet to exist. You can make calls all day long and not use one drop of data. How would your iPhone crash this IN cell network. IT CAN'T. You bought into the Apple - AT&T lie. If a cell network approaches saturation it will route around or simply drop those calls based on call precedence. You can not crash a cell network with an application. END OF STORY.
Don't get me wrong here. Mac is great. I've had them since -89. iPhone is good. Touch is good. Lot of other good products over the years. Job has unarguable had a lot to do with what Apple has been able to offer and what Apple is today. But...
Jobs is a control freak. He fumbled when there was a change for MacOS to become THE operating system. Jobs wanted to have total control and Microsoft became the dominant operating system provider.
Now Apple has a good phone, certainly not the best in hardware sense, but very innovative in software respect. The platform might have a good chance to gain some respectable market share. It seems however that Jobs is going to let his inbuild need for total control to blow this opportunity also.
Keeping the platform closed will push away a lot of developers and innovation. Something Apple needs to make iPhone to become a real hit product. It will also very effectively keep iPhone out of the large scale enterprise market.
Who will put serious amount of resources and/or time in developing a SW-product for a niche phone, when there is no certainty whether the final product will ever be allowed run on the platform it is developed for? Some sure will, but too many wont.
Yes Apple don't know what they're doing because they won't allow you to install crap programs, the iphone is a hit prooduct with or without your programs, why don't you go and design your own phone and turn it into a hit.
Please read correctly. I said you don't have to go through the source code to make sure there are no trojans or viruses, there are many ways to avoid them. Apple may accept only "trusted" developers though iTunes. I don't think Microsoft, IBM, google.. etc will be embedding their software with trojans or viruses.
You do not understand the concept that there are two totally independent networks. One being the Internet and the other being the cell network. They exist completely independent of each other. Do you understand this? No application on the iPhone can crash a cell network.
Y...why don't you go and design your own phone and turn it into a hit.
Ahhh, "make one yourself." The last refuge of someone with his head up his a**.
I think thats bullshit.
The same argument could be made for computers then. Are you saying Apple should control exactly what apps we put on our macs? Oh, and we can only get our apps from iTunes?
All in the name of safety. Whatever, sounds like a corporate version of 'homeland security' to me.
Download an unauthorized app on your Mac and Apple bricks it... how well do you think that would go over?
I can see how it's fine for some developers, however, it's software, and dev's should be able to sell it off their own sites using their own pos systems.
Who knows, maybe this is just a stall tactic until they can develop the iPhone and iPod Touch more.
*pos is 'point of sale' btw... not 'piece of shit'... or maybe it could be that too... take your pick.
Not any different when the first cell phones were introduced or the Mac for that matter. How about the XBox or the Blackberry. Even Nokia today has some phones that won't let it. Let's see, I can't put unleaded gas in my car.
You do not understand the concept that there are two totally independent networks. One being the Internet and the other being the cell network. They exist completely independent of each other. Do you understand this? No application on the iPhone can crash a cell network.
Brother, you have real issues. I was not talking about cell network crashes. Please read my first post on page 1 before replying to a post.