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)
Complicated Issue (Score:4, Insightful)
troll bait (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:troll bait (Score:5, Interesting)
For established Mac developers it's a great deal. Apple handles the distribution and payment processing, and they don't have to worry about competing with open source weenies. But hobbyists get shut out (apparently even if you try to pay Apple for a certificate, there's no guarantee they'll give you one), and end users get nickeled and dimed for apps that would have free equivalents in a competitive market.
When the competitive landscape in the cellphone world changes and the carriers just become dumb pipes, Apple will be the first to drop stupid restrictions
That would be nice, although I'm skeptical since lots of other AT&T phones don't have these kinds of restrictions.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:troll bait (Score:4, Interesting)
The mac world has a very strong history of high quality shareware/freeware. I think a hobbyists windows developer trying to make the jump from the windows and/or linux world to the iPhone will have less to worry about in terms of selectiveness from Apple, than they will from end users. Apple users tend to be much more picky about the appearance/interface of their software.
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.
Re: (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
Re:Complicated Issue (Score:5, Interesting)
The symbian SDK is free. You can get a developer certificate for free (Apple charges $100/year), you can distribute in any manner you choose (Apple insist on using itunes), you can use background apps, you can do VOIP over 3G/Edge....
So in what way is the iphone 'considerably more open'.
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:5, Interesting)
Antitrust sanctions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Antitrust sanctions (Score:5, Funny)
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.
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: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.
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:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Interesting)
The 2.0 software may break the current jailbreak methods, but again, so what, I've already got 3rd party apps on my phone.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Interesting)
My Linux-based Motorola e680 from 2003 would beg to differ. It worked wonderfully, thank you. Full touch screen, minimal buttons (keypad was in the touch screen), mp3 audio, mp4 video playback (this all sound familiar?)....oh yeah and a (vga
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:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You can just not use plugins. But I would like to use them. So it is crippled.
They legally have. I can not develop firefox with plugin on iphone, or use skype with edge.
But maybe some people don't like what author said? For a fanboi: Hurray, we have sdk!. For normal
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Many people could have guessed Apple would pull this stunt too - remember, the ONLY reason this SDK exists at all is due to the existing cracked iphone/itouch development movement. Apple want to cash in, but on
Remember this is the same Apple that ... (Score:4, Interesting)
The same Apple that restricted what software could run on their machines.
The same Apple that restricted
Nothing new here, this is Apple's secret formula to ensure they never have more than 3-5% market share of anything they do in the long term. I remember a time when Apple was very popular, but due to their complete lack of business acumen doomed their ability to take over the hardware and software markets. They could of taken the computer world by storm and buried IBM and Microsoft, but they have no clue how to market long term. Short term marketing and hype they've got down, but I didn't buy an iPhone, because, I know the end result, which we are now starting to see more clearly. Some people might say I was psychic, o which I would say know your history and you won't be doomed to repeat it.
Same ol' Apple. It's comforting to know I can rely on them to be consistent. Isn't Steve Jobs at the helm again?
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Informative)
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: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:5, Informative)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Informative)
Smartphone market? I still find that hard to believe - there are several countries where Blackberry is, but iPhone is not.
Here's a big hint. Sales does not equate to "size of market". If in the final quarter of 2007, the iPhone sold 27% of the smartphones sold, that does not mean every one in four smartphones is an iPhone (I'm also looking at you for a basic misunderstanding of this, Mr Roughly Drafted [roughlydrafted.com]). As the Wikipedians would say, "[citation needed]".
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Funny)
Hal Porter
Re:amerature troll (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Insightful)
Nobody's stopping you from trying, and that's the point.
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.
Speculation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (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: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Objective C is pretty easy to pick up. It really is the language that you want to use for OS X development. Everything fits together rather well, and it is designed to make the developer's l
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Interesting)
I for one am pleased with what they have offered, especially the 70/30 store. That is unprecedented. It also provides a great mechanism for selling open source, which has been very difficult in the past.
Lastly, as a side note, one big realization, as I have played with the SDK, is actually how unnecessary it is. I also was among the people who was really frustrated with the iPhone SDK is Web 2.0 garbage last year. Now that the power of the iPhone has been unlocked before my eyes, I'm realizing that the majority of the functionality you want to give in an app is completely suppliable by Web 2.0. As I've thought about what I should write, I keep realizing, "No, there's no point in doing that natively, because it could be done in a Web app." Granted, I am not a game developer.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Funny)
(to anyone who knows objective C)
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:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Informative)
You seem to portray learning Obj-C as some huge undertaking. If you come from a Java background, learning Obj-C is like learning to play stud poker when you've only played draw poker before. Some of the mechanics are different, but there's a lot of overlap. Anyway, how is Java more conducive to innovation than Obj-C? Because it has better IDEs (which is probably debatable, but I'll cede the point anyway)? What can you do in Java than you can't do in Obj-C? Sure, Java has more frameworks built around it (and frameworks built around those frameworks, with more frameworks layered over them, and frameworks built on top of those, etc.), but Apple has some pretty decent libraries too. I've only dabbled in Cocoa programming, but I find the syntax of Obj-C to be rather nice. I like that there's at least some way to implement delegation. It may be a bit sketchy, but it's better than Java's system, which amounts to "Ahh, fuck it. Let the IDE generate some code. That's good enough."
You have one thing right: Objective-C will probably never be nearly as popular as Java. Ok, two things: Too much java makes me have to poo-poo. I don't see why that means Apple must support Java on the iPhone though. I'm sure the platform will do just fine without it.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Interesting)
Says falcon5768, who's an authority because of...?
As opposed to monster.com, where "Java developer" returns "> 5000" hits, "C++ developer returns 2457 hits, "Perl developer" which returns 1134 hits, or "Python developer" which returns 300?
Java is undoubtedly the most widely used language for current development. So much for "no one".
It's really not too bad, just not ideal for the highest performance and real time niches. Even so, gcj (for instance) comes close.
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Informative)
here's one (Score:5, Funny)
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.
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:5, Informative)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good way to turn a positive thing negative (Score:4, Informative)
hate to break this to you, but much of the software you run on your typical cellphone is written in Java. I have quite a few positive java apps on my blackberry
not to mention, if you use ebay, you're using a Java-based web app. I hear it's a pretty decent piece of software.
oh, and I have a daily (mostly) positive experience with Eclipse [eclipse.org].
The idea that "java apps are obvious due to their slowness and crappiness" is an old, tired adage. It's just false. You might as well say, "C++ apps are obvious due to their memory leaks". Just because you've run some crappy Java code doesn't mean the language itself and all code written in it is crap. It brings you more benefits than you know.
Disclaimer: I do a lot of J2EE coding. I also hate Java, but for more technical reasons. ;-)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure any other smart phone could do it as well.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's the issue here? (Score:5, Interesting)
Look, I know the iPhone is all "snazzy" and "cool" and "trendy," but I think it's been known for a while that Apple would do this, yes?
If you're looking for a platform with more open SDK access, just don't write for the iPhone. Go for a mobile device with a Linux-based OS, or even Windows Mobile. That gives you a lot more flexibility in terms of writing your own software (I write C# on a Moto Q, myself) and you usually end up paying less, too.
Apple has a choice as to whether or not they open up their hardware just as you had the choice of buying the phone in the first place.
Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
What other cell phone company might be facing government regulators over their extremely locked down software choices?
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
I was thinking this exact same thing. The Motorola Q has some really great features, and it turns out a lot of them are masked or outright disabled (Java support) if you use Verizon as your carrier versus a different carrier. If anything, Apple is being more generous than the likes of some cell phone companies.
It's their party (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
By the time someone would be installing applications on an iPhone, it is not "Apple's hardware" anymore. That ended when the buyer paid for it. My iPhone is my property, and I will install whatever I please on it. If Apple tries to stop me, I will do my utmost to stop their intrusion onto my property by any means necessary. This is a simple
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
It's not just a matter of "making it easy". They have made it legally impossible for you to run Java, alternative browsers, and other applications on a product that you shelled out serious cash for.
And whilst the Microsoft comparisons will be coming out of the woodwork like hungry mutant termites, it's simply not the same.
No, it's not. It's worse. This is akin to Microsoft releasing a version of Windows, let's call it Windows Fist-up-your-ass edition, and then saying "Our EULA states you cannot install Firfox, Opera, or Java," while, at the same time, adding rules to the Win32 API that block out these applications.
If Microsof
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.
Lack of Java (J2MEE) a Big Deal (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (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 both
and no python, perl, ruby... (Score:5, Informative)
"no interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-in interpreter(s)."
Ok ok ok just stop... (Score:4, Insightful)
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)
Re:It's funny... (Score:4, Informative)
- iPhone: You can run native code. XBox: no native code; all code runs in the
.NET Framework VM sandbox.
- iPhone: $99 one-time fee. XBox: $99 yearly subscription + $50 yearly subscription for XBox Live Gold
- iPhone: free version with emulator for testing. XBox: free version but no way to test for XBox compatibility.
- iPhone: iTunes is the exclusive distribution channel for iPhone programs. XBox: XBox Live the is exclusive distribution channel for XBox games.
Since neither Apple or Microsoft can control what you do with the SDK on your own hardware, the following restrictions only apply to applications distributed through iTunes or XBox Live.- iPhone: programs of any type will be distributed. XBox: programs must be games for distribution on Live.
- iPhone: distribution on iTunes store will be available to any developer. XBox: distribution on XBox Live restricted to a select few who win periodic voting contests.
- iPhone: programs can use WiFi for any purpose; cellular network with restrictions. XBox: Network access only for XBox Live and local LAN multiplayer. Non-LAN play must enforce requirement of XBox Live Gold subscription.
- iPhone: programs distributed through iTunes may not execute downloaded code or plugins. XBox: Microsoft would never approve a game for distribution on Live that executed downloaded code or could download plugins.
- iPhone: Free programs distributed for free. XNA: not announced. Likely to limit or prohibit free games.
- iPhone: Commercial distribution is 30% of gross revenue, no other fees. XNA: not announced. Likely to be higher than 30% based on rumors of XBLA royalty rates.
As you can see, XBox development is *just* as restricted as iPhone development; more so, in fact.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)
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.
App store vs SDK limitation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
My device, my decision. Apple should control only their store, not license away the competition.
Re: (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 b
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It is their phone (Score:4, Interesting)
This sword cuts both ways. What's wrong (or right, in your case) for one is wrong or right for the other. And according to reason litigation against M$, it would seem that those practices arent "fine and dandy" at all, and they ARE being forced to support competitor software. The same rules could apply down to Apple here.
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Im willing to bet you're
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not according to TFA:
Re: (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
Re:It is their phone (Score:5, Informative)
Which industry? This isn't atypical in the embedded industry at all. It is very unusual in the general computing industry. I think the issue here is that the iPhone and iTouch span that divide moreso than any device that came before it.
If you wanted to develop for the PlayStation, for instance, you had to sign all kinds of agreements. And they were relatively open compared to some embedded device makers.
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?
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: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: (Score:3, Interesting)
Same as I do with any coorporation that sell products with artifical limitations. Actually, as I don't really keep a black & white world view, I do have a sliding scale for it, but Apple is definitly not on the right side on that scale.
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:What did you expect? (Score:5, Funny)
This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time.
It's quite easy to label a home-built computer with an Apple sticker.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Mac OS X has a very, very small number of drivers. Arguably, this is a good thing. By tightly controlling the hardware, Apple can really go over the driver code with a fine-toothed comb and make sure it's solid and will not take the OS down.
Microsoft doesn't have this option... a good portion of the reason Windows crashes is not Microsoft's own fault, but some third-party driver, half the time
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, I look forward to competition in platform openness, and it's definitely forthcoming. Apple can keep its touch screens. Tell the truth, I mostly just want a phone that has the battery life that my 8-year-old nokia had.
Re: (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.
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.