People should compare it with other revenue share from other mobile phone platforms (not how much from mac distributions or pc distributions). Developers who have their apps on the Nokia Content Discoverer deck, Qualcomm BREW deck, DoCoMo imode deck gets pay more money than Apple's revenue share agreement.
Upfront costs may be higher on the other platforms in terms of certification, but the developers get a more on the revenue share.
What is the break-even point? Don't they certify apps on a per-device basis or does one BREW / iMode / etc. certification cover the entire class of devices?
What is the break-even point? Don't they certify apps on a per-device basis or does one BREW / iMode / etc. certification cover the entire class of devices?
Depends, sometimes it's per device (especially games where you are really relying on individual phone model's hardware) and sometimes the carriers require additional certification beyond what deck requires.
But you are also exposing yourself to a much higher customer base.
When Apple mentioned that they are licensing Microsoft's ActiveSync technology, a couple of questions came to mind:
1) Who ported ActiveSync to Mac OS X (or to the iPhone OS)? Did the Microsoft Mac BU do the port? Did Apple? I would be surprsied if Microsoft actually revealed the source code as part of the licensing agreement.
2) Does the licensing agreement only apply to the iPhone, or will we see an upgrade to Mail.app on Macs that will add Exchange connectivity?
They (Microsoft) didn't necessarily have to share any source code with Apple to make ActiveSync work.
ActiveSync really just amounts to a communication protocol between Exchange Server and a remote device. Microsoft's own code stays safely encapsulated within the Exchange Server, communicating with the outside world through some channel - be it IP, SMS, or something else.
All Apple would need would be an agreement granting them access to a spec sheet documenting the data structures and communication protocol for the data flowing through that channel, and a license to use any trade secrets or patents required to make it all work.
They (Microsoft) didn't necessarily have to share any source code with Apple to make ActiveSync work.
ActiveSync really just amounts to a communication protocol between Exchange Server and a remote device. Microsoft's own code stays safely encapsulated within the Exchange Server, communicating with the outside world through some channel - be it IP, SMS, or something else.
All Apple would need would be an agreement granting them access to a spec sheet documenting the data structures and communication protocol for the data flowing through that channel, and a license to use any trade secrets or patents required to make it all work.
Thanks for the explanation. I just hope Exchange support comes to Mac OS X Mail program.
Thanks for the explanation. I just hope Exchange support comes to Mac OS X Mail program.
I had been wondering about Exchange support in desktop OS X as well. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before now (why didn't I mention it?). It wouldn't be just Mail in OS X, it would also be Address Book and iCal that would work with Exchange.
Communications protocols are one of the things covered by the EU's case against Microsoft. The EU forced Microsoft to reveal their protocols to third parties in a ruling in 2004 (in relation to anti-trust monopoly abuse), and Microsoft dragged their heals and delivered such piss-poor documentation that they were fined even more money recently.
I had been wondering about Exchange support in desktop OS X as well. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before now (why didn't I mention it?). It wouldn't be just Mail in OS X, it would also be Address Book and iCal that would work with Exchange.
Communications protocols are one of the things covered by the EU's case against Microsoft. The EU forced Microsoft to reveal their protocols to third parties in a ruling in 2004 (in relations to anti-trust monopoly abuse), and Microsoft dragged their heals and delivered such piss-poor documentation that they were fined even more money recently.
That would be great if Exchange support was system-wide, so that other apps, like maybe Microsoft Entourage LOL, could support Exchange fully (I don't use Entourage, but understand that Exchange support isn't 100%).
Also, I wonder how much it costs to license ActiveSync.
Comments
People should compare it with other revenue share from other mobile phone platforms (not how much from mac distributions or pc distributions). Developers who have their apps on the Nokia Content Discoverer deck, Qualcomm BREW deck, DoCoMo imode deck gets pay more money than Apple's revenue share agreement.
Upfront costs may be higher on the other platforms in terms of certification, but the developers get a more on the revenue share.
What is the break-even point? Don't they certify apps on a per-device basis or does one BREW / iMode / etc. certification cover the entire class of devices?
What is the break-even point? Don't they certify apps on a per-device basis or does one BREW / iMode / etc. certification cover the entire class of devices?
Depends, sometimes it's per device (especially games where you are really relying on individual phone model's hardware) and sometimes the carriers require additional certification beyond what deck requires.
But you are also exposing yourself to a much higher customer base.
When Apple mentioned that they are licensing Microsoft's ActiveSync technology, a couple of questions came to mind:
1) Who ported ActiveSync to Mac OS X (or to the iPhone OS)? Did the Microsoft Mac BU do the port? Did Apple? I would be surprsied if Microsoft actually revealed the source code as part of the licensing agreement.
2) Does the licensing agreement only apply to the iPhone, or will we see an upgrade to Mail.app on Macs that will add Exchange connectivity?
They (Microsoft) didn't necessarily have to share any source code with Apple to make ActiveSync work.
ActiveSync really just amounts to a communication protocol between Exchange Server and a remote device. Microsoft's own code stays safely encapsulated within the Exchange Server, communicating with the outside world through some channel - be it IP, SMS, or something else.
All Apple would need would be an agreement granting them access to a spec sheet documenting the data structures and communication protocol for the data flowing through that channel, and a license to use any trade secrets or patents required to make it all work.
They (Microsoft) didn't necessarily have to share any source code with Apple to make ActiveSync work.
ActiveSync really just amounts to a communication protocol between Exchange Server and a remote device. Microsoft's own code stays safely encapsulated within the Exchange Server, communicating with the outside world through some channel - be it IP, SMS, or something else.
All Apple would need would be an agreement granting them access to a spec sheet documenting the data structures and communication protocol for the data flowing through that channel, and a license to use any trade secrets or patents required to make it all work.
Thanks for the explanation. I just hope Exchange support comes to Mac OS X Mail program.
Thanks for the explanation. I just hope Exchange support comes to Mac OS X Mail program.
I had been wondering about Exchange support in desktop OS X as well. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before now (why didn't I mention it?). It wouldn't be just Mail in OS X, it would also be Address Book and iCal that would work with Exchange.
Communications protocols are one of the things covered by the EU's case against Microsoft. The EU forced Microsoft to reveal their protocols to third parties in a ruling in 2004 (in relation to anti-trust monopoly abuse), and Microsoft dragged their heals and delivered such piss-poor documentation that they were fined even more money recently.
I had been wondering about Exchange support in desktop OS X as well. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned before now (why didn't I mention it?). It wouldn't be just Mail in OS X, it would also be Address Book and iCal that would work with Exchange.
Communications protocols are one of the things covered by the EU's case against Microsoft. The EU forced Microsoft to reveal their protocols to third parties in a ruling in 2004 (in relations to anti-trust monopoly abuse), and Microsoft dragged their heals and delivered such piss-poor documentation that they were fined even more money recently.
That would be great if Exchange support was system-wide, so that other apps, like maybe Microsoft Entourage LOL, could support Exchange fully (I don't use Entourage, but understand that Exchange support isn't 100%).
Also, I wonder how much it costs to license ActiveSync.