Inside Apple's iPhone SDK Gag Order 495
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Tom Yager takes a closer look at Apple's iPhone SDK confidentiality agreement, which restricts developers from discussing the SDK or exchanging ideas with others, thereby leaving no room for forums, newsgroups, open source projects, tutorials, magazine articles, users' groups, or books. But because anyone is free to obtain the iPhone SDK by signing up for it, Apple is essentially branding publicly available information as confidential. This 'puzzling contradiction' is the 'antithesis of the developer-friendly Apple Developer Connection' on which the iPhone SDK program is based, Yager contends. 'You'll see arguments from armchair legal analysts that the iPhone developer Agreements won't stand up in court — but those analysts certainly won't stand up in court on your behalf.' Anyone planning to launch an iPhone forum or open source project should have 'a lawyer draft your request for exemption, and make sure that the Apple staffer granting it personally commits to status as authorized to approve exceptions to the iPhone Registered Developer and iPhone SDK Agreements,' Yager warns."
no sale, here, then (Score:5, Interesting)
I had no idea about this. I don't follow apple things (...) but given how sue-happy they are, they can certainly live without MY buying any of their gear.
simply because of this, alone; I vow not to buy an iphone. I was not really in the market but now I know for sure that apple is on my blacklist (at least the evil phones).
apple: are you trying to dislodge MS as the most hated computer company around? keep it up, mate....
What bugs me (Score:3, Interesting)
Is the way the iPhone dev Center refuses to use a cookie and remember your login info. Every stinking time you want to download the new SDK or check for new sample code, you have to log in. Again. Then you close your browser and and hour later, oop, sign in again. I've downloaded the SDKs now a total of 9 times, so I've definitely typed in my login name and password at least 20 times now. Considering there's no software update for XCode I'd imagine most other devs have too.
I had assumed this would be lifted Real Soon Now. (Score:5, Interesting)
After all, the iPhone SDK cannot remain a "beta" forever, and once it's no longer a beta, I presume the SDK will show up side-by-side with the MacOS X Cocoa SDK from which it was derived.
Most of Apple's beta stuff has the same confidentiality agreement, so I presumed this was just a bug.
Message Received. (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple doesn't want me to program their hardware. I hear and will obey...
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:5, Interesting)
That's amazingly stupid! (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't see that happening with iPhone. What a stupid, stupid way to go about things. Palm didn't even have a robust platform, and they kept a huge market dominance way longer than they should have by making it easy to develop for their platform by keeping things out in the open. You had to sign agreements, but it wasn't this fascist Apple crap for sure. I'll take on any Apple fanboy on that point.
Par for the course (Score:3, Interesting)
This is par for the course for Apple. They make a habit of suing or gagging (by gag order) enthusiast sites... Apple fans almost joke that they know when a leak is dead-on when the lawsuits start. They mismanufactured (and maybe still do -- who knows?) the Intel Macs, specifying a full tube of thermal paste per CPU instead of a dab... and when someone published an excerpt of the service manual which ALSO said to use a full tube.. instead of Apple saying "oops", they Cease and Desisted them into pulling this info down. There's the wireless card driver hole from last year* -- Apple pushed the people who found this hole into using a 3rd-party card to demonstrate it -- and THEN had the nerve to play it up as "ohh.. that didn't even involve Apple wireless hardware", and making sure Apple fanbois filled in the blank (inccorectly) as "Apple wireless hardware drivers were not succeptible" instead of the truth that Apple just strongarmed them into not demonstrating it. That's just from the last year. In general, Apple suppresses info about hardware flaws both on their forums and to a lesser extent elsewhere. Between this and PR, people seem to think Apples are flawless, and they are far from it. I would NEVER buy a Macintosh because of a) general dick-like behavior of the company and b) I'd NEVER, EVER get a straight answer on if a model has any production problems, bugs, flaws or "issues".. as I can about Dells or just about any normal model.
*Which also was present in drivers for quite a few cards -- buffer overflows, allowing possible exploitation without even being associated to a wifi network by sending out corrupted wireless packets.
Re:No browsers, no API, players or background apps (Score:1, Interesting)
Cable boxes with DVI ports did not exist when Apple sold displays with the ADC port (combining video, power, and USB on one cable). It was very innovative for its time and a very good solution to driving a display from a computer. It is too bad the slip on latching connector it used is not used in some form today (HDMI could really use a simple latch).
You're complaining about ancient history, but I wonder about the relevance of wanting to display DVI TV on a 23-inch or less screen.
Then I read the rest of your post and realized you were trolling.
Re:That's amazingly stupid! (Score:3, Interesting)
Relax. This is a temporary situation. I think they had to rush things a bit for the iPhone 3G date and are prepping for the final release of the SDK (probably linked to a 2.0.1 update).
Yes, it would have been nice for them to release it from the NDA when it shipped, less than 2 weeks ago. But they're probably addressing some internal process issues before opening the flood gates, lest they have you bitching about how the process to sign up is too slow, etc, etc.
Not quite accurate (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.consumerdepot.com/products.asp?id=N810RB&referer=google [consumerdepot.com]
It is not only "like" the iPod touch, it is far and away more capable.
It does not have less memory (Score:3, Interesting)
It has the same CPU at a slightly slower clock rate and the same amount of memory. It takes SDHC cards, so saying it has "less storage" would be dishonest.
You could start with the physical keyboard, Bluetooth, lack of application restrictions, and the fact that it plays more formats of media as for it being more capable.
I currently own an iPhone. If there existed a device like the N810 with a GSM radio, I would buy it immediately and sell the iPhone. Unfortunately, I fear such a device will not exist for quite some time -- more than likely, years -- due to pressure from cellular carriers on handset makers to get them not to produce such a device.
Carriers do not like devices that empower their customers.
Boycott is nice and all... (Score:4, Interesting)
....but it's not a real solution, unless there is a real alternative. Unfortunately, openmoko is just plain poorly designed, too expensive, and did I mention that it sucks?
What we need is an openmoko that not only beats the iphone all the way on price and freedom, but on design as well. Hell, just clone the iPhone exactly for now.
With the inherently poor design decisions that seem to consistently go into FOSS projects, such as Ubuntu and OpenMoko, I have to wonder if they don't have some voracious and vocal corporate plants somewhere in the project actively sabotaging the overall movement. Or maybe I need a tin foil hat.
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple charged iPod owners $10 for the 2.0 software update. There is some claim that business law requires them to do this, which is nonsense as Sony routinely give the PSP new features for free. MS released their 2.0 Zune update for free for older Zune's etc... So I'm not sure why Apple is defended in this practice when Sony and MS are possibly two of the most evil companies out there.
Yeah, this is the same crap they pulled on their customer base who purchased 802.11n-ready hardware, then charged them to turn it on. Their reasoning, a bunch of meaningless jargon that somehow seems to lack any basis in reality outside of Apple: [apple.com]
Apple said it is required under generally accepted accounting principles to charge customers for the software upgrade. "The nominal distribution fee for the 802.11n software is required in order for Apple to comply with generally accepted accounting principles for revenue recognition, which generally require that we charge for significant feature enhancements, such as 802.11n, when added to previously purchased products,"
Needless to say, this ploy has been affectionately dubbed the "Apple Tax" by those who were duped by it.
Re:Typical Apple (Score:3, Interesting)
So... I guess this kind of mentality puzzles me. There are a lot of apple users out there, who, like you, acknowldge that they're being dicked around mostly even because you take interest.
To me it almost seems like an abusive relationship. You care about them, they beat you up, and you keep coming back. Why?
You have a point and the answer is probably similar to why it happens in real life: Apple users are pretty sure that what little love they get from Apple is better than anything they can get somewhere else. Where else will they go? So for now, iPhone fanbois (and I'm one) take the abuse. Also, like in real life, we're willing to put up with a lot more abuse from someone/thing with a pretty face. And in this case the iPhone is a really nice piece of arm candy.
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:4, Interesting)
I own an iPod Touch and it is HANDS DOWN the greatest tech device I've ever bought.
I wholeheartedly agree. I have owned my fair share of tech, but the iPod Touch is the best designed, most pleasurable piece of equipment I've used to date. I still have a smile on my face each time I use it, and I've had it for a couple of months now.
The difference Apple brings to the market is that extra yard. Yes their stuff is expensive compared to the competition, yes there are problems with it, yes they are no better than others in terms of things like the non-disclosure agreement. But still the extra polish, the attention to detail makes it worth it for me.
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't want to defend Apple too much, I don't like a lot of their business practices, but are they really as bad as MS?
For example, MS threatened OEMs and stopped them from pre-installing Netscape Navigator (this was way back when it sucked less than IE) on the machines they shipped. Have Apple ever done anything as bad as that?
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:3, Interesting)
Most non-disclosure agreements make an exception for information obtained through legal means from those with the right to disseminate it, publicly known, or that is already known to the recipient. Is there confirmation that these exceptions are not in the Apple NDA in question?
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not quite accurate (Score:4, Interesting)
I was at a crossroads recently, and needed some kind of upgrade, on $800 budget, to my thinkpad/aging tower combo, and was seriously considering getting a cheapo desktop and a nokia n810.
] ended up getting a steal on a Thinkpad T60, which I will love, but the 810 practically makes me salivate. /geek
Re:It does not have less memory (Score:3, Interesting)
The CPU is indeed slower, and what is worse, the PowerVR graphics subsystem is totally unused at the moment. This is being worked on... and thus is the advantage and saving grace of the Nokia devices: they are extensible. The Apple devices are not.
The article is more or less refering to how Apple is attempting to curb development of their device, and that is the fundamental difference of philosophy. Neither is right nor wrong, just different.
Also, the n810 is not a phone, and never will be. [Save SIP capabilities, of course.]
Oh, finally, and just as a matter of form: the iPhone's support for bluetooth is fairly rudimentary: it lacks support for A2DP / DUN & SPP and OBEX.
Re:no sale here either (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. You remember back in the 80's when all the new appliances had that really cool feature where you didn't have to press a button, just touch the metal button on the front? Yeah, it was slick back then, but it's fallen to the wayside. Why? People want tactile feedback. Our fingers are designed to rely on feedback. With touch interfaces we don't get that.
All this new touch screen mumbo jumbo is slick and all, but I have a feeling it's going to follow suit for exactly the same reasons. Touch screen is great when you're using a stylus; however, when you're using a device that has a small handful of simple functions (on/off, play, ff/rw, pause/stop, vol up/down), simple tactile feedback is critical.
Why do we have the nubby bumps on keyboards on the f and j keys? Heck, why do we have individual keys instead of a touch pad? It's the nature of the beast and it will all come full circle or, at very least, both technologies will come together.
Re:If this is the computing model of the future (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a big, fat lie, of course.
Not only is Symbian closed-source, bug-ridden and otherwise horribly hard to write for.
All programs must also be digitally signed by Symbian Inc. to be installable on consumer phones. And if you use certain "protected" APIs, you'll have to shell out some 20 USD per signing.
Yes, documentation is freely available, but it's so lacking in important details that it might as well not be.
Furthermore, I think that the comment edit box should be enlarged.
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:2, Interesting)
I couldn't agree with the parent more. From the marketing side they tend to have this hippy/hipster persona, but on the ground they are a straight time warp from the 80. That alone has kept me from having anything do to with their content selling businesses. I have no intention of being the old woman with the snake.
And the Documentation Sucks (Score:1, Interesting)
What also sucks is that the official documentation is a joke. It doesn't explain anything very well, and the sample code, more often than not, do not work. If you go to the official apple forums, some people will answer and help, and some dickheads will just respond with, "Sorry, can't respond because of the NDA."
Now, this being the internet, they may be dickheads who don't know and just enjoy being dickheads. They also might be the kind of pompous dickheads that know and hide behind the NDA. Either way, it's annoying that that is my only source for information. There is no "vibrant iPhone developer community" at the Apple forums because of this shit. There could be a "vibrant iPhone developer community" elsewhere, but the NDA doesn't allow it.
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:3, Interesting)
The difference being that Microsoft uses it to be anti-competitive and disallow any real competition, while Apple appears to doing it as means for consistency and "look and feel". In reality, Apple may just be use boilerplate legalese to protect its IP, from competitors that are all too willing to make iPhone and iTouch knock offs.
The main reason I forgive Apple more is that, Apple hasn't gone out of its way to drive me or any of my colleagues out of business. While Microsoft on the other hand....
A case where free market may work... (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact, if the iPhone was completely open, it would be much harder for the competition, including Google, as they wouldn't be able to compete with an even-more-open device-- face it, the iPhone isn't all that open, really-- until end-users can write their own toy apps for it, the term "open" doesn't really apply-- regardless of who actually wants to write for it. On the internet, anyone can provide content, and content includes custom and homebrew applications. Apple has left their flank wide open on this one and it's only a matter of time until an AT&T competitor or a Google or Microsoft will hammer them over it, at which point Mr. Jobs will get religion.
In fact, if Microsoft had a brain in Ballmer's head, they could use this opening to gain themselves some needed positives-- an "open" phone (even running proprietary MS software, but with the ability for anyone to freely produce apps for it), could give MS a few sorely needed brownie-points for openness, and MS has the clout to pressure the Verizons and Sprints of the world to allow themselves to be raw data providers and stop trying to micromanage, meter and profitize every last little mobilephone feature...
Re:no sale, here, then (Score:2, Interesting)
1. Apple does not want to have to fix anything bad that might happen if you install software that they don't have control over.
Example: You decide to jailbreak your phone in order install what you think looks like a cool game. It turns out that the game is actually a harmful piece of malware that destroys your phone - freezes, can't place calls, spams the network, or causes your hardware to fail. Instead Apple makes it clear that if you play around outside of the limits set by them, you do so at your own risk. And the relatively recent release of the SDK, the even more recent unveiling of the App Store is going to make a lot of very cool apps available to every iPhone user.
2. They have a contract with AT&T. I'm pretty sure certain things are imposed by AT&T, such as not allowing VoIP over 3G. You could say AT&T is evil, but they have their own reasons to not allow that. You could say that Apple should have gone with another provider, but I would tell you they tried. In the end, Apple was a risky bet for any provider, so I'm sure they had to compromise if they wanted their phone to be supported by anyone.
I'm not saying that Apple is a model company, but there are so many people vehemently opposing Apple for doing what lots of companies do: making a profit and protecting their interests. And honestly, in the end the iPhone really has changed the wireless industry, and it truly is an impressive gadget with very advanced technology and great software architecture. Have fun using Windows Mobile.
PS: I'm a Blackberry user for business reasons and I love my Curve, but I'm seriously considering switching now that the iPhone supports Exchange.
Re:This will have to change... (Score:3, Interesting)