Report: Apple to retain tight control over iPhone apps
Updated at 3:40pm PT after coming across another report.
The latest report on the proposed iPhone software development kit would suggest that Apple is planning a restrictive policy for application development.
iLounge reported Friday that the iPhone SDK will come along with restrictions on what kinds of iPhone and iPod Touch applications can be developed, where they can be sold, and what types of peripheral devices they can access. While not a shock, if true that type of policy will not please software developers who were hoping for more open access to the iPhone.
If true, Apple's iPhone application policy isn't going to please the development community.
(Credit: CNET Networks)The specifics? Apple would apparently mandate that all iPhone or iPod Touch applications be sold through the iTunes Store. That's not too surprising, since the iTunes software is the primary vehicle for getting software updates and contacts onto or off of the iPhone. And the visibility of the iTunes Store would be a boon to smaller developers trying to get noticed.
Secondly, the report says Apple will deny developers access to the iPhone or iPod Touch dock, meaning their software would be unable to talk to third-party peripherals like keyboards or audio equipment. The applications could use the basic functions of the iPhone, such as the phone, Wi-Fi, and camera, according to the report, but that keeps developers inside a relatively small box.
The detail that will generate the most angst and frustration, however, would be Apple's apparent plan to serve as the clearing house for all proposed applications. The company would retain veto power over the number and types of applications that could be installed on an iPhone, meaning no application could be officially released without a thumbs-up from an Apple committee or executive.
If true, this policy would fall heavily to the "restrictive" side of the application-development spectrum outlined we outlined earlier this week. Apple plans to reveal the actual details at an event in Cupertino next Thursday.
UPDATED 3:40pm - Electronista is now reporting that the restrictions might only apply to paid applications, and that free applications destined for the iPhone or the iPod Touch would not be subject to the same kinds of limits. This would be very helpful for extremely small developers or homegrown application development inside companies, but would still mean Apple plans to control the marketplace for iPhone applications.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom.
bed these days, not Apple. In fact, Apple is able to deliver a more integrated, less problematic experience because they've been a bit
more restrictive over the years.
The 'closed' iPhone is already outselling devices with Windows
Mobile. Many third party apps have already been written for
jailbroken iPhones. The Windows platform is plagued with security
problems. What does that tell you about Apple's restrictive software
policies?
I think some restrictions allow delivery of better products in the
end.
other phones out there and you know it. we all know it. it's not
going anywhere. they already set the bar and since most companies
have ZERO vision, they'll be shooting for this phone while Apple
keeps on moving the bar higher.
you should reassess your views there, sparky.
thought of what it might be. We bought it because it's a damned
good product. They'll work out the third party issues and it'll
become a better product. Right now, it blows all others away
without any third party developers.
Heck even if Apple detects a non-Apple approved application / data on your phone, they can decide to brick you phone. They've already done it once and now they have a business justification for it too.
I don't know- this may be a bit too controlling even for Apple.
Only time will tell.
hard to beat given the popularity of the iPhone and iPod.
The idea behind Apple's media platform is to have a/v content
available almost anywhere. Video, music, photos and
communication across various devices.
Examples:
I can download and watch movie or TV show on my HDTV via
Apple TV. I can then move that movie to my computer, iPhone
and/or iPod and continue watching wherever I go. It will even
remember where I stopped the movie prior to transfer and pick
up playing from that point. I'm sure it won't be long before LCD
screens in cars integrate with iPhones/iPods for video playback.
I can listen to my entire music library via my Bose speakers
connected to my Mac. I can access all that content via my HDTV
with Apple TV. I can also stream the music to my Pioneer stereo
system via AirTunes and an Airpot express. Any of it can be
transferred to a laptop, iPhone and/or iPod. Many cars already
support iPod for music playback.
I can upload my photos via iPhoto to my .Mac account then share
with friends and family. The photos will be available to view via a
Mac or Windows computer, an Apple TV, iPhone and/or iPod. Each
device will display the images in a manner that best suits the
device.
Could Apple do something like this with games?! Download and
play a game via my Apple TV then move it to an iPhone or iPod for
continued play?? Not sure... we'll see how it pans out.
Bottom line... Apple is currently far ahead of the competition
when it comes to digital media. They continue to develop their
'platform' with the iPhone, iPod, Apple TV and Mac computer
functioning as content access points.
Sorry, but you just proved that the people who edit this site don't
know the meaning of the word news. I learned in Journalism 101
that this kind of reporting is not only unethical, but bad for
business.
still ensure some level of security, you would have come up with
the points made in the article.
I'm at odds with the article, that paints this as a bad thing.
Personally, I think it's a great, and savvy move. One I anticipated.
You don't even know what the terms are yet.
There are plenty of great software titles from small
developers/hobbiests on the Mac platform. What makes you think
the terms for the iPhone will be so restrictive or costly that those
same type of developers couldn't participate?
I take a lot of pictures with my DSLR. Looking at the images on
the LCD on the back of my 350D is okay, but not that helpful.
To really make the iPhone and iPod Touch really worthwhile,
Apple needs to put a compatible USB port on the things with
software that allows me to plug a CF card reader to it and
download and view all my pictures...
There are dedicated hard drive/LCD screen devices that do this,
but why carry something else when the iPhone/iPod Touch could
do the job. That I know of, there isn't any currently available
Windows mobile device that will do this...
most digital cameras to an iPod with video. Unfortunately they have
not upgraded this device to work with the iPhone or iPod touch.
No need to add a USB port. They just need to update this device
that connects via the port found on all iPods/iPhones.
photos in that. It syncs up with my iPhone just fine, and I have
instant access to thousands of photos. iPhoto is part of the iLife
suite of software that comes standard on all Macs and integrates
seamlessly with each other.
Not saying you should buy a Mac, but.. Oh, wait. That is what I am
saying! ;-)
Now this may mean we'll get lots of great applications that are secure and solid. It also could mean we may not see the huge number of apps available like that of the Palm or Windows platforms where people have the freedom to do what they will with the unit. It's a tradeoff.
I haven't heard of the numbers yet, but I am willing to believe that Apple will be charging fees to have applications distributed through the iTunes store. It's too easy for them to see this as a source of revenue. Will they be charging developers a fee to get their applications listed? Will developers have to pay a subscription fee to keep those apps available or if they drop out, will Apple then remotely remove all applications by that developer? They are within their legal rights to do so. It's a good way to ensure you're taking money from developers and consumers alike.
We'll know more once they officially announce their plans.
or 1,000. But can you say potential millions?
Bottom line, this is a huge step forward, and using iTMS as the
clearing house with via Apples approval process has way too much
upside.
Let's wait for the details shall we?
what Nintendo does with a Wii? No one is complaining about
Wiis; indeed they fly off store shelves with perennial shortages.
There's nothing inherently wrong about controlling the content
that a device will output. It's the Windows babies who constantly
complain about any manufacturer that doesn't allow them to
hobby-hack to their heart's content.
Aside from PCs, no other major category of modifiable devices,
from cars to cellphones, allow the kind of customization that is
demanded by these folks. Well, that's how technology makers
want it, and we all have to live with what they give us.
am willing to believe that Apple will be charging fees to have
applications distributed through the iTunes store. It's too easy
for them to see this as a source of revenue.
Ask yourself how much Apple charges for podcasts like This
American Life, Real Time With Bill Maher, or The Onion, etc.
Oh wait, those are all free. I guess it wasn't easy enough for
Apple to see this as a source of revenue, as Audible.com and
others have.
Sometimes the business model uses the software (iTunes) to sell
the hardware (iPods); bet that Apple will do the same thing with
the iPhone apps.
I have no problem creating applications that are reviewed, and
approved via Apple, then ultimately sold, or given away through the
iTunes store.
Just ship the damn SDK already :-)
There are a lots and lots of apps available for Nokia and Windows Mobile platforms. They work fine too.
I don't see any reason for being control freak (other than a source for making money).
Very monopolistic behavior can be possible with this system. I like to assume companies can be good, but I know I'm 99% wrong.
With this view, I could develop programs that I want to use, but can be forced not to use them.
I also assume Apple will deny any flash/java plug-ins.
I can't get to a small laptop with a phone card fast enough after this contract with sprint ends. Cheaper and better. Monthly anyways.
It's a smart move by Apple, and insures that legitimate applications are operational on the device without interfering with other operations.
Apple has done just about everything right with these devices to satisfy the users, and to hinder the abusers.
Bravo.
What if they say ok x$ is how much you or your users have to pay to apple for getting it through iTunes? This is exactly the kind of monopolistic behavior apple fan boys and the rest have accused MS for doing over the last decade. Apple is exactly the same- no soul, its all about the money isn't it?
but just walk in any store and you find tons of useless apps for
99 cents.
Look to Installer.app for the iPhone/iTouch for example, while
there are some good apps, there are many that are just useless
apps, and themes. Even some people just change the wallpaper
and called a new theme.
This just sucks because you DL a theme with a stupid wall paper
and 4 icons, it just stop you from downloading the good themes
that some that was well polished.
What can be bad of being reviewed?
On the other hand, this is just a rumor, and even if it happens
(as we all expect) we do not know what are the guidelines yet.
How much will you have to pay to get your applicaiton listed? Will Apple really treat an app from John Q. Public the same as they would from Quicken? I'm sure money will talk.
Apple seems to Hate Canadians!!!!
We get the short end of the stick every time. We cannot use
iTunes to download movies (except for a couple of made in
canada tv shows), and we cannot rent movies.
Content on iTunes varies per region. So if Apple is going to
release apps for iPhone only to the US iTunes stores, then once
again we get shafted.
I guess we are forced to jailbreak, download illegal copies of
stuff etc if we want to be able to do anything at all.
It was your choice to be born in Canadia, not America. :)
- How about a comparison? Honest discussion, please
-
by Seaspray0
March 2, 2008 7:51 PM PST
- Lets look at the model compared against linux and microsoft. Both those models have an open development platform. Does it produce apps that are useless? Sure. It produces a wide variety from useless to fantastic to outright malicious. It also produces lots and lots of applications. Just how good is the open model? I'll ask you to decide. I like the open model, myself. It lets me decide which applications I want. How about the linux fans? Now there is a truely open source environment. If you are a linux user, do you think the openess is a good thing? Would you rather have your apps reviewed and partitioned out to you by what a company thinks is best? If you are an apple fan, do you think the closed model where apple decides what apps you will get is best, and only available through itunes? It's your phone, which model would you prefer? How about an honest discussion on what you would like to see?
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
- My vote is for an open development platform
-
by Seaspray0
March 2, 2008 8:06 PM PST
- I agree with the open model. Open development has been shown to work fine. Linux would not exist without it. For microsoft, it has been a big bonus by allowing businesses to develop custom applications specific to their needs (and thereby cementing their operating system into businesses). I get to decide, rather than a company, what applications I will or will not use. I will be taking a risk with the open model. Not all applications will be usefull. I will have to wade through a sea of apps to find ones I want. Some apps might be malicious. However, overall I do not find the risk to be high. I use common sense and do not install every app I come accross. I use the internet search capabilities to find specific apps I want rather easy. I check reviews and double check to make sure the applications are not malicious. I have to make an effort to be careful, but the benefits are worth it to me. With an open development model, I find a wide variety of applications and the competition between them is benifical to keeping the cost down. I vote for an open development platform.
-
-
(58 Comments)