Slashdot Mirror
Apple Targeting Business World for the iPhone
The New York Times is running a couple of stories about the future of the iPhone in the business world and Apple's plan to maintain control of application development. Now that the iPhone SDK has been released and the "App store" has been demonstrated, Steve Jobs is pushing for the adoption of the iPhone as a standard business tool. In addition, a venture capitalist named John Doerr has launched a $100 million "iFund" to spur development of applications for the iPhone. From the NYTimes:
"Mr. Jobs was upfront that there are limitations on what applications can do. He talked about bans on pornography and malicious programs. He also said Apple will not allow any application to be installed on the machine other than through the iTunes store. Nor will applications be permitted that enable an end run around Apple's deals with wireless carriers. Many questions remain unanswered. How much streaming video will Apple allow, because the iPhone is such an interesting video device? Mr. Jobs did say that the application development environment will have a lot of capabilities for video playback. Will Apple allow a service like Last.FM to offer streaming music on the iPhone?"
Right now Apple is proving the market for such a device, and then products like OpenMoko will come in and claim it, using the iPhone as R&D to prove concept but without encumbering themselves as Apple is doing.
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Apple may be about to drop the ball on this one. With Android looking like a (potentially future) winner, Apple are losing the chance to build up momentum as an open mobile platform for developers to experiment on.
I understand that they probably have contractual agreements they need to fulfill, and that the deal with ATT may have been a deal with the devil to get the phone out there and break into the market, but it could end up costing them more than they bargained for.
When will companies learn to provide us [Consumers | Developer] tools to use that do not have purposeful limitations that are simply the concoction of someone who wants to confine what I can do with their product.
"Apple will not allow any application to be installed on the machine other than through the iTunes store"
So how can you be targeting businesses with this product then? What if I want to develop a special in house only product for my sales people to use that I don't want the competition to get ahold of? Why can't the iPhone work like every other piece of hardware I own and run any kind of program/hardware I can stuff in there? I'm on the fence of getting fed-up with Apple...
I love how apple has declared that their 'controls' are actually 'freeing' the phone. Yes, now that you can put apps on the phone, it is a 'more' open platform. But you STILL have to go through apple, and since it is *MY* phone, why can't I do whatever *I* want to it?
... oh wait ... I can ... apple just doesn't like it ;)
This is the same problem sony has with the psp (although, it has some differences as well) - If I want custom firmware on my psp, who is sony to tell me no?
I don't like where this attitude of control is taking us. Already, you don't buy software, you just buy a license to use it. I DON'T want to have to license my HARDWARE too!
...one of the major questions. Jobs was explicitly asked if VoIP apps would be allowed. Jobs explicitly answered that they would be via WiFi, but not via the carrier connection.
So I think the question of how much data usage will be "allowed" for heavy use applications is essentially unlimited via WiFi.
As carriers continue to build out their data networks, as competition continues, and as higher bandwidth (e.g., 3G) iPhones become available (which has already been confirmed by Apple and AT&T several times), then we may see the landscape change for apps that use the carrier's network. It seems right now a common sense approach will be applied.
But it also seems clear that anything (as long as it's not specifically for porn, illegal, etc.) will be allowed via WiFi.
"Slap Android on a pure touchscreen phone and what do you have?"
A phone that's not available? That has no supporting infrastructure? No stores that sell it? No support staff ready, willing, and able to help? No iTunes? No backing from any major carrier? And no one, other than a few geeks, who care if it's "open", closed, or just cracked ajar?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
However, Google's Android OS is not and will never be a replacement for the iPhone or any other powerful smartphones, especially those running Windows Mobile. Consider: http://code.google.com/android/kb/general.html
Q: Can I write code for Android using C/C++?
A: Android only supports applications written using the Java programming language at this time. Google has decided that developers cannot write powerful native binary applications for Android phone, which is important for high performance cryptographically secure applications. How is Apple any worse than Google which only allows interpreted programs, when since the launch of the iPhone, developers could always write Javascript interpreted programs, and now even some native ones as well through the iStore?
As a Unix (NetBSD, Linux, & MacOSX) person, I hate to say this, but so far Microsoft is the good guy here, since their smartphones and Windows Mobile devices have the least restrictions for third party applications and developers.
Another problem with Android is that all of the proposed new phones (none of which have been released yet) for it will only have low-resolution QVGA (240x320) displays, which is literally half of the HVGA (320x480) display of the iPhone which has been available for more than half a year. This will make Android much harder to use for web surfing, office apps, etc. than the iPhone, or even Microsoft Windows Mobile phones, some of which have WVGA (800x480) displays.
Toshiba G900
Softbank X01T
Don't get me wrong, I love the look, feel, shape, sleekness, GUI, and interface of the iPhone and iPod touch. It blows everything else away. But as a business tool, Apple has decided too crippled its devices to the point that of being useless, especially when compared the uglier and bulky Windows Mobile phones.
Actually, I was able to install the SDK on my G4 using only a couple extra manual steps. Because it's not an intel machine it skipped a few critical packages. I merely installed them manually and I was then able to compile some sample applications and run them in the iPhone simulator. You probably won't be able to load your programs onto an iPhone but at least you can do development work using the simulator
I must agree. One of the reasons I never bothered writing an app for my Treo (a timecode calculator in this case) was on account of the copious amounts of "IR Beaming" piracy of titles. I knew only about one in a few hundred users of my program would ever pay me. At least on the iPhone platform, I can be assured that every user has to pay it, thus I can charge a very low price.
Cell phone companies make a tidy bit of change selling apps to kids on their sidekicks and corporate people who want the Good suite on their mobiles, why would Apple's situation be any different.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.