Thats true... but if it passes their automated tests (as in, tests to see if it breaks the sandbox, or uses API's not in the SDK - both tested without people involved) then the risk is almost infinitesimally small it will brick it.
I do think that people (like you!) that are trying to make out like being fair or giving away something for free is actively *bad* or "destructive to the community" are going waay over the top. The suggestion by someone above that Apple should severely limit the number of free apps someone can offer is totally fascist IMO.
I know the socialistic view of the world is all fine and good for freeware and shareware sites, but it's a bit much to ask Apple to be responsible for the raft of inevitable class-action lawsuits that would stem from the use of a 'sleeper' app downloaded to your iPhone that could potentially destroy your hard won consumer loyalty.
I'm sure the open source community, as well as those of us who benefit from their work (which, by the way, includes all of us who run OS X) appreciates your constructive rant.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it. In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it. In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
What are the freetards gonna do, sue? They don't have any money anyway.
This is one way that Apple could really shoot themselves in the foot. They are already taking too much control of what can and can't be run on their device.
When phones running Android come out at the end of the year, this restriction will give people a real reason to switch. Developers will like using the system, because it's truly open and they can do what they like, and most stuff will be given away for free.
What Apple is doing with this store is only stiffling development, and if most stuff is going cost money, then this idea is doomed to fail.
We know the platform will likely be a success with an addressable market in the tens of millions at the very least (and that's just to start with). Apple should be advising the developers to control their greed a little bit and think of how much money they will make even at $.99 an app, not encouraging higher prices.
I saw nothing about encouraging higher prices, Apple was encouraging developers to charge vs give away free. Don't assume more than what's written in the article.
There is nothing wrong with giving away apps free. There is also nothing wrong with Apple encouraging developers to put a price (be it small or large) on their apps when those apps are made for the iPhone and using Apple's distribution system.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it.
That's true, but the point of the person you replied to was that we all benefit, especially as it improves interoperability.
Quote:
In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
Those people just have to deal with it. If the projects didn't want a company to take it and make money from it, those projects should have chosen a different license. There's no shortage of open source licenses, so if the project has a particular kind of agenda on how the software can be used, they can pick a license style that fits their agenda.
Then don't.... but don't be so petulant about it. It makes you seem childish.
He isn't. What it is is fact. Apple promised it, there is the contract and that's his statement about the whole affair. It also doesn't matter if he lives at home on his parent's dime and wants to offer free apps. That's his prerogative and he shouldn't give a F what anybody else says.
If Apple refuses to sell free apps in the future then these apps can be hosted at MacUpdate where many awesome free apps live. We certainly don't need Apple / iTunes to install these apps.
He isn't. What it is is fact. Apple promised it, there is the contract and that's his statement about the whole affair. It also doesn't matter if he lives at home on his parent's dime and wants to offer free apps. That's his prerogative and he shouldn't give a F what anybody else says.
If Apple refuses to sell free apps in the future then these apps can be hosted at MacUpdate where many awesome free apps live. We certainly don't need Apple / iTunes to install these apps.
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
I don't think it's a problem as so long as Apple keeps updating and adding applications to what is already on the phones. For example, I hope Apple comes up with a good to-do-list that would be part of the next update.
iPhone - Pocket Informant 1.0 coming second half of 2008
Designed for the iPhone and takes advantage of the unique iPhone Touch interface
Full Calendar: Agenda, Day, Week, Month
Month and Week View with timebars
Task Groups and Priorities
Full Contacts Integration
Search Calendar, Tasks, Contacts
Over-the-air synching to your Mac or PC
You may say that the built in Calendar on the iPhone is good enough. For some sure, but really its pretty weak. I hope to be able to show some nice screenshots of where we're at next week.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more.
I do buy software but not like this.
Like what? You can get software for free or buy it. Apple is simply encouraging developers to charge for their work. Apple isn't forcing them to. Its just a nice email saying "Hey, sounds good - have you thought about charging for the app instead to give it more value?". And that makes sense - if Apple pays for distribution they would prefer to get paid for it.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more. I do buy software but not like this.
This wasn't a secret. Apple made this clear in February. Their public reasoning makes sense, even if I might disagree with their decision and whatever their unstated reasons might be.
Developers do seem to be treated pretty fairly, and I think the split is reasonable too. If the iTunes model is any indication, use and purchasing should be as painless as you can get.
Comments
I do think that people (like you!) that are trying to make out like being fair or giving away something for free is actively *bad* or "destructive to the community" are going waay over the top. The suggestion by someone above that Apple should severely limit the number of free apps someone can offer is totally fascist IMO.
I know the socialistic view of the world is all fine and good for freeware and shareware sites, but it's a bit much to ask Apple to be responsible for the raft of inevitable class-action lawsuits that would stem from the use of a 'sleeper' app downloaded to your iPhone that could potentially destroy your hard won consumer loyalty.
I'm sure the open source community, as well as those of us who benefit from their work (which, by the way, includes all of us who run OS X) appreciates your constructive rant.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it. In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it. In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
What are the freetards gonna do, sue?
When phones running Android come out at the end of the year, this restriction will give people a real reason to switch. Developers will like using the system, because it's truly open and they can do what they like, and most stuff will be given away for free.
What Apple is doing with this store is only stiffling development, and if most stuff is going cost money, then this idea is doomed to fail.
WTH is a grote?
Ok I didn't spell it the right way, I meant to say Groat. A unit of money - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groat
I know it as a slang word for money, 5 groats or whatever. A generic word for a currency.
We know the platform will likely be a success with an addressable market in the tens of millions at the very least (and that's just to start with). Apple should be advising the developers to control their greed a little bit and think of how much money they will make even at $.99 an app, not encouraging higher prices.
I saw nothing about encouraging higher prices, Apple was encouraging developers to charge vs give away free. Don't assume more than what's written in the article.
There is nothing wrong with giving away apps free. There is also nothing wrong with Apple encouraging developers to put a price (be it small or large) on their apps when those apps are made for the iPhone and using Apple's distribution system.
MacOS X is BASED on open source with open source components, it is not all open source and you do have to PAY for it.
That's true, but the point of the person you replied to was that we all benefit, especially as it improves interoperability.
In fact there were alot of open source people who weren't happy with Apple making money off of open source software.
Those people just have to deal with it. If the projects didn't want a company to take it and make money from it, those projects should have chosen a different license. There's no shortage of open source licenses, so if the project has a particular kind of agenda on how the software can be used, they can pick a license style that fits their agenda.
Then don't.... but don't be so petulant about it. It makes you seem childish.
He isn't. What it is is fact. Apple promised it, there is the contract and that's his statement about the whole affair. It also doesn't matter if he lives at home on his parent's dime and wants to offer free apps. That's his prerogative and he shouldn't give a F what anybody else says.
If Apple refuses to sell free apps in the future then these apps can be hosted at MacUpdate where many awesome free apps live. We certainly don't need Apple / iTunes to install these apps.
Now, I am not going to any more.
I do buy software but not like this.
He isn't. What it is is fact. Apple promised it, there is the contract and that's his statement about the whole affair. It also doesn't matter if he lives at home on his parent's dime and wants to offer free apps. That's his prerogative and he shouldn't give a F what anybody else says.
If Apple refuses to sell free apps in the future then these apps can be hosted at MacUpdate where many awesome free apps live. We certainly don't need Apple / iTunes to install these apps.
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more.
I do buy software but not like this.
LOL! I wouldn't base my buying decisions on anything said on these boards.
I don't think it's a problem as so long as Apple keeps updating and adding applications to what is already on the phones. For example, I hope Apple comes up with a good to-do-list that would be part of the next update.
Some pre-advertising:
http://webis.net/newsletter/imgOther/iPhonePI.png
iPhone - Pocket Informant 1.0 coming second half of 2008
Designed for the iPhone and takes advantage of the unique iPhone Touch interface
Full Calendar: Agenda, Day, Week, Month
Month and Week View with timebars
Task Groups and Priorities
Full Contacts Integration
Search Calendar, Tasks, Contacts
Over-the-air synching to your Mac or PC
You may say that the built in Calendar on the iPhone is good enough. For some sure, but really its pretty weak. I hope to be able to show some nice screenshots of where we're at next week.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more.
I do buy software but not like this.
Like what? You can get software for free or buy it. Apple is simply encouraging developers to charge for their work. Apple isn't forcing them to. Its just a nice email saying "Hey, sounds good - have you thought about charging for the app instead to give it more value?". And that makes sense - if Apple pays for distribution they would prefer to get paid for it.
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
That's right so upload away!
p.s. verbal contracts CAN be binding
I was already under the assumption that most of the apps would cost money anyways...
What's a good free app? the AIM client?
Games and everything will of course cost money.
I would be shocked if a high quantity of solid apps come out as free.
The OrbLive TV client is a great free app.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more.
I do buy software but not like this.
LOL That's one down out of 6.5 billion.
I was planning to buy the iPhone as soon as it comes out in 3G.
Now, I am not going to any more. I do buy software but not like this.
This wasn't a secret. Apple made this clear in February. Their public reasoning makes sense, even if I might disagree with their decision and whatever their unstated reasons might be.
Developers do seem to be treated pretty fairly, and I think the split is reasonable too. If the iTunes model is any indication, use and purchasing should be as painless as you can get.
I am quite offended.
No! I am not living on my parents dime. I get no support from them.
I am a college student doing a double degree (which means practically double the work) as well as working 30 hours a week to support myself.
My apps are free because they will be Christianity related and I don't believe that anyone should be charged to get a bible in the medium they want.
Stop making assumptions.
"I am hurting the development community as a whole."
How? By stopping people having to pay for a resource I see should be free?
I welcome that hurt.
And my program will not be garbage thank you! It is already a long way into development, and looking great.
Really, what are you majors? "Superstitious Cults of the Last 2000 Years" and "Indoctronation Jesus Style"?
This explains why you're offended by pretty much every reply to your posts.
That is WRITING.
I have the contract on my Mac just by my side so i know my rights and responsibilities with this.