Apple

If you were wondering whether the iPhone software development kit would end the unofficial third-party development craze, stop wondering.

O'Reilly, one of the most well-known publishers of technology primers for professionals, has released a book on developing applications for a jailbroken iPhone. iPhone Open Application Development, written by Jonathan Zdziarski, was spotted by dozens of iPhone aficionados Tuesday. Chapter 1? "Breaking Into and Setting Up the iPhone."

That's not a Tiger or a Leopard, but it will show the way to unofficial iPhone applications.

(Credit: O'Reilly)

Zdziarski was among the first hackers to take aim at the iPhone last year in light of Apple's Web-only application policy, and his book is essentially a how-to guide for using the "unofficial" iPhone SDK to create applications. Apple, of course, has started to outline its own vision of how applications should be created for the iPhone, giving developers two options for their projects.

There's a group of developers, of an uncertain size, who feel that Apple's SDK restricts their freedom to develop creative applications for the iPhone. Those folks will likely be all over this book. The book itself appears to be a summation of a lot of the iPhone jailbreaking and development techniques that are easy to find online, but condensed into one handy reference guide.

Once the official SDK is released in June, it will be interesting to watch how unofficial iPhone development progresses. Apple's restrictions have some carrots attached, such as a powerful distribution vehicle in iTunes and the App Store, which will definitely attract those trying to make a living off the iPhone.

But those who are trying to circumvent Apple's restrictions by developing unlocking software, music players, or applications unlikely to sit well with Apple, will need a handbook.

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.

Twenty-four hours after Apple revealed its procedure for getting third-party applications on the iPhone, developers have a few questions about the software development kit, but seem mostly satisfied.

In the immediate aftermath of Thursday's presentation at Apple's headquarters in Cupertino, Calif., reaction was almost universally positive to Apple's SDK plans. Some developers had feared worse outcomes, such as having to submit their source code to Apple, and seemed willing to let Apple take a piece of their revenue and be the exclusive distributor for iPhone applications in exchange for getting a crack at the technology.

Apple's Scott Forstall explains how application development works on the iPhone.

(Credit: Corinne Schulze/CNET Networks)

Now that everyone has moved a good mile or so away from the famed "reality-distortion field," a few tidbits regarding the SDK are coming to light. Thursday, I noted that the devil would be in the details of the SDK, namely in what types of applications Apple chose to allow on the iPhone. A day later, we're getting a better picture of that.

For example, you're not going to be able to use anything other than Apple's official APIs (application programming interfaces), notes Ken Aspeslagh (via Daring Fireball). This isn't much of a shock, but it means that a lot of techniques learned developing unofficial iPhone apps will probably not work with the official SDK.

Also, Aspelagh notes that a third-party application can't write data to another application, which is known as "sand-boxing." This is a security-influenced rule, presumably. The downer is that "the possibility of cool mashups is basically eliminated," notes Wired's Scott Gilbertson.

The SDK item drawing the most attention Friday, however, is that third-party applications will not be allowed to run in the background. TechCrunch's Mike Arrington wrote, "Instant-messaging applications (we saw a demo of an AIM version at the event today), can't run in the background and collect messages while you are doing something else. Leave the application to take a phone call, and it shows you offline."

Apple's SDK documentation (embedded in the TechCrunch post) points out that the iPhone can only display a single application screen at a time, and urges prospective developers to spend a lot of time designing an application that can handle quick stops and starts. "In other words, users should not feel that leaving your iPhone application and returning to it later is any more difficult than switching among applications on a computer."

There could be a number of reasons behind this stance, perhaps chief among them that the iPhone might not be able to support the processing demands required by multitasking, but plenty of other phones seem to be able to juggle more than one application at a time. I wonder whether future Apple-developed iPhone applications--like, say an iPhone version of iChat--will be subject to the same restrictions.

One interesting passage in the iPhone SDK documentation should give Intel something to think about. "If you have an existing computer application, don't port it to iPhone OS. People use iPhone OS-based devices very differently than they use desktop and laptop computers, and they have very different expectations for the user experience."

Intel has been pitching its upcoming lineup of x86-based Silverthorne and Moorestown processors as ideal for the next generation of mobile devices, because they can run any type of software that you can currently run on a PC. The chipmaker has a point in that if you're already familiar with x86 development process, you might find a Silverthorne chip an easier target than an ARM-based chip. But all those Mac and PC software developers will have to bring a totally different mindset to mobile development anyway. Those developers who have been doing this type of development already could have a substantial edge.

Apple is finally getting ready for the iPhone to mean business.

In its first eight months, the iPhone has been mostly a consumer phenomenon in the U.S. Apple has pitched the device by showing off its iPod capabilities, or how to search the Web for restaurant reservations and car prices, or update your status on Facebook. But next week Apple plans to show off some "exciting new enterprise" features for the iPhone, which will presumably make it easier for those of us who can't push the CIO around to use our iPhones as tools for work.

The groundwork for this movement has been taking place for some time. When Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced plans to bring out a software development kit for the iPhone in October, that paved the way for companies developing enterprise software applications--decidedly not Apple's strength--to move those applications to the OS X operating system that runs the iPhone. Also, earlier this year AT&T began allowing iPhone users to sign up for business accounts, after requiring them to use personal accounts in the early days of its service.

Getting corporate e-mail on your iPhone could become a snap by the end of next week.

(Credit: CNET Networks)

It's not hard to imagine that a wide variety of previously skeptical iPhone customers would take a second look at the product if they realized they could use it for both work and play. The first people who widely adopted smartphones were business executives, who wanted products like Research In Motion's BlackBerry so they could have access to corporate e-mail while traveling. Phones based on Microsoft's Windows Mobile, with its ties to the Exchange e-mail software, the Office suites, and the Windows desktop, were also able to exploit the business community's need for a mobile office.

Apple's first attempt at a smartphone came from a totally different place. The company swung for the fences, and connected, with its focus on consumer-friendly features like the touch-screen user interface and videos. People who had never even considered a smartphone were drawn to the iPhone, and they made the iPhone the third-best selling smartphone in the world during the fourth quarter, only the second full quarter it was available.

So now, after demonstrating that people like its iPhone, Apple has a chance to show how practical a device it can be as well. The release of a few influential enterprise applications could provide a reason for holdouts to take the iPhone plunge, or a reason for current iPhone users to upgrade once the 3G iPhone arrives.

Most notably, the iPhone currently doesn't fully support widely used e-mail software such as Microsoft's Exchange or IBM's Lotus Notes, making it much more difficult to get the IT department to support push e-mail to your iPhone the way they would a BlackBerry or a Treo. The iPhone can work with Exchange servers with some configuration changes, but that's not something that is widely supported inside IT departments that aren't located at One Infinite Loop, Cupertino, Calif.

In an interview with News.com's Ina Fried on Wednesday, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said licensing the Exchange protocol to Apple would be consistent with the company's practices but declined to say if in fact Apple was a licensee. Earlier this year, IBM denied several reports that it was about to announce a deal with Apple for licensing the Lotus Notes software, saying it wasn't ready to release the software. Perhaps one or both of those stances are about to change.

Peter Burrows over at BusinessWeek notes Apple could be firing a shot across RIM's bow next week if it announces full support for corporate e-mail software. RIM's BlackBerry handhelds are the second-leading smartphones in the world, and the leading product in the U.S., largely on the strength of corporate sales. Apple, however, sits just behind RIM in both markets after less than a year, almost completely on the strength of consumer sales.

RIM has been trying to break into the consumer market with products like the BlackBerry Curve, but now it might have to defend its own territory if Apple suddenly starts cuddling up to business customers. RIM has had this market largely to itself for a while, now that Palm has really fallen off the map and is focusing on getting back to basics.

Still, RIM might be able to deflect Apple's inroads into its own business by striking a deal with Apple to license the BlackBerry Connect software for iPhones. It already does this with Nokia, Samsung, and Motorola, among others.

Apple could have other enterprise features in mind for next week. It could have been working with Salesforce.com, for example, on a version of Salesforce To Go--the company's smartphone product--for the iPhone. Maybe the iPhone will soon support reading and creating Microsoft PowerPoint presentations, adding to its read-only support for Word and Excel.

The feature perhaps most coveted by iPhone-using professionals is support for Microsoft ActiveSync, which would allow iPhone users to wirelessly sync their Outlook e-mail, contacts, and calendars with their Windows PCs, rather having to sync Outlook calendar and contacts by physically connecting your iPhone to your computer through iTunes. This would let you create a calendar appointment on the iPhone and have it automatically show up the next time you fire up Outlook on your desktop without having to mess with any cables.

There are ways to do wireless syncing between the iPhone and Outlook with unofficial third-party applications like Funambol, but IT departments don't like to support hacked software, and that version only supports contacts right now, not calendars or e-mail. Likewise, Synchronica's Web application only supports "pull" e-mail, not "push" e-mail that automatically delivers e-mail to your handset when received by your corporate e-mail server.

Until today, the details of the iPhone software development kit were the hot topic in the iPhone world. That will still be a very important development, and next week's event will provide a telling look at how Apple views the importance of third-party application development to the future of the iPhone.

But announcing deals with big third-party application developers--names like Microsoft, RIM, Adobe, Salesforce.com, or countless other possibilities--would signal that Apple is ready to pitch the iPhone as more than just a toy. Some of the earliest criticisms of the iPhone were that it didn't support the needs of the enterprise. Those might quickly go away by the end of next Thursday.

CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report.

Apple distributed invitations Wednesday morning for "an iPhone software road map" event next week, which means we're finally going to hear details on the plans for an iPhone software development kit.

Next Thursday, we'll find out more about what Apple has in mind for third-party iPhone software.

(Credit: Apple)

As you might be aware, next week is March, not February, which means Apple will have missed its deadline for shipping the SDK this month. Still, on Thursday, March 6, at 10 a.m. PST the company will hold a "town hall" meeting at its headquarters in Cupertino to discuss the State of the iPhone, and probably answer several questions about how iPhone application development will unfold.

Apple also said to expect details on "some exciting new enterprise features," which at first blush sounds to me like a method of getting the iPhone to work more closely with corporate e-mail software. It's not clear whether the SDK will actually become available next week, or whether Apple is planning to use the occasion to explain what options developers will have for getting their applications on the iPhone. Check out our report on the iPhone SDK and the possibilities for official third-party application development for more background on what might be discussed next week.

Apple will be playing host twice next week, holding its annual shareholders meeting on Tuesday and then two days later having us all trek down I-280 once again for the iPhone event.

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.

Editor's note: This story was updated at 9:59 a.m. PDT.

Steve Jobs made it official Wednesday morning: third-party applications are coming to the iPhone.

Apple's CEO posted another of his open letters to the world Wednesday on Apple's Hot News section of its Web site, confirming reports that a software development kit (SDK) for the iPhone will be released to developers next year. It's coming in February, rather than January as reported, but application developers and iPhone owners will probably be able to wait the extra month.

"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. "It will take until February to release an SDK 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."

It always made sense for Apple to go down this road, since it was never going to win a hacking war and users clearly want third-party applications on their iPhones and iPod Touches, which will also be opened up by the SDK, Jobs confirmed. I actually thought it would take a little longer for Apple to open its precious iPhone up to developers, but the company probably has become more satisfied in recent months with the stability of the OS X operating system. Apple has always said that the iPhone runs Mac OS X at its core, but in practical terms it's really a new operating system that Apple has put together for the iPhone with common DNA from Mac OS.

Jobs implied that the first iPhone SDK would be a step past what Nokia is doing with its developers. Nokia has a huge developer community that creates applications for both Java and Symbian-based phones, and Jobs said those applications are required to have a digital signature that verifies the application has passed certain tests, and that makes sense given the growing concerns about smartphone security.

"While this makes such a phone less than 'totally open,' we believe it is a step in the right direction," he wrote, hinting that Apple would somehow make it possible for almost any developer to add trusted applications to the iPhone using the SDK.

We'll have to see how Apple decides to strike a balance between openness and security, but it's good to see the company acknowledge that there are more options for keeping the iPhone secure than just limiting developers to Web applications.

It seems only fair that since the hardware side of the computing world plowed ahead with parallelized computing, they should help out the software development community.

In that spirit, AMD plans to let developers take a crack at its Light-Weight Profiler Tuesday as a possible assist for the growing problem faced by PC software developers: just how the hell are we going to effectively use processors with multiple cores? AMD's LWP could let applications written for runtime environments like Java or .Net interact directly with hardware to know how much performance is available across a series of cores, said Earl Stahl, vice president of software alliances for AMD.

Much has been written about the need for the PC software development community to move past the "free lunch" era, when it could write a single-threaded application and watch its performance improve over time as a processor's clock speed got faster and faster. That ended with the overheating concerns presented by fast single-core chips. Parallel programming is nothing new to the server world, but it's a new path for PC software developers and new techniques are needed to make sure client applications will show improved performance as the number of cores on a chip increases at a faster rate than the actual clock speed of that chip.

LWP is designed to help developers boost the performance of applications created for runtime environments like Java or .NET, such as Web-based applications. Right now, those applications don't talk directly to the processor to see how much performance they've got in the pipeline; they have to go through the operating system. LWP will let that application code see exactly what resources are available, allowing the code to avoid overloaded cache memory in one core, for example, and avoid the performance penalty caused by asking the operating system to query every core.

Right now, this isn't an immediate problem. As we move forward with quad-core chips and eventually to eight cores or more, however, applications will need to know how to allocate themselves across those idle cores, Stahl said. AMD hopes LWP will help a new generation of application development tools make those decisions.

Interested developers can check out the specification on AMD's site, Stahl said. The company's holding the equivalent of a public comment period during which developers can submit feedback for a final specification that could be incorporated into future AMD processors as an extension to the x86 instruction set, such as AMD's 64-bit AMD64 instructions or Intel's SSE multimedia instructions. Eight-core PC chips won't be very common until around the end of this decade at the earliest, giving the industry some time to tackle the problem.