Slashdot Mirror
iPhone SDK May Be 1-3 Weeks Late
tuxeater123 writes "According to a blog posting at BusinessWeek.com, the iPhone SDK could be pushed back by another 1-3 weeks. Unfortunately, the evidence provided, such as the media announcements that are usually made before most Apple releases, suggests that this may indeed be true. Apple usually sticks to their announced deadlines, however they have been known to break them occasionally."
to make sure no one can create an alternative version of iTunes with it.
My big problem with this is that EVERY program for the iPhone has to come from iTunes, which means it will most likely be sold. I doubt Apple is going to host any freeware programs that people write out of the goodness of their hearts. I've actually been very surprised by the quality and ingenuity of some of the programs written for jailbroken iPhones, and I know that these programs will only increase in quality once real tools are released, but I just wonder how hindered it will be because of the inability of people to "just install" programs on it that they like.
"Thank you for using Stop-n-Drop, America's favorite suicide booth since 2008"
What kind of /. user would buy a locked-down phone anyway?
One of the most frustrating parts of being a mac and Apple platform developer has always been being the veil of secrecy around API's, and for anyone who's used to the mac development lifestyle, the iPhone SDK isn't an exception. Personally, I can't understand it; keeping customers in the dark may be smart marketing, but keeping developers for your platform in the dark is suicide.
Thousands of developers are already writing code for Google's Android platform because Google released the API early, even before they released a device. By the time Apple releases their SDK, Google will already be ahead of them in the numbers of developers experienced with their API. I wish Apple could understand the enormous competitive disadvantage they are putting themselves in.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
The security question is not a red herring. I have witnesses a phone virus and the results are not pretty.
A good friend of mine lives in the Philippines, where expensive cellphones are status symbols. In 1996, when I was paying her a visit, she had the latest, fanciest Nokia. It got a virus, and the virus started sending hundreds of X-rated advertising MMS messages to everyone she knew. It was both embarrassing and expensive, since the phone companies over there charge for each individual message.
Fortunately, I was with her at the time and was able to fix the problem with f-secure's anti-virus software for the phone, but the result was a $300 phone bill the phone company refused to write off. My friend is in the upper middle class in the Philipines, and that means a $1,000 monthly income. The phone bill devastated her.
So don't ignore the cellphone virus threat. It can cost real people real money and genuine embarassment thanks to the annoyance and subject matter of those messages. Fortunately for her, most of her friends didn't have the fancy cellphones needed to receive those messages (and catch the virus) but it was still no fun at all explaining them to people.
So don't understate the virus threat. Steve definitely doesn't want stuff like that happening to his beloved iPhone, and as a happy iPhone owner, I can't blame him one bit.
D
How about the fact that everything (on 1.0) runs as root?
Kiteboarding Gear Mention slashdot and get 10% off!
Yes, there are a great number of interesting and impressive web based apps, but I agree with "get real" in regards to them. Web apps on the iPhone (and mobile phones in general) ALL SUCK for a few important reasons:
Lack of signal breaks the web application.
Whether because of poor coverage, network trouble or signal interference, loosing access to apps on a device in your hand because of network issues SUCKS. For example, I tried to use a shopping-list web application, but discovered it was useless because I couldn't pull up the app while inside any large box-stores.
Web applications vanish without notice.
Web developers can be fickle and your favorite app vanishing from the web SUCKS. I've gone to bookmarked apps I use regularly a number of times and found only an annoying search-engine gateway page remaining.
The web browser interface gets in the way.
Accidentally hitting the history back or reload buttons and loosing progress in a web app SUCKS. The auto-rotation of the screen and consequent dimension change, can also hamper app usage and worse, break the app.
I love my iPhone and I love surfing the internet on it, but I prefer my native apps over their web-based equivalents any day. And for what it's worth, a native app really only has to send data back and forth over the network, not the interface as well, so I'd argue that they are even more efficient in terms of bandwidth than web versions.
Being unable to run as root is where problems occur for developers. Behold the market for Nokia S60 v3 smartphone software. Half of the most popular apps are written by Nokia, because everyone else is busy jumping through flaming hoops to get their apps signed. The process is so damned bureaucratic, innovation freezes, developers loose interest in frustration, and Nokia ends up developing most of what little appears on the platform. Worse yet, the stated goal of providing security through signing is obvious bullshit when signed spyware starts popping up. It's all about Nokia controlling who gets signed and who gets to compete.
You're root comment is a user security issue and has NOTHING to do with the availability of an SDK. If iPhone is unable to run at different user levels it is NOT Mac OS X, because user levels are a fundamental property of any *nix OS.
Macintosh computers aren't riddled with viruses and security breaches, what makes you think Macintosh phones would be any different? If Apple's SDK "solution" is to sign apps instead of fixing their obviously broke ass permission system, then their SDK will be useless anyway just like their other iPhone "SDK." If Apple can't provide a hand held platform as open to developers as their desktop systems, then they will join the long list of companies that failed to revolutionize the mobile market.
Right now they're blowing it, just like they blew it with the Macintosh two decades ago. I wouldn't be so upset about it if I wasn't such a huge fan of the company.