Leak: third-party iPhone apps to be issued through iTunes Store
Now working alongside Apple, Tiny Code, a onetime repository for fixes and updates to some unauthorized third-party iPhone applications, briefly leaked some information this week on the handset maker's plans for distributing authorized applications via its website.
Chief among the revelations was that Apple will apparently manage and distribute software for the iPhone and iPod touch written using its upcoming Software Developers Kit (SDK) through its ubiquitous iTunes Store.
"Tiny Code no longer produces fixes or applications for firmware 1.1.3. We can't say much, but we are working with Apple and with their SDK for the next firmware release and SDK applications and we shouldn't be missed for long," the developer wrote in a message on its website that has since been remove. "We will no longer update our Installer.app repo for legality reasons and you should see us soon on iTunes."
In a sidebar item also since removed from the site, Tiny Code also wrote "Now targeting fw 1.1.4 alpha 2," implying that applications written using the iPhone SDK will only function on iPhones running the still unreleased iPhone software version 1.1.4.
While announcing Apple's formal intent to offer an official SDK for the iPhone and iPod touch last October, company chief executive Steve Jobs also hinted that his firm was taking extra precautions to develop a distribution system that would protect users from viruses, malware, and privacy attacks -- one that many have long speculated would involve the iTunes Store in some fashion.
"While this makes such a phone less than 'totally open,' we believe it is a step in the right direction," he wrote. "We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone?s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs."
Chief among the revelations was that Apple will apparently manage and distribute software for the iPhone and iPod touch written using its upcoming Software Developers Kit (SDK) through its ubiquitous iTunes Store.
"Tiny Code no longer produces fixes or applications for firmware 1.1.3. We can't say much, but we are working with Apple and with their SDK for the next firmware release and SDK applications and we shouldn't be missed for long," the developer wrote in a message on its website that has since been remove. "We will no longer update our Installer.app repo for legality reasons and you should see us soon on iTunes."
In a sidebar item also since removed from the site, Tiny Code also wrote "Now targeting fw 1.1.4 alpha 2," implying that applications written using the iPhone SDK will only function on iPhones running the still unreleased iPhone software version 1.1.4.
While announcing Apple's formal intent to offer an official SDK for the iPhone and iPod touch last October, company chief executive Steve Jobs also hinted that his firm was taking extra precautions to develop a distribution system that would protect users from viruses, malware, and privacy attacks -- one that many have long speculated would involve the iTunes Store in some fashion.
"While this makes such a phone less than 'totally open,' we believe it is a step in the right direction," he wrote. "We are working on an advanced system which will offer developers broad access to natively program the iPhone?s amazing software platform while at the same time protecting users from malicious programs."
Comments
It was made pretty clear at MacWorld that Apple would be handling this.
You call that a leak? I'm not exactly shocked that 3rd party apps are going to be available through itunes. But since its not official yet I guess I will pretend I'm actually surprised and shocked by this.
"What...oh, ALIEN BABY!? THAT IS SHOCKING...I...I AM SHOCKED! SHOCKED!"
-Andy the Bomb
Seriously, can I get an "effing duh?" Of course it was going to be through the iTunes store. How else was it going to work?
Leak? Wait. Didn't you guys attend MacWorld this year?
It was made pretty clear at MacWorld that Apple would be handling this.
100% agreed! Common knowledge at the very least. So much for breaking news.
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.
Obviously you never heard of Symbian OS.
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.
I totally agree. Furthermore, the non-geek iPhone owners I know don't really even care (or necessarily want) third-party apps because they are afraid it will make the phone too complicated or something will stop working right as a result of it. I think third-party apps are ESSENTIAL, but it's a good idea to have some control over it.
The only problem I see is that Apple might make it so that there is no such thing as freeware or shareware on the iPhone. If you have to pay for everything you download, that would really suck. You at least need to be able to install a demo first and check it out before buying. If that happened, AppTap would still reign. No doubt there will be pirating on the iPhone no matter what.
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.
The easy way to handle that is to not add anything. There you go, you can pretend you have a closed phone.
Leak? Wait. Didn't you guys attend MacWorld this year?
It was made pretty clear at MacWorld that Apple would be handling this.
Where was this made clear? I just don't remember anything like that.
-
Friggin hell AppleInsider, i was the one that found out about this first and told you about this in an email and i posted about it in the forums this morning yet you don't even mention my name like MR did.
[sarcasm]Thanks.[/sarcasm]
BTW, i've got a screenshot of the site without a friggin AppleInsider logo on it if anyone wants one, i don't know why somebody would want one...its just my act of defiance
It's possible that AI procured this from a different source and hasn't gotten around to even reading your submission yet.
I do your see name on the MR sites as the submitter with their noon EST posting. If it helps, I give you mad props, kudos, and will name my first born iPhelim (is that pronounced phlegm?), much to the chagrin of my wife.
Umm, now which software company does that remind me of
Friggin hell AppleInsider, i was the one that found out about this first and told you about this in an email and i posted about it in the forums this morning yet you don't even mention my name like MR did.
[sarcasm]Thanks.[/sarcasm]
BTW, i've got a screenshot of the site without a friggin AppleInsider logo on it if anyone wants one, i don't know why somebody would want one...its just my act of defiance
The paperwork for your MBE has been submitted.
The easy way to handle that is to not add anything. There you go, you can pretend you have a closed phone.
my guess is that he'd like to have *some* apps. just with less risk of viruses.
Also, while I can see that it is important to make sure that people's phones are free from malware, and I can see why Apple doesn't want people doing an end run around ATT, I don't see any argument for not letting people freely install whatever they want on an iPod Touch.
"While this makes such a phone less than 'totally open,' we believe it is a step in the right direction,"
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Translation:
We wanted a totally open iphone but instead we sold out once apple showed us the money
The problem I have with Apple controlling what software can be put on a device is that I want to write my own software. Right now I am a ADC online member, but if every online member could write their own applications than the system would be totally open. Therefore, I conclude that Apple is going to start charging me and/or hassling me for writing my own software.
Also, while I can see that it is important to make sure that people's phones are free from malware, and I can see why Apple doesn't want people doing an end run around ATT, I don't see any argument for not letting people freely install whatever they want on an iPod Touch.
I was assuming that Apple would be taking a cut of whatever the charge for the software is going to be and the rest would go for the coder. Sorta like the model most game console makers use. But what if the coder wants to give their app away for free? It probably still has to get signed by Apple. I guess we will all find out for sure on the 26th.