iPhone SDK Rules Block Skype, Firefox, Java ... 800
An anonymous reader writes "Apple's iPhone software development kit is already drawing complaints due to the strict terms of service. Voice over IP apps like Skype that attempt to use the cellular data connection will be blocked. Competing web browsers Firefox and Opera are forbidden. Even Sun is now backpedaling on its recent announcement of a java port, noting that there are some legal issues. Critics are already comparing Apple's methods to Comcast's anti-net neutrality filtering, and Microsoft's Netscape-killing antitrust tactics. Could Apple face government regulators?"
Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
It is their phone (Score:1, Insightful)
Vote with your money (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not like comcast which is a monopoly in certain areas. There are hundreds of other cell phones to buy. Whoever wrote the summary is an idiot.
Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
What other cell phone company might be facing government regulators over their extremely locked down software choices?
It's their party (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
My device, my decision. Apple should control only their store, not license away the competition.
Could Apple Face Regulators... (Score:5, Insightful)
Somehow.. I doubt it.
People seem to forget that Apple don't need to make it easy for people to develop for the iPhone. They don't have to assist at all. At. All.
Whilst I may disagree with their tactics, I'm certainly not going to tell them how to run their business. And whilst the Microsoft comparisons will be coming out of the woodwork like hungry mutant termites, it's simply not the same. Windows & Office locks people into a platform by being an established monopoly, it also uses this established monopoly to lock people into their other products. What this is, is simply Apple giving people a piece of cake and not letting them eat it. Sure it sucks, but you know what - don't like it; don't develop for it. Simple.
Er wha? (Score:3, Insightful)
Could Apple face government regulators?
For what reason? Last I heard Apple did not have a monopoly on cell phones, or even on smart phones. The only thing they seem to have a monopoly on is fanboys.
Don't like the iPhone's rules, don't buy the phone. There are a multitude of alternatives. The FCC does not regulate what US providers can and can not restrict on their cell phone networks currently in any way.
Complicated Issue (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
It's "their" device right until I pay for it. Then it's "my" device.
Let me turn the question around. Why can't I dictate why software gets loaded on "my" device?
Regulators? No. (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a far cry from Microsoft forcing hardware manufacturers to install Windows on EVERYTHING or NOTHING, then using that penetration to foist IE, WMP, etc.
Apple users made a conscious decision for the whole kaboodle. Slashdot readers are not the norm for anything but obsessive Linux users. Say whatever it is that you want, but only Slashdot readers are going to be upset about this. The majority of iPhone purchasers and Apple users in general will hardly notice, if they even know what an SDK is.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been planning on snagging an iPhone as soon as the next model is released.
Unless a) this situation plays out differently than currently seems likely or b) I come to decide that a phone is just an appliance and I can live with Apple's constraints... I will not be buying an iPhone after all.
It is their software (Score:3, Insightful)
That is the question I should have asked. When you buy the phone, you own the physical hardware, but only a license to use the software. Why can't Apple dictate how their software is used? They aren't Microsoft with a 90% market share, they are in a market with massive competition.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok ok ok just stop... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
(all who already have or can afford to buy an intel mac with leopard)
, and easy to program
(to anyone who knows objective C)
and port apps
(so long as they don't do anything apple doesn't like, since they control the sole distribution channel)
without using java which is all but a dead language
(that happens to run on the majority of cell phones sold today, as opposed to ObjC which is apple's baby just as much as java is Sun's)
Re:It is their phone (Score:1, Insightful)
They just won't support you doing it through their framework. And why should they?
No Skype makes sense, No GPLv3 is annoying... (Score:1, Insightful)
The "No Competing Browsers" I understand as well. You see, on the iPhone, the browser really isn't ordinary, but the keys to the kingdom of usability and utility. Apple wanting to protect that makes sense.
What is probably the MOST annoying is "No GPLv3": Apple won't distribute GPLv3 code because it means giving aways the signing key for that app (the anti-TiVoization clause), and since all distribution is through apple, GPLv3 is out.
However, for all the griping, this is actually an AMAZINGLY flexible and unrestricted platform, compared with say game consoles or other PDAs. And for $100 to get a developer key (which allows you to directly run on your own devices), who cares about the distribution restrictions if you are some l33t haxor type who just HAS to run firefox on his iPhone.
Re:It's their party (Score:2, Insightful)
I think apple is being stupid and short-sighted to a degree that is only surpassed by the anonymous posters musings about possible regulation.
Jobs must not understand the millions of Blackberry and WM smartphones that would happily be tossed in the garbage...
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between not providing support and using legal means to restrict the usage. Apple isn't just not supporting the SDK (which would be fine), they're saying that you LEGALLY cannot do this with your phone and the SDK.
Biggest problem in my eyes... (Score:3, Insightful)
But the limitation that instantly kills a ton of useful potential apps is the fact that you can't run an app in the background. If you switch away from your app (say, accept a phone call), your application quits. Bye bye instant messaging and every other application that needs to run for a long time/wait for events.
It's funny... (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple not subject to antitrust regulation. (Score:3, Insightful)
Antitrust laws are a last resort for when the market can't correct itself. If Apple keeps up with this crap they risk the more dire consequence of consumers simply abandoning their platform. Can you say, Apple Lisa [wikipedia.org]?
Honestly though... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:0, Insightful)
what the fuck it's a communications device (Score:1, Insightful)
WTF
might as well buy a CB friggin radio!
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
* "Native" look and "feel" is a joke. The GTK+ emulation looks awful, nothing looks quite right. Select/combo boxes are nowhere even close to native. Nothing behaves properly, and there's still zero integration with the desktop. That pisses me off even more than the ugly purple theme so I just disable the "native" look when I can.
** Every other SWT-based app I've used gets on my nerves. Eclipse I can tolerate since I love it's editor and am addicted to several plugins. Nothing else out there is even half as nice. It's configuration, however, is an abomination.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a LOT more Java developers out there than there are Objective-C developers, and a lot more people learning Java every year than are learning Objective-C. While the SDK is pretty reasonable, as someone who's coded on both platforms I have to say that not only is Java significantly nicer, but the IDE's are dramatically better than XCode.
Mac developers love to poo-poo Java, but Objective-C will probably never be as popular as Java is. And if/when Java disappears, it'll probably be at the hands of C# combined with scripting languages or something akin to that instead of Objective-C.
If Apple really wanted to open their platform up to innovation, they'd open it up to Java.
Re:here's one (Score:1, Insightful)
Predictions? (Score:3, Insightful)
I seriously doubt it. The iPhone has not given anything and then taken it away. Nor have they made any promises they didn't keep. Further, the level of ubiquity of the iPhone platform is not high enough to be on any government regulatory radar. (Blackberry *might* be just to illustrate a point of reference.)
As to whether or not a "next version iPhone" will grant developers and users the freedom and flexibility they crave? I find it to be HIGHLY unlikely. Apple has been very consistent in stating their attitude about who controls their products. Apple does -- at ALL times -- especially after purchase. They're pretty good at blurring the lines of who actually owns the products they sell.
Re:No Skype makes sense, No GPLv3 is annoying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Windows Mobile and Symbian have far more unrestrictive terms of use, in fact - simply being able to write an app in the relevant programming language is the only barrier to entry. There's no third-party enforcing distribution control, no ridiculous $99 sign-up fee - yet, ironically, some people justify the licence fee as "getting rid of the chaff". Unbelievable.
I try to credit people with intelligent reasoning for the most part but it's tough to argue in favour of people who advocate draconian control the likes of which Apple is putting into effect with its SDK, when if it was Microsoft or some other less-favoured darling at the helm there would - justifiably - be outcry.
Disclaimer: I own a Macbook Pro and an iPod.
App store vs SDK limitation (Score:3, Insightful)
troll bait (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Complicated Issue (Score:3, Insightful)
However, the conditions are not. Apple doesn't have a monopoly in the phone or smart phone market. Pretty much every phone on the market is closed in some form. The iphone in providing an sdk is considerably more open than it's competition.
I have never owned an Apple product.
If the demand for these apps is strong enough and the business model is profitable enough, perhaps a competing phone would like to offer what Apple isn't. (Android? It'd sure be nice, it'd cause me to buy my first phone.)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
With the exception of Verizon, who does a similar lockdown deal with BREW, most phones have a J2ME VM on them and are quite capable of running just about anything.
I've got Gmail/Gmaps/Opera mini among others running on my plain old (non-smart) phone. They were all free and the only way my carrier impeded my installing them right over the air was with a single warning screen about installing 3rd party apps.
Re:Vote with your money (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure any other smart phone could do it as well.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
Nobody's stopping you from trying, and that's the point.
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
You can choose not to buy it. A lot of devices are like that, consoles are a very popular example. If you don't like the limitations of the system, that's fine, don't buy it. The rules don't change just because someone buys it.
Re:Could Apple Face Regulators... (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft did this, you'd be screaming bloody murder.
Because Apple's doing this, it's okay.
Sorry, no dice.
I said this is what would happen. Did anyone listen? No.
Re:It is their phone (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows is open because that is what the market demands. Notice how even signed drivers become an issue for them. The phone market has the Windows Mobile, Palm, etc, platforms if you want open (or semi-open). The iPhone is among the ranks of thousands that is not completely open. If the market demanded open phones, Palm and Windows Mobile would dominate.
Why do people get so bent out of shape? There are many, many phones on the market. It's hardly a shock that AT&T/Apple would lock out Skype when using the AT&T network! Sort of a business model threat, no? Apple has no monopoly on phones, smart phones, or even good phones. They make one nifty smart phone, and ways exist to run stuff on it outside the official SDK if you really want to.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
What GP was trying to get at was that if Apple wanted the iPhone to be a truly competitive and flexible smart phone, the best way to accomplish that would be to open the interface completely to third party apps with the SDK.
Re:It is their phone (Score:3, Insightful)
I have never seen an SDK that so blatantly locks users out of common usage like this, have you? Maybe I've managed a decade and a half in this industry without noticing that it's normal practice to use legal force to ensure that an SDK is only used a particular way?
(That was sarcasm, in case you didn't catch it. The worst I've ever seen is Sun's "do not use this in a nuclear reactor" bit, which wasn't written in a binding fashion. More like a "if you do this and frak it up, it's on your head, not ours.")
Re:It is their phone (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not to say it's alright. But it does seem like something they should be allowed to do, and something which was an obvious move, given that the thing started out locked-down. I really hope no one bought an iPhone based on the coming SDK...
Re:troll bait (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay a slight stretch there but that is basically the point. I can make firefox for the iPhone but legally I can't install it. It isn't for technical(except for the skype over edge which is just a bad idea) reasons just legal.
No different than.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:2, Insightful)
Just to clarify a subtle point: Apple sets rules on developing apps for their proprietary consumer electronic product, nazis slaughter millions of innocent people in attempted genocide.
Thought I'd help clear that up in case anyone wasn't clear on the difference.
Re:No Skype makes sense, No GPLv3 is annoying... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, that makes no sense. If it's the most important thing to have work well, why wouldn't they welcome competition? If iPhone Firefox ended up being better than iPhone Safari, why wouldn't Apple be happy about this situation? Their customers get better utility out of the device, and Apple doesn't have to lift a finger.
I guess this can be the first documented case of the GPLv3 actually working, and working well. I'm sorry, but a version of an app which you can't modify without paying $100 for a "developer key" is not free software.
And amazingly locked down, compared with Android.
In what way is this OK?
If Microsoft wanted to charge you $100 to run Firefox on Windows, you would burn them at the stake. The only thing that makes Apple different is that they aren't a monopoly... yet.
Re:troll bait (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a Mac owner (three Macs in the house), and I've developed Mac software. I'm totally underwhelmed by the iPhone. It's a very pretty UI on top of a phone that lacks functionality that was standard in the 90s. The SDK would allow those defects to be fixed, but Apple is intentionally crippling the phone by limiting what third parties can do. (No XMPP client, for example, which I consider an absolute must-have feature on any phone I buy.)
Making stupidity more painful (Score:5, Insightful)
Why the docile obedience? Just because it is Apple?
You buy it, you do whatever the hell you want with it! Isn't that the mantra here at Slashdot? Except when it is Apple.
I want to see someone port Iceweasel to the damned thing, post a torrent up on a server somewhere anonymously and watch Apple suffer the PR nightmare of trying to ban it. If we can't outright outlaw stupidity we can certainly make it painful.
Adn if Sun actually had a pair of dangling between their legs they would port Java and double dog dare Steve to sue. Come on, they stared Microsoft down over their mistreatment of Java, why be scared of Apple when, again, this is a case they can't lose. Because it won't ever make it to a court of law, Apple would get their asses handed to them in the court of public opinion years before the wheels of justice could turn.
Re:Complicated Issue (Score:5, Insightful)
i keep finding myself thinking that the iphone is a creation of the US mobile market.
in europe on the other hand its just another "smartphone".
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, it's FUDday already? (Score:2, Insightful)
a.) Skype over GPRS isn't particularly compelling as it is. GPRS has limited bandwidth (particularly for VoIP apps) and latency issues. It transmits TCP/IP just fine, but UDP is better scaled to VoIP's requirements. VoIP, and Skype are allowed over WiFi, which is entirely technologically feasible. And a great idea. I realize there's plenty of cloak-and-dagger arguments about Apple trying to preserve their high-revenue margins on carrier exclusivity agreements, but there's no need to delve into it. GPRS uses time-division multiplexing, which means that timeslots are limited, and a UDP usage of the GPRS timeslots would pretty much screw other people who just wanted to use their phone to make a cellphone call, the very thing they are paying AT&T for. I realize there's a huge nerdgasm at the though of getting an iPhone that only puts limited cash in AT&T's pocket, but let's face it, it's called the iPod Touch. AT&T doesn't just *have* a GSM cellular network, they *PAY* for it, and so do their customers, and giving the power to iPhone users to monopolize the entire network is going to hurt both AT&T's and Apple's bottom-lines.
b.) ZOMG no Java!! I don't know what to say to this, except that I find it absolutely absurd that people have been clamoring for Apple to open up their APIs, and they essentially did, busted the whole thing wide open, and when Java wasn't built in, now we want an extra API? Java doesn't, and has never, jived with Apple's goals and desires. Java on mobile devices, IMO, is kludgy to use, at best. I've also tended to notice that many Java apps run slow on all mobile platforms. You open a SonyEricsson cellphone, go to launch a game, wait for Java to start up, and then play the game. Using the iPhone native APIs will provide significant access to software writing without having to resort to Java. There have been cries aplenty from the Java people with the OS X debacle, and now the iPhone, but this is Apple's cry that Java is *irrelevant.* Whether you believe it or not, the people in Cupertino think they can do it better, and with the latest slate of software (including Boot Camp, Parallels, and VMWare) I'm hard pressed to argue with them. Someone has yet to give me a compelling reason why Java should be allowed other than the "freedom" argument which should extend to porn and malware as well (which is doesn't).
c.) Firefox. I could see Firefox wanting to go there, but Apple hasn't made any statement on this one way or the other. If you'd like to assume that Firefox is disallowed on the iPhone, well, I'm curious how you can assume that when there is no Mobile Firefox for any platform. Firefox is a pretty hefty program, especially once you get it laden down with extensions, and there are probably more practical impediments to generating a successful Mobile Firefox before they can even start worrying about what Apple thinks.
These are all HUGE non-starters, especially when everyone starts hailing the openness of Android, but quite frankly, Skype still isn't going to work (well) on GPRS, Firefox still isn't going to have a mobile device browser (even on Android), and if you actually do the research, Java isn't all that happy about Google's Java implementation on Android.
Hence, FUD.
Re:Lack of Java (J2MEE) a Big Deal (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not a big deal unless Apple really wants all of that software ported over to iPhone very quickly without the developers putting in additional work. And why would they want that?
Apple wants people to use their SDK so everything is using power efficiently, interacting with the OS properly, and has an interface that fits with OSX and other iPhone apps. They're not going to take a shoddy port of a crappy program written for another cell phone and put that up on their store anyway, so why would they bother making their SDK support it?
Re:No Skype makes sense, No GPLv3 is annoying... (Score:3, Insightful)
$250 if you want the convenience of commercial pre-signed apps. And Nokia don't take 30% of your revenue for the privilege... so it's *still* cheaper than the apple solution.
Antitrust sanctions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:2, Insightful)
I wouldn't buy an iPhone now if I was paid to. Fuck Apple.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
As an iPhone owner myself, I was really excited to see what was possible with the apps people were writing for jailbroken phones, and it was really cool.. some were quite buggy, but there was definitely potential, even in this unsanctioned way. Now there will be an official SDK and even better apps i am really excited. Now sure, these apps may already exist for winmobile or rim or palm even, but that is taking out the very most important factor, the interface and interaction with an iphone. some folks may not like it, or want one, but I've found it to be incredibly useful with myself using for more features on it then i did on any previous phone.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
There's more than one Blackberry (four, last time I checked). There's only one iPhone.
You also seem to be mistaking "truly competitive and flexible" for what you would like companies to compete for. My bet is that the iPhone SDK will do just fine. The posturing here is completely fabricated. Mobile browsers using desktop plugins? Doubtful. Plugins of any kind aren't that common for mobile browsers. VOIP over EDGE? Worthless. Apps that run in the background, ignoring calls to quit by the OS memory manager? There's a stability problem just waiting to happen.
It's not that you can't multitask, it's that they want to encourage coding practices that don't rely on background services, and applications that save state when they're not active so that the user doesn't lose any data, and that returning to the app is as seamless as possible. With the exception of things like IM and file downloads, you don't need background processes sitting in RAM. Mobile applications should launch quickly and go away when they're told. Windows Mobile developers should take a clue on that, as a user.
Re:troll bait (Score:3, Insightful)
Now here we are, months away from the release of apps, and already people are already turning their guesses about how Apple will interpret the SDK ToS into news. But all we really have are guesses. Your assertion that Apple will block development of an XMPP client is completely unfounded; this speculation is based on a paragraph in the Human Interface Guidelines (of all things) that is really talking about making the application quitting/restarting transparent to the user. Apple allowed AOL to demo an AIM client, so the conspiracy theories about AT&T wanting more SMS revenue turned out to be completely unfounded; there will be IM on the iPhone as soon as developers release clients. Even the notion that Apple will "block Firefox" is based on the fact that Firefox includes a plugin architecture (which could be disabled) and a JavaScript interpreter (which may or may not be included in Apple's definition of an "interpreted language").
* - normally it wouldn't be polite to imply that someone is irrational simply because they like or don't like a certain product, but it's become part of the way we discuss Apple stories on Slashdot, apparently.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a secret formula, all right (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple's restrictions on hardware significantly reduce the amount of development they do and the amount of support Apple has to provide. OSX doesn't have to have drivers for every crappy, made-in-China knockoff MoBo. They never have to take support calls where someone says "Hey, I tried installing OSX on this 286 DX-2 66 machine, and it runs like crap!" When you're Microsoft, you can afford to blow off consumers, since they pretty much don't understand what their options are and have become used to having an OS maker who says "FU!" if you have a WGA problem.
It also ups Apple's profitability, since a lot of people (including yours truly) finally get tired of screwing around trying to get Windows to cooperate and decide to buy something that "just works" even if it costs a little more. I used to build my own boxes back in the day--but eventually I grew up, moved out of the basement (figuratively) and got a life. I want to take my wife to dinner and a movie and have a tea party with my daughter, not spend three hours diagnosing some obscure video card driver issue. I use Linux at work (and love it) but I'm not up for doing Linux support (for my wife and myself) at home.
Apple's thing may not be for you, but it seems to be working out for them.
Re:troll bait (Score:3, Insightful)
legally you can install it because you own the device. Apple just isn't providing you the means to distribute it via the SDK and App Store, and they aren't required to.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:2, Insightful)
Even my best friend (a hardcore Linux user) is so upset about these "restrictions" that he's practically craping broken glass about the whole SDK!
What the HELL is WRONG with you people?!!?
I challenge ANY ONE OF YOU to explain, in clear and reasonable terms, WHY Apple imposing some restriction on the type and scope of applications that can be developed for the iPhone is a bad thing?!
I mean HONESTLY, do you people WANT the same virus/spy/mal/adware ORGY that is the disaster we jokingly call Windows?!!!!???
If Apple DIDN'T impose SOME restrictions such as limiting interpreters which can be used in malicious ways and are impossible to control, providing quality control to filter out the mountains of buggy crash inducing CRAP that people will spew out, etc.... and then that is EXACTLY what all the money grubbing scum suckers will DO. They WOULD make viruses, they WOULD crash you iPhone so much you're swear it was NASCAR on Ice, they WOULD find a way to hijack your phone and they WOULD make your life with an iPhone a living HELL...
Surprise people, the iPhone is NOT a hacker platform! It's a CONSUMER platform and consumers want their devices to work. Every. Single. Time. No exceptions!
I, personally, think it's a bloody BRILLIANT idea and a wonderful way to not only distribute apps but also provide marketing and availability that so many great apps never get and remain in obscurity as well as ensure that consumers get quality programs that don't bork their new $400-$500 toy!
Hell, a GREAT analogy is to the console video game industry! In fact Apple's model is practically a photocopy of how Nintendo handles things except the Big N doesn't allow any Lee, Dick and Harry to program for the Wii!
Yet no one is getting their butt hairs in a knot about Sony or Nintendo or Microsofts gaming division about how THEY handle their software!
As for the little niggly stuff such as:
"The SDK only runs on a Mac!" - Yes, that sucks and i don't like it any more than you do, but tough noogies. It's APPLE'S development platform, they didn't even have to MAKE it. in fact they said they WERE NOT GOING TO when the iPhone was launched.... So in my mind, we ALREADY got a bonus because it EXISTS. So, Mac only? Yeah that sucks.
"They're restricting what us 'hackerz' can publish!" - To damn bad for you. Not only are you 1% of (exceptionally whiny) iPhone users BUT, (gasp!) the iPhone is not an open platform!!!
Even with the new SDk, it is STILL not an open playground for you to do what you want, just like the Wii or the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Apple has placed REASONABLE restrictions on what you can do, JUST LIKE WITH THE WII, THE PS3 AND THE XBOX 360! Deal with it.
Personally, the only thing I am wondering is if you can compile and install (via "debug" mode, etc...) your own personal application creations on your own iPhone... not to distribute, but for PERSONAL SINGLE USE on YOUR phone.... that would definitely placate the "I'll do whatever the hell I want with MY hardware" people...
Either way, as I wrap up here, If you don't like the rules Apple has set on the playground then LEAVE. The door is right there, it's open and unlocked. Go buy a Blackberry or a Palm or a Windows mobile device and develop for them. I'm not stopping you, neither is Apple.
I HONESTLY don't mind someone (Apple) keeping a casual and comparatively lax eye on the "children" when they are turned out to play. There is no law that says you should have the right to throw sand in everyone's face just because they want to use a copy of the toy you made. not every program is going to be made to better the iPhone people, there are a LOT of scum suckers out there.
Apple has done a good thing to let everyone play nice and yet still have some degree of freedom, or would you prefer have millions of developers writing applications to PWN your iPhone and turn it into a battleground of slow, crashing and malware threats...
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
That's insightful? (Score:5, Insightful)
No one's stopping people from running whatever the hell they want on their iPhone either. Apple has not sued, attacked, harassed, or taken any legal action whatsoever against the jailbreak folks. Even the "bricking" software updates were announced ahead of time and could be refused by the owner. They haven't helped them--true. But neither has my microwave manufacturer.
If you don't want the restrictions, don't use the official SDK. You will face no legal action whatsoever for doing whatever you want to the phone you own. But Apple is not legally obligated to help you do anything to the phone you own either. There is absolutely no legal duty for a company to make any electronics device a software platform. If you want to hack your phone, go right ahead, you have every right, but don't expect a helping hand. Can't have it both ways.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
Something slashdotters need to get a grip on is you are a tiny, extremely hard to please, demographic. Most companies recognize it will cost them a lot in one form or another to satisfy you, and the revenue they get off you wont make up for it. The only impact you have in this particular arena is Apple apparently wants geeks to develop apps for their phone. But there are probably going to be about a million geeks doing that even with the restrictions in their terms of service.
I like Linux and the myriad options it gives personally, but Apple wants to maintain a coherent and stable software ecosystem for their phone. They really don't need to have 5 different browsers, and a bazillion apps designed for geeks instead of polished standards conforming apps that fit in to their phone experience. The iPhone works pretty well the way it is now, if they can grow their software ecosystem some they will be happy. I'm pretty sure they don't want to turn it in to a confusing train wreck, kind of like the Linux desktop with 10 different window managers, a half dozen GUI toolkits, 20 different browsers, some awesome apps and a lot of brain dead broken ones, none of which adhere to the same set of UI guidelines.
Re:troll bait (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a little amusing that you throw out "wasting time on MMS" when I would view MMS as one of the least important apps on my N95 (and yes, I've used an iPhone, too). If you've not seen the latest [nokia.com] version of Nokia Maps [nokia.com] on an N95, you would be impressed. I agree with your assertion that XMPP is on the "must have" list of a fraction of a percent of users. But to suggest that there's something "irrational" about not being all gooey inside about the iPhone when my phone is smaller, is 3.5G, has a 5MP camera, has 8GB of internal storage, Bluetooth 2, Exchange Push email, GPS, etc. But I'll stop there, lest I be branded as an irrational Apple hater.
What? That makes no sense (Score:3, Insightful)
What Apple is not doing, and have never done, is to legally go after people who hack the phone without using the official SDK. They have never even so much as sent a threatening letter to the jailbreak folks.
There is no legal duty whatsoever to provide an SDK for an electronics device. Your legal rights to do whatever you want to your phone do not extend to forcing Apple to provide an official SDK to allow it. The law cuts both ways--you have the right to do what you want to your property, but you also have the sole responsibility for doing it.
Speculation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Antitrust sanctions (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft's illegal abuse of its monopoly position is not from simply having a mere "advantage" in the browser market. A browser requires an OS - whoever controls the OS has strong control over the browser. The OS is itself the distribution mechanism for the new browser. Conversely, iPod owners do not suddenly find themselves in possession of a free iPhone. These are quite obviously completely different situations.
Secondly, for a post to get +5 Insightful only requires a few moderators to mark it up. It does not mean the post is agreed to by the majority, or even makes a valid point. There's many a groupthink post that gets a +5 rating. It's actually kind of pathetic you think a point shouldn't be argued simply because of a +5 rating in another thread.
"I'm sure
- The passive aggressive schtick is kind of lame, as well.
Apple's point of view (Score:2, Insightful)
As far as Java goes, I'm yet another Java developer. I love Java apps. They need no installer; they bypass the corporate security monitor on my workstation. They would also bypass any controls Apple uses to protect the user experience on the iPhone.
I don't own an iPhone, and I probably never will. It's not as if I don't have options.
vote with your dollars (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:2, Insightful)
There are some differences (Score:2, Insightful)
- Apple makes a complete, integrated product: hardware + software.
- They have an image of "style" and "high quality" to maintain.
- They are worried about "diluting" that image with potentially crappy 3rd party apps.
- With Apple, people expect a self-contained product that "just works", so the tech support calls would end up going to Apple.
- This is even more critical with a cell phone than a home PC. It can't crash when you need to make a 911 call!
On the other hand:
- Microsoft makes only the software and for cheap, commodity hardware. They don't make the whole product.
- Many things come to mind for people when the name Microsoft is mentioned, but style and high quality are not among them.
- 3rd party software vendors for Microsoft platforms are responsible for their own tech support.
Re:Complicated Issue (Score:-1, Insightful)
Not to mention that Apple's Cocoa seems a lot nicer than the obscure nonstandard C++-stuff you get with Symbian..
Re:Antitrust sanctions (Score:5, Insightful)
If and when
then, maybe you can start to compare Apple's role in the music player market with Microsoft's role in the operating systems market.
Meanwhile, I'll keep using my iPod Nano to play MP3s made from my own CDs (and, slowly, MP3s bought online as decent services such as Play.com start offering unencumbered legal downloads for sensible prices) with absolutely no compulsion to buy from iTunes and absolutely no compulsion to buy another iPod unless I happen to prefer Apple's design.
What's more - I can buy a Symbian/Windows Mobile/Brand X phone and it still accepts incoming calls and texts from an iPhone! - so I can choose not to buy an iPhone too!
So, please explain again how the Apple "monopoly" (which doesn't force anybody to buy an iPod and/or buy from iTunes unless they like the product) remotely resembles the MS operating system monopoly (which means that many Mac and Linux users are pretty much obliged to dual-boot or run emulation software - usually requiring us to buy a copy of windows & MS Office - in order to interoperate with the masses)?
Re:Remember this is the same Apple that ... (Score:3, Insightful)
But if you look at what they rule, and how, you get a different perspective. It's not like windos is the #1 OS because it's so great, we all know that. The state of software is horrible, quality non-existent, interoperability weak - even on the same OS.
What kind of "victory" is that? Yeah, it made Billy the richest man alive. It also made him one of the guys who can't wash his name clean even with billions of bucks poured into charity. He's also a criminal, in all senses but the pure legal one which for some reasons allows you to do illegal things legally as long as you don't do them as a private citizen but as the CEO of a large enough company. He also makes some of the worst powerpoint presentations I've ever seen.
Market share is cool, but quite honestly, I'd rather have a 10% share in any given market and be able to look at myself in the mirror each morning, than having the other 90% and know I'm a scumbag. And I'd rather buy a computer from the honest guy with the 10% share than from the scumbag. Which, incidently, means all the scumbag-lovers are somewhere else, which only makes my choice even more attractive.
So, all you windos lovers: Please stay in your corner, we simply don't want you over here. Write your buggy software for your crashing piece of shit, hail Bill and make sure to buy the xbox720. Meanwhile, we guys over here will simply work on our Macs and use our iPhones and occasionaly wonder what the noise is all about.
Because, you know, I didn't buy an iPhone because every idiot can write shitty software for it, I bought it because I liked what was in the package. And aside from the few dozen guys who bought it to prove the world they can hack it open, everyone else had pretty much the same reason. So the whole whining, crying and complaining over what exactly is or is not possible with the SDK - it's simply pointless. The people who care largely aren't the people who did or will buy an iPhone anyways.
Re:troll bait (Score:3, Insightful)
But that's not what the iPhone is.
From Apple: "Firefox? Why? Safari is installed and working fine. Why fuck that up? Skype? This is a CELL PHONE. Why in the world would we allow Skype on the thing? You guys do realize that 95% of the cell phone/iPhone purchasers have no idea what you are talking about, and never will, right? Therefore, if you do not want an iPhone, then don't buy one. We sold 1 million of these in 74 days, and this just makes it better. We're sorry if the geeks are pissed, we don't care. Hack something else. One of the biggest reasons people buy our stuff is because we control what goes on it for the most pat. This keeps support costs, frustration and time lost to a minimum for most of our customers. Want something that you can install whatever you want on it, giving it more points of failure, be my guest."
Nice FUD, but: (Score:2, Insightful)
My iPhone has been running several applications in the background -- the RSS updater, MobileScrobbler, sshd, an ftp server, afpd, Samba -- for quite a while with absolutely no stability problems whatsoever. Plenty of others' have as well. Stop buying the Apple company line on everything.
Re:here's one (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, you keep trusting that code to not be reporting what you're downloading to anyone in Big Media.
Re:Speculation (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd say they'd be well within their rights to do that and you would be well within your rights not buy from them.
You don't have to buy a given product. Vote with your wallet.
Re:here's one (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:here's one (Score:4, Insightful)
Beyond that, there are plenty of fair use things you could be downloading that could still get you sued. Whether you won or lost, the fight itself could ruin you financially.
Good Gravy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Complicated Issue (Score:3, Insightful)
However with an iPhone I know that when the new update is released, I'll just be able to do everything through iTunes.
I realise this isn't what you mean by 'more open', but to most users it WILL be more open, because everything is going to be heaps more accessible than any other platform - it'll have a unified, simple access system to expanding and improving your phone.
Regular users won't give a shit that you can't do any of the stuff in this thread (run java, voip, develop on windows, etc) - they'll just be amazed they can download a solitaire game for free, or a new calendar application for $5, or something.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:3, Insightful)
And hey, it's not as if MS could write an OS that supports all those third party hardware. Remember that the drivers ususally come from the manufacturers, and guess what MS blames all the crashes on? Answer c), 3rd party drivers, wins.
XP's still a crashing piece of shit. Better than the predecessors, which were utter and total crappy pieces of crashing shit.