Apple

Your perception of Apple's iPhone probably has a lot to do with your personal philosophy of computing.

Do you want unfettered freedom to run anything, whenever and however you want it? Or do you only need a few vital applications to make you happy, and really just want the damn thing to work reliably?

In these, the early days of the iPhone, it's very clear that Apple has taken a very cautious approach to independent iPhone developers and software development. Contrast that approach with Microsoft, which built a PC empire catering to developers' needs, and would like to expand that into the mobile realm.

Some developers are peeved that Apple isn't giving them as much access to the iPhone as they'd like.

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET Networks)

However, developing software for mobile devices has been, and seems like it will be, very different from the development process for PCs and Macs. How this give-and-take between operating system developers and application developers evolves--not just at Apple, but for smartphone development in general--could dictate the evolution of truly mobile computing.

If limiting the role of independent developers helps create secure and reliable computers, doesn't that seem worth it to everyone? (Except, of course, to the developers.) That seems to be Apple's position, although the company declined an interview request in search of a clearer picture. The vast majority of developers are professionals or hobbyists who wouldn't dream of writing inferior or malicious code, but viruses, malware, and poorly written applications still proliferate.

On the other hand, imagine how you'd feel if another company controlled everything you can or can't do with its product after you brought it home. I don't think people would be too thrilled if Honda decided that the after-market installation of a third-party stereo voided the warranty, based on the rationale that the car is now much more likely to be stolen.

Such is the hubbub over the iPhone software development kit, which is still a work in progress. Some developers, captivated by the promise of the iPhone's unique combination of touch screen, accelerometer, and Mac OS X goodies, have been chastened to learn that they won't be able to create applications the way they want because of restrictions imposed by Apple on development tactics.

There are several bones of contention, but the primary concern seems to be the decision to prohibit third-party applications from running in the background. Apple warned developers of this restriction in the iPhone SDK documentation, and urged them to develop applications that are capable of quickly saving information, and then closing, when the user decides to switch to another application.

This policy makes it extremely difficult to create Web-aware native applications, wrote Hank Williams, a blogger working on mobile-software development. "The issue of background processing is *the* issue for a mobile device because it is key to two things: telling the world about your status in some ongoing way, (and) receiving notification of important events."

That makes sense; remember that friend or relative who got a mobile phone but never turned it on? That practice greatly diminishes (although some might say it enhances) the value of a mobile communications device, and one-way communication is not what has made the Web so interesting in its second decade.

The thing is, you can't expect everything from the PC Web world to work the same way on a battery-operated device. Craig Hockenberry, another developer, agrees that background processing is nice to have, but impractical right now on anything with a battery. (Thanks to John Gruber at Daring Fireball for the links.)

Hockenberry built an unofficial iPhone version of Twitteriffic, a Mac application he wrote that gathers "tweets" from people you're following on Twitter. An early version for the iPhone had a component that ran in the background to automatically gather tweets every five minutes.

The result? "Both the EDGE and Wi-Fi transceivers have significant power requirements. Whenever that hardware is on, your battery life is going to suck. My five-minute refresh kept the hardware on and used up a lot of precious power," Hockenberry wrote.

Other mobile operating systems such as Symbian, however, don't restrict processes from running in the background. And Nokia's N95, which runs Symbian, can browse the Web for longer periods of time than the iPhone, according to one test.

So what is this really about? Maybe it's about avoiding the mistakes of the past.

Software developers were the lifeline for PC users before broadband Internet became pervasive. If you wanted to do anything interesting with a PC, you needed application software, and so developers of both consumer and corporate applications were endlessly courted by Microsoft.

People want more applications than Apple can deliver. But how open should the process be?

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET Networks)

That brought the world tons of great applications. But it also brought security nightmares, blue screens of death, and sluggish computers that hog resources. The mobile world can't afford to let that all happen again; people have gotten used to a bit of "funk" from their PCs. They don't tolerate that from their phones.

So, don't expect to see Apple CEO Steve Jobs pacing the stage at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June while screaming "Developers! Developers! Developers!" At times, Apple seems to treat software developers like a necessary evil, acknowledging that they have a role to play but wary of letting them damage the product. Much of Apple's pitch for the Mac is that everything works, and it's easier to make that pitch when you retain so much control over what runs on the platform.

That stance naturally doesn't sit well with the developers, who are used to different treatment from the likes of Microsoft, Symbian, Palm, and others. But what if that's what it takes to produce a reliable product? After all, the fewer things you install on a PC or Mac, the more reliable it tends to be.

That's the tradeoff Apple is trying to make with the iPhone as it evolves. There's no doubt that the iPhone needs third-party applications. But do smartphone owners need the flexibility and breadth of applications that are available for the PC and Mac?

Apple is arguing through its SDK restrictions that, at the moment, they don't, and I'm inclined to believe them: for now. If smartphones really do turn into mobile computers, Apple will have to acquiesce--at least somewhat--to the need for broader third-party development that can truly exploit the iPhone. After all, that unofficial parallel iPhone development path doesn't show any signs of slowing down, meaning that people really do want more than just Apple's stock applications, and they'll want some things Apple's not inclined to provide.

So for now, if you want to run anything and everything on an iPhone, buy one and jailbreak it. If you want a more stable controlled experience, only install what Apple and the App Store provides.

However, what we really need is both. And that's something Apple will have to tackle during the second year of the iPhone. There's no shame in taking baby steps while building a business from scratch, but you've got to take the training wheels off at some point.

Despite some early problems managing the flood of developers seeking access to the iPhone software development kit, Apple reported 100,000 developers have downloaded the kit as of Sunday.

Apple formally released the iPhone SDK after an event at its Cupertino, Calif., headquarters last Thursday. The SDK will allow third-party developers to create games, business software, and other types of applications for the iPhone with Apple's official blessing.

Apple recorded over 100,000 downloads of the iPhone SDK by developers hoping to build applications like EA's Spore.

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET Networks)

Several would-be iPhone developers reported problems actually getting a copy of the SDK in their hands during the first day or so it became available. Over the weekend, Apple sent registered developers an e-mail acknowledging, "You may have recently experienced difficulty gaining access to, or downloading the iPhone SDK." But that traffic jam seems to have cleared itself up as the initial frenzy died down.

In Wednesday's press release, Apple included quotes from a number of third-party developers that give a pretty clear signal of what types of applications are already in development.

Intuit (TurboTax), Namco Networks (Pac-Man and Galaga), NetSuite (ERP/CRM software), and Six Apart (blogging software) are a few of the companies whose PR departments graciously worked up executive quotes for Apple's announcement. During the event, AOL, Sega, EA, Epocrates, and Salesforce.com showed off preliminary versions of their iPhone applications.

If you haven't downloaded a copy of the SDK yet, here's where you can find it. The beta version of the SDK is free to download, but if you want to release applications based on the SDK you'll have to join Apple's iPhone Developer Program for $99 a year.

By the time Apple officially releases the OS X 2.0 update in June, there will be no doubt that the iPhone will have turned both the personal computing and mobile communications industries on their head in just one year.

Let's be clear: Apple didn't invent the concept of the smartphone. People have been making calls, checking corporate e-mail, surfing the Internet, watching videos, and playing games on handheld devices for years. What Apple has done, however, is put together the most complete and compelling combination of those features and wrapped it with a breakthrough in user interface design.

The enterprise-friendly features and roadmap for third-party applications unveiled Thursday at its Cupertino, Calif., headquarters bring Apple two steps closer to that point. And when the final piece--the 3G iPhone--arrives at some point in the upcoming future, Apple will have developed the first truly mobile computer.

Apple CEO Steve Jobs explains how the iPhone is about to enter its second chapter.

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET Networks)

At least, for now. Will all mobile developers find it as easy to build iPhone applications as the five developers highlighted during Thursday's event? Does the addition of push e-mail make the iPhone more attractive than the BlackBerry? And how soon will it be before the rest of the world figures out Apple's secret: it's the software, stupid. The answers to those questions will dictate the second chapter of the iPhone.

Let's review what was introduced Thursday. The new enterprise features are a slam dunk. Licensing Microsoft's ActiveSync is a move as important to the growth of the iPhone as developing a version of iTunes for Windows was for growth of the iPod. iPhone users will now have secure and reliable access to Microsoft's widely used Exchange e-mail server, turning their iPhone into an extension of their desktop.

roundup
iPhone opens up for business

Click here for complete coverage of Apple's iPhone SDK announcements, which give the hot-shot gadget its entree into Corporate America and even the gaming world.

No one will be able to say, after the release of OS X 2.0, that the iPhone isn't suitable for businesses. It will have a laundry list of enterprise features, starting with ActiveSync. That protocol allows for the secure, wireless syncing of e-mail, calendars, and contacts data. It turns the iPhone into a BlackBerry or Treo.

IT departments cautiously testing the iPhone waters will also be able to breathe easier with features like Cisco's IPSec virtual private network technology (IPSec is an encryption standard), "remote wipe" technology that can erase sensitive data if an iPhone is lost or stolen, and better wireless security with 802.1x support.

This is an unquestioned win for Apple in the enterprise, as IT managers will get almost everything they want in a mobile business device. Software developers might not be quite so ecstatic at their portion of Thursday's news, but it could have been worse.

Developers swarmed Apple's Web site in the immediate aftermath of the company's presentation, trying to get more information and to download a beta version of the SDK. Several Apple blogs reported very slow load times on Apple's developer Web pages.

Developers will get access to the iPhone for $99 a year, as part of Apple's iPhone Developer Program. The program, however, will only be available to U.S. developers at first, and only "a limited number" of developers at that. Apple declined to elaborate on the exact definition of "limited." A separate $299 "enterprise" developer program will be available for corporations creating in-house applications.

Cocoa Touch is the key
The actual development process itself should be very familiar to anyone who has developed a Mac application in the past, as Apple's in-depth presentation on OS X confirmed that the mobile operating system shares many of the same underpinnings as Mac OS X. The difference, however, is a tweaked version of Cocoa, Apple's programming environment, called Cocoa Touch.

Cocoa Touch is the key to iPhone applications. It will allow developers to take advantage of the touchscreen interface that has been key to early iPhone demand. EA's Spore and Apple's Touch Fighter games demonstrated just what innovative developers will be able to do with that technology.

But while the games should be interesting, there are countless other possibilities. I was struck by Epocrates' concept applications involving the iPhone as a diagnostic instrument, allowing doctors to check for drug interactions, obtain patient history, or even check the picture of an unknown pill against a database of pills.

As expected, Apple is going to control the distribution of the applications through either the iTunes Store or the App Store, which will allow iPhone users to wirelessly download applications. Apple gets a 30 percent cut of the revenue of any iPhone or iPod Touch application sold through the stores, which sounds like a lot to me but apparently didn't faze some developers. Free applications will be listed free of charge on the App Store.

An Apple representative confirmed that the company will certify every application made available through the App Store. That will be a ton of work--and might explain why participation will be limited at first--but Apple CEO Steve Jobs said it's necessary to ensure security and reliability. All applications will have to be electronically signed by their developers, a process similar to what is required by Symbian, the most widely used smartphone operating system.

The devil, as always, will be in the details of that application certification program. Wireless unlocking applications? Of course not, Jobs said. But voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) software will be permitted, he said, so long as it only uses the Wi-Fi chip for communication, not the EDGE cellular network.

So where will Apple draw the line? This was perhaps the key unanswered question from Thursday's presentation. Apple seems open to quite a few different types of applications, but if it's planning to certify them individually, some patterns might emerge and provide some hints of where Apple wants to go with its own software applications. As developers get their hands on the beta SDK, I expect a lot more of those questions to be answered, at least in part.

A wide-open race
To me, the most interesting thing about the development of the smartphone industry is the wide-open nature of the race. This time around, a winner is not going to be picked in the early stages of the competition. Several huge important companies--Apple, Microsoft, Google, Nokia, RIM, and don't forget about Palm just yet--have already had an impact on the development of the product, and will continue to do so well into the future.

Despite sitting out the first few years, Apple has arguably vaulted ahead of its competition in just 12 months. The other players in this industry came into smartphones building them for businesspeople and their IT masters. Then they tried to woo the consumer.

Apple has done the complete opposite, hooking those who had never used a smartphone before with the iPhone's interface, and now giving them the opportunity to use it for both work and play.

The first era of the mobile-computing industry was about hardware. The second part will be about software. And right now, no one is developing mobile software like Apple.

We're quickly closing in on the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the iPhone, one that could signal just how far Apple can take its maiden voyage into the smartphone world.

This is supposed to be the week that Apple makes honest coders out of all the software developers who have been busy creating unofficial applications for the iPhone almost since the day it was released last June. Back in October, Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced that the company planned to release an official software development kit (SDK) in February that would allow third parties to create applications that would run directly on the iPhone.

Now it's the last week of February, and anticipation is building to see just what Apple has in mind for third-party iPhone and iPod Touch software development. We might have to wait a little longer, however: over the weekend, Business Week reported that the SDK would be delayed into March. And on Monday, The Unofficial Apple Weblog predicted the initial SDK will be just an alpha or beta release, with a full version coming later this year at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference. An Apple representative said Monday the company had no updates to the plan to release the SDK in February.

What applications do you want to run on your iPhone? What kinds will Apple let you?

(Credit: CNET Networks)

Apple loves to make announcements on Tuesdays, so keep your ears and eyes peeled tomorrow for any sign of the SDK or any of the 15 other things rumored for introduction this month. Whether or not Apple releases the SDK this week, the more important subject is how the company plans to treat third-party application development: is it a necessary evil, or a welcome catalyst for the product?

(Editors' note: As of mid-morning Tuesday, Apple's announcements for the day seem limited to some updates to the MacBook and MacBook Pro lines.)

When Jobs announced the plan to release an SDK, he explained the four-month gap between the announcement and the planned release as necessary "because we're trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once--provide an advanced and open platform to developers while at the same time protect iPhone users from viruses, malware, privacy attacks, etc."

Developers will either be thrilled, annoyed, or perplexed depending on how Apple decides to define "an advanced and open platform." The company has a few choices: it can allow unfettered access to the iPhone to anyone, it can allow anyone to develop applications for the iPhone but only those applications that have been digitally signed by Apple or a certification authority can be installed on the iPhone, or it can be the sole arbiter over who can create applications and what can be installed on the iPhone. There are also shades of gray within those scenarios, which leads to a lot of speculation on what exactly Apple has in mind.

To this point, the company has chosen the most restrictive policy possible, in that only Web applications that don't have full access to the iPhone's underlying technology are authorized. Security and reliability concerns seemed to drive Apple's conservatism in the early days of the iPhone, in that the company didn't want its prize product sullied by poorly written or unsecure applications just as it was trying to build momentum.

Still, Apple was aware that the promise of the iPhone would be quite limited if that was the full extent of access of the iPhone. There's just no way Apple can anticipate--not to mention create--every possible application that might convince someone to buy an iPhone. "We are excited about creating a vibrant third party developer community around the iPhone and enabling hundreds of new applications for our users," Jobs wrote in October.

In that letter, Jobs hinted that Apple was considering an application development model used by other members of the smartphone community, notably Nokia. This model would require any application bound for an iPhone to carry a digital certificate that would verify whether the application was created to meet certain standards for security and reliability. In this system, if you tried to install an application on the iPhone, the iPhone's OS X operating system would check for that digital certificate and either allow or prohibit the application from being installed.

Symbian, the world's largest smartphone operating system developer owned in large part by Nokia, offers application developers three options (click for PDF) based on different factors such as cost, proliferation, and access to core operating system technology.

For example, smaller developers have a no-cost option to get their applications onto Nokia handsets running Symbian, but they face restrictions on how many phones can install their application and users are warned when installing the application that it has not been verified by Symbian. If they cough up more money, there are no limits on how broadly their application can be distributed but it has to pass tests to guarantee quality, which has the benefit of making their application appear safer to the end user.

Microsoft offers several different options for Windows Mobile smartphones, depending on the requirements of the phone manufacturer or carrier. There's no requirement on Microsoft's part to obtain a digital certificate for an application, but the company will help promote applications that have either been certified to participate in Microsoft's logo certification process, or that have taken the further step of obtaining a digital certificate.

Application developers were not crazy when Apple CEO Steve Jobs told them that Web applications were the limit.

(Credit: James Martin/CNET News.com)

And interesting moves are taking place in Silicon Valley as mobile developers evaluate Google's Android SDK. Android is being billed as the most "open" operating system ever created for mobile phones, as it would appear that there is no requirement for digital signatures and any application can be created for the operating system. Of course, Android is not a shipping product, and things may change once the wireless carriers get their hands on Android phones.

Most wireless carriers have historically frowned on the notion of completely open applications for phones on their networks. In fact, until recently Verizon was notorious for controlling almost every single piece of software that ran on devices that connected to its network. The carrier recently changed that stance to permit outside applications to run on phone connecting to its network, and plans to outline its requirements during a developer conference in March. It has yet to say exactly how it will implement that goal, but it would be somewhat surprising for Verizon to veer from a complete lockdown to total openness in the space of a year.

So, expect Apple to implement some sort of digital-signature requirement on iPhone applications. This would be for two reasons: to control the quality of applications that run on the iPhone, and to allow AT&T a chance to approve or deny applications that might compete or hinder its own services.

But if the requirements are too heavy-handed, don't expect developers to cheer that news. Any kind of restriction may be very frustrating to many developers, because while Apple has been hard at work developing the SDK, the iPhone became an open development platform.

One of the biggest stories in the early days of the iPhone has been the hard work of an army of coders in "jailbreaking" the iPhone to run all sorts of independently developed applications that natively access the phone. This includes everything from games to mapping to camera software, and if you think iPhone unlocking is widespread, iPhone jailbreaking is much, much more common.

Since July, a whole set of best practices, and even an "unofficial" software developers kit have been created from scratch by an enthusiastic community of coders looking to unlock the iPhone's potential. Apple has half-heartedly tried to fight this growing tide, releasing firmware updates that wiped applications off iPhones and making changes to the way the iPhone loads applications, but the hackers have managed to stay one step ahead of the company to this point. The latest firmware update to the iPhone, released in January at Macworld, has already been cracked.

An SDK that's seen as less than satisfactory by this crowd might result in two different iPhone development paths: the officially sanctioned model that larger companies might choose to follow, and the unofficial model already in place that will appeal to small developers unwilling to cough up the certificate fee or adhere to Apple's guidelines. Presumably, Apple will update OS X to lock out unofficial applications when the SDK is officially released, but previous updates haven't proven to be a deterrent yet.

And what of the iPod Touch? Will there be two separate SDKs, one more restrictive model for the iPhone that addresses the concerns of wireless carriers, and one more open one that's designed for the Wi-Fi-capable iPod Touch? A more restrictive SDK for the iPod Touch would be a tough sell and would hold back the development of the iPod Touch, which Apple hopes is the model for the future of the iPod lineup.

What might this mean for you, the iPhone owner? A tough development policy could wipe your favorite unofficial application off the home screen and force you to pay for a similar application from an official developer. A lenient one could hook you up with anything you desire, but open you up to security problems.

And a more balanced model could offer you access to powerful applications that dramatically improve your iPhone experience, such as having access to your corporation's BlackBerry e-mail server if RIM decides to get on board. Or Flash-based Web pages with Adobe's support, or cool games that use the iPhone accelerometer and touchscreen to crazy ends.

Apple is walking a fine line between throwing the iPhone wide open to development and locking it down to the point where only a select few friends of the company get to play. The consequences of that decision could play a huge role in determining whether Apple hits its sales targets for 2008, and addressing the larger question of whether Apple really has changed the future of mobile computing with the iPhone.