shawnsat

thechansen

richardmnixon

Canoehead

tamade

poagao

I have a fairly standard GPS for my car. One of the neat features is that it can connect to a standard phone via bluetooth and act as a handsfree device, plus it can dial numbers from its POI database through the phone for you. Prett sweet, right?

Well, the iPhone doesn't support ANY kind of bluetooth functionality beyond the basic headset. So my cool bluetooth functionality (which worked with my crappy Windows Mobile phone just great) is now useless.

Weaksauce.

mullingitover

Um.. I guess you don't have one.

And didn't read this...
[www.tuaw.com]

badweasel

rimplestultskin

Pixelologist

thechansen

So, you'll personally guarantee that ? Today's world says you have to assume someone will do that bad thing - like write an app which looks useful, but in fact starts dialing random phone numbers on your phone at some set date. Someone's sure to write it as a pure prank, given the capabilities of the hardware. I don't see the big deal in Apple playing it a little safe in the first go-round with this SDK.

You know, another point is that this IS the v1 SDK. Maybe exercising control will limit the folks who seriously dive into it - and on v1 that can be a good thing. Let Apple work out the kinks with some major companies who are serious about software development. Open it up a bit wider once the processes and procedures are a bit worked out, right?

swrdfghtr

How many features did you dislike, or which were missing, in OS 10.1 - which are now great in 10.5? I'd rather see Apple get SOMETHING out for the iPhone SOONER, even if that means it's a subset of what I'd eventually hope for.

And everyone's assuming that Apple's going to screen apps for what "they think should be on the iPhone." That may not be the case at all. It may simply be a matter of apps being tested for stability and conformance; that testing may incur fees, but it might not be a "content screening" process like some comments seem to assume.

Before everyone starts telling Apple they "suck" based on pure rumor, can't we just want and see what actually happens, and then maybe take that in the context of an evolving platform, instead of automatically assuming Apple's just doing it to piss you off personally?

swrdfghtr

jaizone

1 in 3 cell phones is an iPhone???

Pass that around this way buddy.

BillTager

This allows people to make their own stuff without any worries about viruses or bringing the network down due to too much data use etc. whilst still allowing safe apps to do everything they want as long as proven safe.

sparx104

Why would they limit an SDK to what they think should be on an iPhone? The point of an SDK being released is to allow people to do what they want with it, and not just Apple. I'm guessing Apple's just going to check if your app is going to spread a virus through the phone or if it just includes, say, porn; I doubt they would say, "Hrm, Slingbox? ...nah, that's not what we do." They don't do that with podcasts, music, videos, or anything else they distribute. So why would they make you follow a "business model" with applications?

BBC already announced they're making their own video player, and I doubt they'd reject that, along with for instance a Sling Player, especially considering they're pretty good size companies/services both. And I doubt a service would interfere with them selling whatever in the iTunes store. They don't already make you buy all your music from the store, or buy all your movies and shows from there, either.

chasema

nojo

That's probably because Macs have such a small percent of the market share. But iPhones have - what? - a third, I think. That would be a lot more incentive to get into those little devices.

BonoBGood

ehhhh thats a bit of a stretch, I mean there has been an SDK for OS X since its been around. and well, I dont see too much if any malware being created for it.

odnet

That's a good point that I didn't consider.

drwedge

MrBlahBlah

Android will be a blessing. I don't plan on trading in my iPhone, but if the open platform is successful, it will set a new tone and you will see more companies opening up their devices to compete.

BonoBGood

Manve

@Keighvin: yes, in theory that's fine, but just means that any application that isn't approved will end up being used by a maximum of .00001% of the general public. Which is not much incentive to create an application.

@shorty63136: Well, let's call it limited in the PC world. Certainly I shouldn't have used the term "dominance" with regard to the PC side of things. They're a distant third on PCs. But they certainly have a very strong dominance in the MP3 player market, as Kaiser Machead pointed out. And they're certainly growing in that direction with the iPhone.

Apple coulda/shoulda opened development to any third party the way that Palm did way back in the day. Simple, free application development tools, open distribution, completely hands-off. That's the right thing to do for consumers, that's the smart move for the company. But they're getting grabby and they're crippling their own product just so they can squeeze out a few more dollars in the short run. I think it hurts them in the long run though, and hopefully that means Android (for instance) will be all the better positioned to kick them in the nuts. I don't relish Google over Apple as my corporate overlord, but given the two I'll take the lesser of the evils.

weatherman

SDK should have controls ver bluetooth profiles to allow more functionality.

WTF with no-dock control?, ipods can use docks for sending audio, control iTrips and stuff.. aarrrgg!!

EL_RIEL

Canoehead

RainyDayInterns

Brookespeed

read this
[www.gomite.com]
not sure how far to look into that though. Since if they were working with apple, they would not be able to disclose what they are working on under the NDA.

odnet

Petezah

madcoweater

The only people whining were high school kids who wanted to write their own apps for it. I don't remember many professional developers complaining. They just got on board, worked within the bounds of the program, and made money...

Ashman

Yeah, I was a developer for the Sidekick. This is pretty much exactly the way that development worked as well.

You created your app, and then went through a lengthy submissions process. If your app is accepted then you get put into their online store.

If you're a professional developer, it was actually not bad at all. However, if you're a homebrew hacker then you're all but closed out other than for making apps on your own personal device, which really isn't a bad thing.

The argument for this is that in this case, we're talking about a phone network that isn't as robust as the internet and any apps that do massive ammounts of data transfer multiplied by a bazillion phones could bring the thing crashing down. So, that's why they insist on having approved apps only.

Not to mention the fact that if they opened it up wide to anyone who wanted to develop for it, it would only be a matter of time before the first malware was written. At least this way they can have some low level of control over what people run on it.

Ashman

Their imagination won't be limited, just the ability to make it a reality because apple wants to control that.
M

BigDaddyM

This will not happen with the iPhone - Hell will host the Stanley Cup Finals before people give up developing for any Apple platform - but it's a perfectly acceptable reason to whine.

strangepork

pashdown

drwedge

Which means the SDK will have to either emulate an environment in which the application can be run, or provide a mechanism to get the content onto a sample device itself, preferably with debugging enabled. I'm hoping it's the latter, especially as that means it will be possible to provide alternate channels of distribution for those willing to install the SDK. Either way, I'm still excited to see what's going to be possible with this.

Keighvin

firesign

(almost bricked m'iPhone when trying to downgrade from 1.1.3 - f*ckery plain and simple.)

shorty63136

Oh and how about a game or two. Is this the only cell phone in recent history to not come with a single game? My first cell phone (10 years ago) came with games. The first thing my wife asked about the iPhone when I got it was "what games does it come with?"

matt448

shorty63136

snitch29

So does that mean no horney manatee porn apps?

dkeady

EBone

Apple: You Suck for this. You could have the greatest, most versatile mobile device ever, and you're going to forgo that, and for what?

If one could snap on GPS, 3G, extra memory... man you could do endless things with an interface like that.

nutbastard

pimlicosound

Kaiser-Machead

While I like the idea of tight quality control, this is a definite negative, since third party support is supposed to be about freedom of sources and the nature of the applications we choose. I can see them not wanting to deal with people that got apps that fucked up their iPods, but so what? They can be reset.

If I was a developer, I'd be pretty damn wary of this. I'd hate to spend hours upon hours day and night coding only to have my application, which would be created to further improve the experience, turned down for some oddball reason.

Kaiser-Machead

thechansen

As warm-and-fuzzy as everybody is about Mac, when you think about it they are an absolutely closed universe and they continue to be just as monopolistic and protective of their market dominance as Microsoft.

weatherman

trekkie

Looks like their imaginations are then limited by Apple Inc, Cupertino CA

G_Money