We have decided to drop the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for released iPhone software.
What's this distinction? If you haven't released a code snippet on the App Store, is it under a NDA then? That would mean a continuation of no books, not much discussion of anything except between seasoned Apple devs (who, incidentally, have a lot to lose so are likely to avoid angering Apple).
Of course one can simply discuss everything anonymously, NDA or no...
To answer my own question... it looks like to compile and run an iPhone application on an actual iPhone (as opposed to the simulator) you have to pony up the $99 to Apple. Bummer.
What's this distinction? If you haven't released a code snippet on the App Store, is it under a NDA then? That would mean a continuation of no books, not much discussion of anything except between seasoned Apple devs (who, incidentally, have a lot to lose so are likely to avoid angering Apple).
Of course one can simply discuss everything anonymously, NDA or no...
All non-released software is under NDA. Thats why I'm under NDA when I beta Photoshop. Once they release the software, I can say what I want (within reason).
Companies don't want testers, or developers, talking about bugs, features that may not be in the final version, or features that were mentioned in public that have not yet made it into the software.
Apple isn't concerned with DEVELOPERS code. just how that code can tell those competitors how APPLE'S code works, etc.
It was surprising that Apple didn't lift the NDA once 2.0 went public. But, now it will be under more normal NDA restrictions.
I disagree, the NDA prohibited anyone from posting iPhone source code online since doing so would reveal parts of the iPhone SDK API to people not under NDA. If example code can now be posted online or in books, then I see no reason why code for a full application can't be posted.
Sorry, I didn't clarify. Yes, you can now release your source code. (Although WordPress did from the start, even though they shouldn't have)
But people can not download it and install it on their iPhone, unless they are also a developer because they need provisioning profiles keyed to their device, which they (or someone) needs to be a registered developer to do. But I believe this was legal before, since both parties were under Apple's NDA. You just couldn't publicly post the code.
So, from the perspective of helping other developers, this is very good. But it doesn't allow you to give away your app to regular users without going through the App store.
Sorry, I didn't clarify. Yes, you can now release your source code. (Although WordPress did from the start, even though they shouldn't have)
But people can not download it and install it on their iPhone, unless they are also a developer because they need provisioning profiles keyed to their device, which they (or someone) needs to be a registered developer to do. But I believe this was legal before, since both parties were under Apple's NDA. You just couldn't publicly post the code.
So, from the perspective of helping other developers, this is very good. But it doesn't allow you to give away your app to regular users without going through the App store.
Yes, the benefit here is solely to developers, first hand at least.
The thing is, though, this will also produce applications that:
a) Don't crash - developers can now confer and help each other in overcoming this.
b) have more depth - applications get more complex and better built as developers can now talk openly about API's and how to use them.
c) faster - finding less processor intensive ways to do things benefits the entire developer community, and thus users, as they cause better battery life and also a "snappier" (lol) user experience.
c) are generally better - getting other developers views and suggestions will create far better programs all-round.
To answer my own question... it looks like to compile and run an iPhone application on an actual iPhone (as opposed to the simulator) you have to pony up the $99 to Apple. Bummer.
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
I can't disagree with your assesment that you can easily make the money back. The $100 can almost be covered by accident. But that is all after the fact. $100 is a lot of money if you are trying to startup a ligit business on a shoe string.
The thing is you have filling fees, lawyer fees and insurance to look at and deal with before that first sale is made. You can be out of a lot of money before success on the app store pays off. Plus you have to realize that half of whatever you make will go to taxes.
I've been looking into the possibility of starting a business specifically to market apps on app store. As such I've been learning a bit about the whole process of getting a business going and this got involved in a program offered by SCORE. In four nights they threw a lot of info at us that I thought was very useful. As such I'd reccomend that anybody thinking about app store get into touch with the local SBA and get all the info you can.
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
The point is to be able to write and release for others programs that Apple won't let in the App Store (for example, tethering, or a podcast utility, or an email client, or a unix shell, or a flash player, or a java client...).
It's not clear to me if the removal of the NDA now makes it possible to sell GPL applications in the App Store. Does it fulfill the terms of the license if you provide your source code but other people can't compile it without paying Apple? It seems against the spirit of the license, if not the letter.
There was a couple of Apple-apologists saying the iPhone NDA was a good thing here last week? What do you say now? Now that Apple agrees is wasn't good, do you still think it's a good thing? Think for yourselves guys, please.
$100 is a lot of money if you are trying to startup a ligit business on a shoe string.
If you want the business to be truly legitimate you're going to have to spend 5X that to register the business name and incorporate the company. Sure it would be better if it was free, but it's Apple, you only get stuff for free in your dreams with Apple
It's not clear to me if the removal of the NDA now makes it possible to sell GPL applications in the App Store. Does it fulfill the terms of the license if you provide your source code but other people can't compile it without paying Apple? It seems against the spirit of the license, if not the letter.
Other people can compile and run it - but only on the simulator.
People have to pay $99 to deploy to a physical device. Personally, it'd almost be worth paying the $99 to have access to all the apps that people will be releasing source code for. Think of it as a flat fee to bypass the App Store.
I could see developers releasing source code for people to download, build, and deploy themselves, and also submit binary only versions to the App Store.
Other people can compile and run it - but only on the simulator.
People have to pay $99 to deploy to a physical device. Personally, it'd almost be worth paying the $99 to have access to all the apps that people will be releasing source code for. Think of it as a flat fee to bypass the App Store.
I could see developers releasing source code for people to download, build, and deploy themselves, and also submit binary only versions to the App Store.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
Someone can make apps for regular computers on any currently supported computer platform at no cost other than download and learning. Whether there will be enough open source apps to make it worthwhile, I don't know. Right now, I've only bought one app, the only kind of third party app that I wanted on my Palms, though the one I used for Palm was free. It's too bad there wasn't a good Palm OS smartphone. Even if the UI has a bit of a dated look, my Zodiac was always snappy and ran without hesitation.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
$99 for a hobby is real cheap. Who doesn't spend more than $99 on a hobby over time? If you knew how much I've spent on my fish this year, you wouldn't even mention the $99.
$99 for a hobby is real cheap. Who doesn't spend more than $99 on a hobby over time? If you knew how much I've spent on my fish this year, you wouldn't even mention the $99.
As I said: "It depends on the person". Some people can buy and fly airplanes as a hobby, others, not so much.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
Someone can make apps for regular computers on any currently supported computer platform at no cost other than download and learning. Whether there will be enough open source apps to make it worthwhile, I don't know. Right now, I've only bought one app, the only kind of third party app that I wanted on my Palms, though the one I used for Palm was free. It's too bad there wasn't a good Palm OS smartphone. Even if the UI has a bit of a dated look, my Zodiac was always snappy and ran without hesitation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
As I said: "It depends on the person". Some people can buy and fly airplanes as a hobby, others, not so much.
According to most of the posts here, it seems only a few knew what the NDA did, my understanding was this:
The NDA prevented iPhone app developers share solutions and ideas amongst each other. So if you were an iPhone app developer you couldn't go on a forum and discuss 'the best way to do such and such...' or if someone wanted to ask questions on how someone accomplished a certain task, according to the NDA that would've been 'illegal'.
A useless thing really, it kinda prevented iPhone apps from evolving leaving each app in its own vacuum further adding fire to the rumors that the iPhone is unstable.
According to most of the posts here, it seems only a few knew what the NDA did, my understanding was this:
The NDA prevented iPhone app developers share solutions and ideas amongst each other. So if you were an iPhone app developer you couldn't go on a forum and discuss 'the best way to do such and such...' or if someone wanted to ask questions on how someone accomplished a certain task, according to the NDA that would've been 'illegal'.
A useless thing really, it kinda prevented iPhone apps from evolving leaving each app in its own vacuum further adding fire to the rumors that the iPhone is unstable.
I thought part of the idea was supposed to be that Apple didn't want entire books and lots of web posts discussing code for beta APIs that might get significant changes. The books I can understand, though it seems that someone that can program can pay attention to date stamps on forum posts and such.
Comments
We have decided to drop the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for released iPhone software.
What's this distinction? If you haven't released a code snippet on the App Store, is it under a NDA then? That would mean a continuation of no books, not much discussion of anything except between seasoned Apple devs (who, incidentally, have a lot to lose so are likely to avoid angering Apple).
Of course one can simply discuss everything anonymously, NDA or no...
Huh? Not talking about the OS source code. Talking about application source code.
Since SDK 2.1 is relatively recent, it's hard for me to believe that interesting and useful applications (like tethering) can't be developed using it.
Yeah, thats what i meant.
What's this distinction? If you haven't released a code snippet on the App Store, is it under a NDA then? That would mean a continuation of no books, not much discussion of anything except between seasoned Apple devs (who, incidentally, have a lot to lose so are likely to avoid angering Apple).
Of course one can simply discuss everything anonymously, NDA or no...
All non-released software is under NDA. Thats why I'm under NDA when I beta Photoshop. Once they release the software, I can say what I want (within reason).
Companies don't want testers, or developers, talking about bugs, features that may not be in the final version, or features that were mentioned in public that have not yet made it into the software.
Apple isn't concerned with DEVELOPERS code. just how that code can tell those competitors how APPLE'S code works, etc.
It was surprising that Apple didn't lift the NDA once 2.0 went public. But, now it will be under more normal NDA restrictions.
I disagree, the NDA prohibited anyone from posting iPhone source code online since doing so would reveal parts of the iPhone SDK API to people not under NDA. If example code can now be posted online or in books, then I see no reason why code for a full application can't be posted.
Sorry, I didn't clarify. Yes, you can now release your source code. (Although WordPress did from the start, even though they shouldn't have)
But people can not download it and install it on their iPhone, unless they are also a developer because they need provisioning profiles keyed to their device, which they (or someone) needs to be a registered developer to do. But I believe this was legal before, since both parties were under Apple's NDA. You just couldn't publicly post the code.
So, from the perspective of helping other developers, this is very good. But it doesn't allow you to give away your app to regular users without going through the App store.
Sorry, I didn't clarify. Yes, you can now release your source code. (Although WordPress did from the start, even though they shouldn't have)
But people can not download it and install it on their iPhone, unless they are also a developer because they need provisioning profiles keyed to their device, which they (or someone) needs to be a registered developer to do. But I believe this was legal before, since both parties were under Apple's NDA. You just couldn't publicly post the code.
So, from the perspective of helping other developers, this is very good. But it doesn't allow you to give away your app to regular users without going through the App store.
Yes, the benefit here is solely to developers, first hand at least.
The thing is, though, this will also produce applications that:
a) Don't crash - developers can now confer and help each other in overcoming this.
b) have more depth - applications get more complex and better built as developers can now talk openly about API's and how to use them.
c) faster - finding less processor intensive ways to do things benefits the entire developer community, and thus users, as they cause better battery life and also a "snappier" (lol) user experience.
c) are generally better - getting other developers views and suggestions will create far better programs all-round.
To answer my own question... it looks like to compile and run an iPhone application on an actual iPhone (as opposed to the simulator) you have to pony up the $99 to Apple. Bummer.
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
I can't disagree with your assesment that you can easily make the money back. The $100 can almost be covered by accident. But that is all after the fact. $100 is a lot of money if you are trying to startup a ligit business on a shoe string.
The thing is you have filling fees, lawyer fees and insurance to look at and deal with before that first sale is made. You can be out of a lot of money before success on the app store pays off. Plus you have to realize that half of whatever you make will go to taxes.
I've been looking into the possibility of starting a business specifically to market apps on app store. As such I've been learning a bit about the whole process of getting a business going and this got involved in a program offered by SCORE. In four nights they threw a lot of info at us that I thought was very useful. As such I'd reccomend that anybody thinking about app store get into touch with the local SBA and get all the info you can.
Dave
One hundred dollars is a big deal for you? I'd say it's one of the best deals going. If you have a solid app to offer and if you stand behind it with some kind of customer service with regular updates, you'll make your $100 back and then some.
The point is to be able to write and release for others programs that Apple won't let in the App Store (for example, tethering, or a podcast utility, or an email client, or a unix shell, or a flash player, or a java client...).
It's not clear to me if the removal of the NDA now makes it possible to sell GPL applications in the App Store. Does it fulfill the terms of the license if you provide your source code but other people can't compile it without paying Apple? It seems against the spirit of the license, if not the letter.
The thing is there is a lot of strangeness in the SDK and frankly talking to others that have been down the same road just makes for less frustration.
Dave
$100 is a lot of money if you are trying to startup a ligit business on a shoe string.
If you want the business to be truly legitimate you're going to have to spend 5X that to register the business name and incorporate the company. Sure it would be better if it was free, but it's Apple, you only get stuff for free in your dreams with Apple
It's not clear to me if the removal of the NDA now makes it possible to sell GPL applications in the App Store. Does it fulfill the terms of the license if you provide your source code but other people can't compile it without paying Apple? It seems against the spirit of the license, if not the letter.
Other people can compile and run it - but only on the simulator.
People have to pay $99 to deploy to a physical device. Personally, it'd almost be worth paying the $99 to have access to all the apps that people will be releasing source code for. Think of it as a flat fee to bypass the App Store.
I could see developers releasing source code for people to download, build, and deploy themselves, and also submit binary only versions to the App Store.
- Jasen.
Other people can compile and run it - but only on the simulator.
People have to pay $99 to deploy to a physical device. Personally, it'd almost be worth paying the $99 to have access to all the apps that people will be releasing source code for. Think of it as a flat fee to bypass the App Store.
I could see developers releasing source code for people to download, build, and deploy themselves, and also submit binary only versions to the App Store.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
Someone can make apps for regular computers on any currently supported computer platform at no cost other than download and learning. Whether there will be enough open source apps to make it worthwhile, I don't know. Right now, I've only bought one app, the only kind of third party app that I wanted on my Palms, though the one I used for Palm was free. It's too bad there wasn't a good Palm OS smartphone. Even if the UI has a bit of a dated look, my Zodiac was always snappy and ran without hesitation.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
$99 for a hobby is real cheap. Who doesn't spend more than $99 on a hobby over time? If you knew how much I've spent on my fish this year, you wouldn't even mention the $99.
$99 for a hobby is real cheap. Who doesn't spend more than $99 on a hobby over time? If you knew how much I've spent on my fish this year, you wouldn't even mention the $99.
As I said: "It depends on the person". Some people can buy and fly airplanes as a hobby, others, not so much.
Well, I suppose compared to other systems, it can be cheap. It's cheap compared to trying to make a business out of it, but maybe not so much as a hobby. It depends on the person, some people spend every spare cent on a hobby, others spend much less.
Someone can make apps for regular computers on any currently supported computer platform at no cost other than download and learning. Whether there will be enough open source apps to make it worthwhile, I don't know. Right now, I've only bought one app, the only kind of third party app that I wanted on my Palms, though the one I used for Palm was free. It's too bad there wasn't a good Palm OS smartphone. Even if the UI has a bit of a dated look, my Zodiac was always snappy and ran without hesitation.
As I said: "It depends on the person". Some people can buy and fly airplanes as a hobby, others, not so much.
Still, $99 for a bobby is, er, fish food.
The NDA prevented iPhone app developers share solutions and ideas amongst each other. So if you were an iPhone app developer you couldn't go on a forum and discuss 'the best way to do such and such...' or if someone wanted to ask questions on how someone accomplished a certain task, according to the NDA that would've been 'illegal'.
A useless thing really, it kinda prevented iPhone apps from evolving leaving each app in its own vacuum further adding fire to the rumors that the iPhone is unstable.
Still, $99 for a bobby is, er, fish food.
What's with the double quoting, anyway?
According to most of the posts here, it seems only a few knew what the NDA did, my understanding was this:
The NDA prevented iPhone app developers share solutions and ideas amongst each other. So if you were an iPhone app developer you couldn't go on a forum and discuss 'the best way to do such and such...' or if someone wanted to ask questions on how someone accomplished a certain task, according to the NDA that would've been 'illegal'.
A useless thing really, it kinda prevented iPhone apps from evolving leaving each app in its own vacuum further adding fire to the rumors that the iPhone is unstable.
I thought part of the idea was supposed to be that Apple didn't want entire books and lots of web posts discussing code for beta APIs that might get significant changes. The books I can understand, though it seems that someone that can program can pay attention to date stamps on forum posts and such.