Apple Drops Part of iPhone Developer NDA

ds writes "Apple, this morning, announced they are dropping the iPhone Developer NDA in respect to released software. Previously, iPhone developers were legally bound even after their software had been released." Another reader adds, "Early release software is still covered, but this should bring about increased developer interaction, as well as a slew of iPhone dev books." The complete message about the NDA change can be seen for now at Apple's iPhone Developer site, and is reproduced below. "We have decided to drop the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for released iPhone software. We put the NDA in place because the iPhone OS includes many Apple inventions and innovations that we would like to protect, so that others don't steal our work. It has happened before. While we have filed for hundreds of patents on iPhone technology, the NDA added yet another level of protection. We put it in place as one more way to help protect the iPhone from being ripped off by others. However, the NDA has created too much of a burden on developers, authors and others interested in helping further the iPhone's success, so we are dropping it for released software. Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released. Thanks to everyone who provided us constructive feedback on this matter."

Comments

About freaking time

[Gewalt]

Seriously, what took apple so long?

Re:About freaking time

[2nd Post!]

They were probably waiting for Android to be released.

Re:About freaking time

[ShieldW0lf]

I suspect they were waiting for Android. Prior to its arrival, they were pretty much the only game in town, so there wasn't really anywhere for disgruntled developers to flee to.

Re:About freaking time

[Chundra]

Their stock price hadn't tanked enough?

Re:About freaking time

[Poorcku]

I don't get this: first post and it gets modded redundant? Leave it to Slashdot to understand logic.

So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Gewalt]

Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released.

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Free the Cowards]

No. The NDA only covers Apple's stuff, it does not and cannot cover yours. (Developers couldn't talk about their stuff, but only because talking about their stuff implied talking about Apple's stuff.)

When Apple says unreleased software they mean their unreleased software. You can talk about your unreleased software all you want, so long as this doesn't involve things like betas of new iPhone OSes.

In other words, the policy is going to be the same as it is for Mac OS X, where prerelease versions are covered under non-disclosure but you can talk about publicly released versions all you want.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[gnasher719]

f I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

You have been reading an announcement about a change in the NDA. Whatever is in that announcement has no legal value whatsoever. Trying to search for a deep meaning in each word of this announcement is completely pointless. If you have a changed NDA in your hands, then whatever that changed NDA says is the new rules.

Also note that Apple _always_ puts all its own unreleased software under NDA. Therefore XCode 3.1 (which was and is needed for iPhone development) was under NDA until it was released a few weeks ago. So "unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released" is exactly what Apple has always said for many years, iPhone or no iPhone.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[elrous0]

Now I'm really confused. So you're saying that developers can talk about their stuff because it's theirs, but they can't talk about their stuff because it implies talking about Apple's stuff?

Me head hurt.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[ClassMyAss]

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

While the wording is a bit ambiguous, and I don't know what it means for bitching about rejections, I have a pretty good feeling that what they're talking about when they say "software" is really Apple software, i.e. the stuff that makes up the iPhone SDK, not the applications that you are developing. In other words, once this new agreement is in effect, we should be able to freely discuss the iPhone SDK in its current release form; we will not, however, be able to discuss the unreleased betas of the next iteration (which Apple usually gives registered devs access to). I think this is much better, because any person that wanted to can see Apple's tutorials and download the SDK anyways, so it was a little ridiculous to have it under NDA. Now if you're just not allowed to talk about the unreleased features, that seems a lot more reasonable.

...which should now make it totally legit to open source software that targets the iPhone - I know people have already done this (Oolong Engine comes to mind), but technically people that did this were in a gray area, where they were probably violating the NDA, but betting on the fact that Apple wouldn't come after them as long as they weren't doing anything too sneaky. It's good to have it cleared up, finally.

Back to your original point, though, IIRC the rejection letters that many received actually came with their own NDAs attached, so I'm not sure that this new agreement will have any bearing whatsoever on that.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Khakionion]

Is that really so hard to understand?

Any piece of code that elucidates Cocoa Touch/iPhone OS functionality couldn't be disclosed, because Cocoa Touch/iPhone OS was under the FNDA. It may be the developers' code, but it can speak volumes about the structure of the iPhone SDK.

Now, the only code you can't distribute is code that uses new features in prerelease versions of the OS/SDK.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gewalt was referring to Apple putting NDA notices on rejection letters.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Free the Cowards]

Yes.

You write code. You can talk about that code. But if that code is based on somebody else's code, and that somebody else has that code under NDA, and your code implies information about their code, then you have to keep it under wraps.

More concretely, Apple's NDA cannot prevent you from discussing your own code. But if your code contains information about the iPhone code, you can't discuss that.

Now that things are being lifted, you can discuss the iPhone code and therefore your own code which relies on it. The only remaining restriction is that you can't talk about iPhone code which isn't public yet, and by implication any of your own code which relies on the non-public changes.

So this change covers only their prerelease software, and by extension any of your software which contains information about their prerelease software. But it doesn't, and can't, cover your own prerelease software by itself.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[Free the Cowards]

...And? I knew what he was referring to. His implied connection was wrong, as I discussed.

Re:So you still cant bitch about being rejected?

[firewood]

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

Note that this announcement is about the SDK agreement. It says nothing about the App store agreement, which might still cover communications from Apple about submitted apps.

Developer's app?

[dazedNconfuzed]

Here's hoping we'll see a developer's app that runs entirely on an iPhone / iPod Touch.

Re:Developer's app?

[cleatsupkeep]

Here's hoping we'll see a developer's app that runs entirely on an iPhone / iPod Touch.

What would it do?

Re:Developer's app?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if you're developing for a jailbroken phone, installing the compiler, etc., on the phone is the easiest way to do it.

I wrote about how to install it on my blog: So I Made My iPhone Say Hello World

But Apple's SDK license agreement restricts you from writing any applications that execute other code, download plugins, or use non-Apple-standard interpreters. Basically, SDK-legal apps are intentionally crippled. My analysis of the SDK agreement: So I Don't Agree

I see no way that Apple will lift the restrictions on what you can develop, even though they lift the NDA.

It used to be "The first rule of iPhone development is you don't talk about iPhone development." This goes away, but the second rule of iPhone development is and will remain,

"You only write what Apple says you can write."

Unless you use the open toolchain - but then you get no AppStore, and can only deploy to jailbroken devices.

kb

Why All Bailout Packages Will Fail

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been thinking about this for a while, but I think I understand why the majority of the American people are against the current bailout package, and why ultimately all bailouts (whether for banks, mortgage holders, or taxpayers in general) will fail.

The root of the problem is not economic but sociological in nature. No amount of economic carrots will fix the problem, despite the fact they may delay the crash or draw it out into a painstakingly long-term affair. Despite the fact that corporate productivity continues to increase, individual productivity has dropped off as people have become depressed with their jobs, which seem to absorb ever increasing amounts of their time and effort.

Americans have become disillusioned with going after material at the expense of building relationships. People are addicted to their jobs and have delayed finding a partner of the opposite sex, getting married, and having children. Their job brings them immediate stability and shiny things; however, they know their long-term stability is at risk.

I think a majority of the population would appreciate a breather from the corporate world, and if there are large swaths of people in the same position, that gives them ample chance to meet with other people who have plenty of spare time in order to build relationships that cannot be built barhopping on Friday nights.

Maybe I'm projecting my thoughts on the populace at large, but I know very few people my age (~30 years old) who have started building a family, and that's quite frankly distressing. The economy isn't everything. The crash will happen. We will survive. Let it happen swiftly and let the recovery happen in the near term.

Re:Why All Bailout Packages Will Fail

[Anonymous Coward]

It's going to be fun to see if anybody mods this up.

It's worthy of both Offtopic and Interesting mods.

Re:Why All Bailout Packages Will Fail

[Gewalt]

d'oh.... meant not even remotely interesting. /sigh

Re:Why All Bailout Packages Will Fail

[MightyYar]

Yeah, the anonymous coward must travel in different circles than I do... I've been to almost all of my friends' weddings over the last few years. There's really only one of us not married or engaged, and almost all of us have at least one baby. And yes, we're all in our early 30s.

Re:Why All Bailout Packages Will Fail

[Si-UCP]

Oh, geez, I thought the Linux fanboys were full of themselves, but the Apple fanboys now think Steve Jobs runs the country? ;)

Android

[SuperKendall]

They wanted to wait for the Android release so the API could not legally borrow too heavily from the iPhone API.

At least, that seems like a reasonable guess...

Re:Android

[XxtraLarGe]

They wanted to wait for the Android release so the API could not legally borrow too heavily from the iPhone API.

I highly doubt it. Google has their own Mac developers and one of the first apps bundled on the iPhone was a YouTube video program. Google has had access to the iPhone API's long before most other developers. Google Mobile App was available on the App Store since July 3. Besides, IIRC, Android is based on Java whereas the iPhone OS X is based on Objective C. More likely, the fear of iPhone developers leaving for Android was an incentive. Hopefully they'll go ahead and drop the whole darned thing since any Tom, Dick or Harry can sign up for the ADC and download the dev tools.

Re:Android

[Ilgaz]

Spend months developing your application under strict NDA terms and get your application rejected because some idiot working at App Store thinks it has potential to be competitive?

I don't feel pity for iPhone developers. It is same as customers. They accept such abuse while buying the device or firing up XCode new iPhone app project.

Java is also object oriented and there is a very object oriented OS in hand which has more than 200 million users. Symbian that is. Symbian developers could release working iPhone apps in full functionality in months time. They also had to mess with stupid "hack" thing let alone fixing their own issues.

I keep saying that Developer should maintain a Windows Mobile or better, Symbian "mirror" of application. Symbian developers can ship their apps in whatever way they want, they can even mail the .sisx file to users. It is a lot different on iPhone official scene. If that idiot clicks "reject" template, you are doomed. You can't even TELL that the idiot clicked "reject" to your potential customers.

Re:Android

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Plus, the api is all objective c ish. IF the goal of andriod is to get a ground swell of developers they wouldn't want to follow that kind of syntax and naming convention that most non apple developers (including those that are developing the hardware to run it) aren't familiar with.

Re:Android

[geekoid]

No it is not a reasonable guess.
A) Android developers could have also been iPhone developers. Illegal

B) It still wouldn't be legal to take Apples stuff without an NDA. You don't need an NDA to have Patent/Copyright/Trademark protection. In fact, the point of Patent/Copyright/Trademark is so you can have protection and release your stuff.

Re:Android

[SuperKendall]

B) It still wouldn't be legal to take Apples stuff without an NDA. You don't need an NDA to have Patent/Copyright/Trademark protection. In fact, the point of Patent/Copyright/Trademark is so you can have protection and release your stuff.

But an NDA always adds legal weight to all of that. You aren't thinking like a lawyer, everything is defense in depth and parts building together to make a stronger whole.

It's actually a lot like programming.

Recovery time needed

[DodgeRules]

They had to recover from the clubbing they got from developers.

Expect even more non-app store apps

[Seakip18]

With this gone, Saurik and other jailbreak devs can release their tools and compilers in binary format now. What this means is that Linux and Windows boxes developers enter the fray a lot quicker without having to navigate the pain that is the toolchain compiler assembling.

On top of that, they can openly discuss apps running on jailbroke phones without fear of reprisal. Hoorah!

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Free the Cowards]

Why would this affect jailbreakers? Why would they have ever agreed to an Apple NDA?

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Seakip18]

Yes, because in order to compile their programs, one of the tools they have to use is apples IPhone SDK that you get from joining the dev program. In order to join it, you have to agree to the NDA.

Rather than risk a future legal battle that would cripple jailbreak development, they wisely played by the rules it looks like.

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Anonymous Coward]

With this gone, Saurik and other jailbreak devs can release their tools and compilers in binary format now. What this means is that Linux and Windows boxes developers enter the fray a lot quicker without having to navigate the pain that is the toolchain compiler assembling.

On top of that, they can openly discuss apps running on jailbroke phones without fear of reprisal. Hoorah!

I don't know how you put two and two together and got six, but this has nothing to do with jailbreaking.

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Seakip18]

Argh.

Should read

Saurik and other jailbroken-iphone devs

Click here if you want to get a see what is needed to compile code developed outside of Apple's X-Code.

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Free the Cowards]

So how did they build all those jailbreak apps in the months before Apple released the official SDK?

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Seakip18]

Saurik explains alot of it here.

They developed using Apple's open-source stuff via darwin-gcc, if I understand correctly. You just never got any of the really cool class headers required to use the neater functions of the IPhone.

In order to make the most with the 2.x firmware, you needed to get the SDK. Once you got it, you agreed to the NDA.

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Free the Cowards]

Thanks for the info, makes sense now.

Re:Expect even more non-app store apps

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but Apple can only go after people who break the NDA. So, if someone posts information anonymously and other people use that information, then Apple is SOL.

Summary is wrong, ugh

[Anonymous Coward]

The NDA still covers APPLE'S unreleased software, NOT third-party developers'.

You misunderstand "release", iPhone OS versions

[SuperKendall]

If I read this right, does that mean developers still can't publicly bitch about their apps being rejected from the store?

"released software" means APPLE released software. As in, you can talk about API versions that are out in public but not versions that are still developer preview only.

Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've put my order in for a G1 and I'll be writing applications for that platform from now on. I spent far too long at the mercy of another iron fisted company to want to go back to that kind of situation.

Re:Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit on you Anonymous Coward. I think you have in fact, never written a application for any mobile platform

Re:Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

kthxbai ^_^

Re:Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a G1 a type of iPhone?

Re:Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Nobody cares about a few nerds and their G1s. Why are such replies always modded up?

Fact is, they already have a huge amount of mind-share and everybody who is looking to get a new phone is going to think iPhone, not HTC G1.

And there are still a shit load of apps that can be developed that will pass any crazy Apple review process.

There is absolutely no danger of iPhone failing because a few silly nerds bought G1s.

Re:Too little too late.

[Anonymous Coward]

Too little? What else do you want them to do, bake you cookies?

Sorta Like Google...

[onkelonkel]

"Don't be (quite as) evil"

Oh the benevolent merciful...

[milatchi]

Oh the benevolent and merciful Apple. Thank you for allowing me to speak and allowing me to gaze upon your products. You truly are awesome Apple.
Apple is so great, and innovative, and fantastic. They make the best, most dependable enterprise products, and they treat their developers like gods. I wish Apple controlled the entire computer industry. It would be beautiful , intuitive, and in a word, "perfect."

You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

The cellphone industry is rapidly moving to Android as their standard platform with Motorola being the latest large cellphone company to embrace Google's open source OS with a ramp up of their internal Android team to 500 people.

LG and Sony are next in the queue for Android phone releases and there are huge numbers in the pipeline after them including devices that fall between cellphones and mini-laptops.

To suggest that there is some sort of secret and valuable information in the iPhone SDK that anyone cares about is absolutely inane.

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market. Look for future attempts to fend off Android with dropping the fees to release iPhone apps, development on machines that don't require overpriced Macs just to do simple phone app development, and all the other silly shit Apple has going on with the iPhone.

   

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[DurendalMac]

BWAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAA! Yeah, the industry is rapidly moving to Android, a platform that has only just seen a released product that is middling at best and has yet to gain a foothold in the market. Yeah, there's a mass exodus of developers from the ridiculously lucrative iPhone market. Yeah, the iPhone is the only competition for Android and vice versa, so Blackberry and Palm don't figure into it at all.

I fucking hate FOSS fanboys.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market.

Well, it indeed WOULD have been that way if not for this.

development on machines that don't require overpriced Macs just to do simple phone app development

Well, sorry I don't think this is feasible. Yes you could build GCC as a cross-compiler but what about Xcode?

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[MightyYar]

Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

Did you just make that up?

The cellphone industry is rapidly moving to Android as their standard platform

Even if this is true... so what? Since Apple doesn't offer their platform to other makers, why would they care what other makers use?

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market.

If you take a step back, you'd see that they are already in a niche - supplying just a tiny fraction of cell phones. However, as they always seem to do, they picked a very profitable niche. If it gets too competitive, I wouldn't expect to see them hang around.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Korin43]

Where did you get all that from "Apple doesn't want a potential competitor to use any of their code"?

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

The cost of a machine that is suitable to do iPhone development is $600. Mac-Mini. Presumably you already have a mouse, keyboard, and monitor.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Renderer of Evil]

This has as much credibility as "Year of the Linux" and "iPod Killers"

Android has yet to ship and create a healthy ecosystem that can be monetized by developers. It's all conjecture now. Just about anyone knows about the iPhone. The brand is really hot and in demand. NDA whining is confined to nerd elite who have found an issue and want to run with it as if it affects the majority of people. It doesn't.

Apple is really shielding itself from all kinds of legal minefields. This issue isn't black and white as some make it out to be. Every company out there wants to see shelves stocked with books targeting their platform. NDA prevents some publishers from releasing books which only goes to prove that Apple isn't doing this to be antagonistic. They have assumed the risk because the alternative could be much worse.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[wickerprints]

I disagree. I think that the market is largely driven by what consumers want. Apple has a huge head start--they are quite literally years ahead on hardware/software integration, having released a product that has yet to see any equal in overall end-user experience. People absolutely love the iPhone. Relatively speaking, they haven't even heard of what the competitors are offering, and even the recent release of Android has received minimal attention by comparison.

Now that I've established the context, it's easy to see why handset manufacturers and non-AT&T providers in the US are embracing Android. It is their best shot at competing with Apple. They moved too slow, lacked long-term vision, and failed to concede to Apple's demands. And now they're scrambling to keep up. iPhone + iTunes + App Store = killer combination. This has nothing to do with FOSS. Face it, few people have even seen what Android does, let alone have any real-world understanding of how well it will integrate with a variety of handsets and carriers. Because it hasn't happened yet. Maybe it'll be a competitor, maybe it won't. But I can confidently say that whatever the outcome, it won't look or feel nearly as clean as an Apple product.

I've also heard that despite a lot of grumblings by iPhone developers, they generally like the business model. Steve Demeter, for example, is on the record for saying he has no intention of bringing Trism to Android. This coming from a guy who made a quarter million in two months off his blockbuster game. So I don't think you're telling the whole story here. It's the secrecy they don't like, and with this latest turn, Apple has done the right thing.

Frankly, I'm amazed that you didn't get modded down. Your bias is so clearly showing and you lack any evidence to back up your outrageous claims. I think Android can be huge, and I like that Google has stepped up to provide more competition in the mobile computing market. I hope it lives up to the high expectations that the industry has set for it, but I'm not holding my breath because judging from how Motorola, Sony Ericsson, RIM, Palm, Samsung, LG, Nokia, T-Mobile, Verizon, Sprint, etc. have behaved in the past, I don't think they're going to all have some kind of Voltron moment and band together to bring down the "evil Apple."

After all, you're just cheering for one evil corporation to smite the other. Personally, what matters to me most is whether I get the user experience and customer service I expect. If Android facilitates this goal, then I'm all for it. But you won't catch me talking complete bullshit just because I have a stick up my ass about a particular company. That's so last decade.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[fatandsassy]

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market.

Actually, isn't this move arguably their step back away from that edge? The developer backlash from the App-denial situation (and the NDA situation) was threatening to put them in a bad spot, and this is a decision in the developers' favor.

Look for future attempts to fend off Android

I think Android is going to have to grab a bit larger of a foothold before we can feasibly credit a move like this as being defensive. There's plenty of room in the market for some competition as both platforms take bites out of Windows-based smartphones.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[riegel]

hmm "by Anonymous Coward"

just to do simple phone app development

Apparently the Anonymous Coward has never used an iphone app.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[cyfer2000]

Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

Are there many developers at all? And exodus, where do they go? They program in ObjectiveC, if they don't do iPhone, they can only program for OS X and OpenStep. I thought those who programed on iPhone must have done some kind of programming on OS X.

The cellphone industry is rapidly moving to Android as their standard platform with Motorola being the latest large cellphone company to embrace Google's open source OS with a ramp up of their internal Android team to 500 people.

If Motorola doesn't move to Android, where can they go? Graveyard? And if Apple didn't do the NDA thing, will Motorola move to iPhone? No XXX way.

LG and Sony are next in the queue for Android phone releases and there are huge numbers in the pipeline after them including devices that fall between cellphones and mini-laptops.

They have been doing this for years, nothing for me to see here.

To suggest that there is some sort of secret and valuable information in the iPhone SDK that anyone cares about is absolutely inane.

Why?

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market. Look for future attempts to fend off Android with dropping the fees to release iPhone apps, development on machines that don't require overpriced Macs just to do simple phone app development, and all the other silly shit Apple has going on with the iPhone.

From a niche market to a niche market, I don't see any potential problem here for Apple. And why I can only program in java on Android, I like java, but why can't I access CPU directly? Yeah, I know the JIT thing, but it draws juice from my battery. And why the java on Android is not compatible with other's java? If it is not compatible, what's the point of java?

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

I fucking hate FOSS fanboys. - said the raving Mac fanboy from under Steve Jobs ass...

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has a huge head start--they are quite literally years ahead on hardware/software integration, having released a product that has yet to see any equal in overall end-user experience.

Do you work in the PR or marketing department? What does that statement really mean? Every cell phone ever produced has hardware and software and they are integrated. Hell, every device with a CPU has some type of software that is integrated to work with the hardware. What makes Apple special and so much more advanced on this?

The iPhone has specific issues that people do not like either. Oddly, these complaints do not seem to reach a critical mass of complaints until Apple releases x+1 and then everyone claims how much better and more functional the new version is. My proof of that is how many people buy just about every new version of iPod and iPhone within days of its release? If these people loved the existing product so much, why are they litererly standing in line so excited about the newest version with the newest features?

I do fully agree with you general statements about Apple shaking up the market and getting other companies off their asses in an attempt to compete. More actual competition is always a benefit to everyone.

But you won't catch me talking complete bullshit just because I have a stick up my ass about a particular company. That's so last decade.

Really? What about this statement?

But I can confidently say that whatever the outcome, it won't look or feel nearly as clean as an Apple product.

I find this statement odd as well

People absolutely love the iPhone. Relatively speaking, they haven't even heard of what the competitors are offering, and even the recent release of Android has received minimal attention by comparison.

Okay, people may love the iPhone and I'll even throw the iPod in there as well. But... Using your own words, many people made this decision about the iPhone and the iPod being the "best" products out there in their field but yet they can't even name or have not seen or used any of competitors products.
All that matter is the person is happy with what they bought though.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[dslbrian]

Actually, isn't this move arguably their step back away from that edge? The developer backlash from the App-denial situation (and the NDA situation) was threatening to put them in a bad spot, and this is a decision in the developers' favor.

Yeah but how many times do you have to be bitten as a developer before you stop going back. I know if I had spent a bunch of time and effort making a complete phone app only to have it rejected at the last minute for some capricious reason, that would be the last time I developed on that platform.

When I read that Apple backed off on the NDA, to me that sounds like - "we are dropping the NDA because everyone got pissed off, yet we reserve the right to screw over developers in the future." They want to operate that way, fine - as a developer I'll spend my time elsewhere.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Goaway]

I'm pretty sure he got it from "Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers" and "The cellphone industry is rapidly moving to Android".

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[ShieldW0lf]

This doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with consumers and what they want. Everything you said about consumers and the market is irrelevant, be it true or false. This has to do with developers, who have the choice to support a platform or not. It's just like game consoles. If game developers don't support you, you're done, regardless of how much the consumers like or dislike your particular device. This is the same thing.

If the perception among developers and those who fund development is that developing for the iPhone is risky and you might not be permitted to deploy your application after investing time and effort into learning the platform and developing for it and creating something useful that people want to use, then the iPhone will die, and quickly too.

Personally, I've already started investigating Android, but I'm not wasting my time with the iPhone, because Apple as a business entity is a control-freak of draconian proportions who simply can't be trusted.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[wickerprints]

What makes Apple special on hardware/software integration? You're seriously asking this question? Since when has Nokia or Motorola come out with anything that looks remotely like iTMS? Since when have they developed a UI that is easy to use and intuitive? If I have to hunt through a labyrinth of nested menus to change a setting on my phone, that's poor design, UI as an afterthought. Who was the first to employ an an orientation sensor in a phone, a multi-touch screen, and other hardware improvements and then integrate that with the software? That is what I mean by "years ahead."

The iPhone was not, and is not, perfect. At least Apple never claimed it to be. The fan base might treat it as such, but as is the case with fans, there's often a love/hate relationship. The consumer is not a monolithic entity. Loving the existing product while buying the next available revision is not logically inconsistent, and in fact, you fail to recognize that some degree of product success is required in order for consumers to be willing to purchase the next version. If you think such behavior is unique to Apple, you've obviously ignored the Playstation, the Wii, and the XBox. They're standing in line because Apple has made a product that people love to use and love to be seen using. It does things that other phones don't do, and it generally does them well. Perfection isn't a prerequisite for a successful product.

They can't name competitors' products because as of the present time, there isn't one. There hasn't been one YET. You again fail to understand the nature of the product. The iPhone is more than just the handset itself, just like the iPod is not just the hardware device. It is the device + iTunes. Once you understand this, you will see that to date, there has not been any other product so tightly integrated on the market. Now, bear in mind I hope Android changes this. I sincerely do. But I really doubt it will ever look and feel as clean, because there is something unique about Apple's long-standing tradition of (obsessively) developing a product from the ground up. Remember, Google has to make a product that works with different hardware, different carriers, and different corporate tastes. In fact, these companies (Sony, Motorola, etc.) are even competing against each other! So do you really think that the result will be anywhere near as monolithic as what Apple has done?

In a way, it might be a good thing. Who knows? And that's my point. People are all excited about Android and making broad claims about the demise of Apple's business model for the iPhone, all over a product that has yet to cut its teeth in the marketplace. It's way, way, WAY too early to tell. Any claims about its ability to compete with a firmly established product as the iPhone is totally premature.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[dangitman]

This doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with consumers and what they want. Everything you said about consumers and the market is irrelevant, be it true or false. This has to do with developers, who have the choice to support a platform or not. It's just like game consoles.

No, it's not really about developers at all. Otherwise, how was the iPhone successful, even when there was no third-party software available? I'm pretty sure it would still be going strong today if they had never opened it up to third-party developers.

Consumers matter, because they are the ones who buy the product, and that is how you make money, by selling products (although I would have thought that was obvious). Consumers don't really care about what the developers think.

Also, developers don't have as much choice as you might think. Some may object on ethical/moral grounds, and not participate. But most will, because they will go where the money is. Just look at Windows. Plenty of people would rather be developing for some other system than Windows - but they bite their tongue and release software for Windows, because that's where a lot of the consumer market is at.

Individual developers may take a "principled stance" - but when it comes to anything larger than that, like small companies, they are not going to pass up the opportunity to make easy money from the iPhone.

Personally, I've already started investigating Android, but I'm not wasting my time with the iPhone, because Apple as a business entity is a control-freak of draconian proportions who simply can't be trusted.

So, what's your purpose in wanting to develop phone applications? Is it just for fun, or is it to make money?

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Macman408]

s/cellphone/MP3 player/g
s/iPhone/iPod/g ...etc.

Sure, Apple's decisions aren't always popular, but that doesn't mean that the iPhone is going to fade away into the sunset. They have an amazing amount of brand power (pronounced: "fanboys"). And they have a pretty good product from the point of view of the consumer - and that's where the money comes from.

The iPod is an even more closed platform (developers by invitation only!), yet it has been wildly popular. And this is in the face of a similar market - a late entry, a more expensive product, and countless others trying to imitate or improve upon it.

That's not to say that the iPhone is a guaranteed success, either. But so far, it has done pretty well - I doubt any single new phone will outdo it any time soon. On the other hand, an extension to an existing line (like from RIM) or an avalanche of Android phones might bury it. For the short term, I see no reason to discount the iPhone.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[Anonymous Coward]

Once you get past your VBScripting class, you'll find that it's not all that difficult to know more than one programming language. Just hang in there - I'm sure you'll get that Devry diploma someday.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[ShieldW0lf]

You are totally wrong. Consumers don't have any idea about NDA's or the lack of them. They are completely oblivious to such things. This is about developers. And developers have all the choice in the world. If you have a dozen different avenues you can dedicate your time and effort to, only one of them, you need to ask permission to try and put it into use, and the others, you're secure in your capacities to offer it to people. Add to this the fact that it's another platform you need to dedicate your time to learning and learning well if you're going to make good software. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense from a business perspective. Oh, and my purpose in building applications of any kind is neither fun nor money, but building good tools. Which incidentally is fun and makes me a lot of money.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[dangitman]

You are totally wrong. Consumers don't have any idea about NDA's or the lack of them.

Isn't that exactly what I said? It seems you agree with me, but then say "I'm totally wrong".

This is about developers. And developers have all the choice in the world.

Of course they do, but developers alone don't determine the success of a platform.

Add to this the fact that it's another platform you need to dedicate your time to learning and learning well if you're going to make good software. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense from a business perspective.

And given that the iPhone SDK is very easy to learn, and makes a lot of money for developers, then why would it be bad business sense to develop for the platform? iPhone developers are making out with bucketloads of money for very little effort.

Oh, and my purpose in building applications of any kind is neither fun nor money, but building good tools. Which incidentally is fun and makes me a lot of money.

Isn't building good tools a version of "fun"? Regardless, those who don't have any kind of noble goals like "good tools" can still make a fortune on the iPhone regardless of Apple's heavy-handed tactics - so why would they pass up the option? The risk/reward ratio is very low.

I believe you mentioned consoles in an earlier post. This is a good example of what I'm saying. Developers follow the consumer, not the other way around. For example, Sony has many onerous requirements to develop for the PS2/PS3, yet developers flock to the platform, because they know that consumers are there waiting to buy their products.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[nolife]

Since when has Nokia or Motorola come out with anything that looks remotely like iTMS? Since when have they developed a UI that is easy to use and intuitive?

Not a phone but I have a Samsung Sansa mp3 player and I find the UI very simple and easy to use. It also integrates with Real Rhapsody just fine. I plug the unit in and it syncs up my choice of music and my playlists, including the dynamic playlists that I "subscribe" to that are created by other people. It is simple and easy to use.

Didn't the Nokia N95 have an orientation sensor? Is the N95 one of those products that you did not know about ;)

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[daVinci1980]

Yes, I couldn't possibly imagine how I would get Xcode to run on any other windowing system...

Like Xwindows. That would just never work. /ducks

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

Apple is facing a mass exodus of OSS zealots with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[wickerprints]

Yes, it does, and it did so before the iPhone. But in keeping with my original point, it's not merely about the hardware, but how the software integrates with it. The N95 interface never used the accelerometer the way the iPhone does. So, even though the N95 has features that the iPhone did not have (GPS), and still does not have (video recording capability), it is again about taking the hardware and creating a user interface and applications that maximize its capabilities in an elegant and thoughtful way. That is what distinguishes the iPhone from any previous offering in the mobile handset market, and why it is enormously successful.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[MrResistor]

so Blackberry and Palm don't figure into it at all.

Palm pretty much doesn't. There are so few phones running PalmOS that it might as well be dead. I really wish that weren't the case, as I happen to like PalmOS, especially compared to the Blackberry I have now.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[teh kurisu]

I think 'mass exodus' was maybe a bit of an exaggeration, but there have been instances of developers moving in that direction:

Already, Cool O' Meter developer Tseng and Exposure developer Fraser Speirs have sworn off iPhone development. And Williams told us, "I downloaded the Android SDK. I'm not sure I will do anything on the platform, but Apple's actions over the past few months has made me actually think about it. Six months ago, I couldn't have imagined that."

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[moronoxyd]

First off, I'd have to be an Apple fanboy as the iPhone and the Mac are separate entities.

The iPhone uses a trimmed down version of MacOS X.
So there you go.

Re:You Have To Be Joking

[hobbit]

The App Store:
No trojans. Less crapware than Android Market. Lame.

Stupid iPhone devs

[clang_jangle]

Developing for the iPhone platform is exactly like slaves manufacturing shackles to be used on other slaves. When shiny is more important than freedom, it says something about one's lack of intelligence/integrity. IMHO. Heh, I laugh in the face of bad karma...

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[cowscows]

Yes, it's exactly like slavery. Thanks for such a useful analogy.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[sootman]

Now that this part of the NDA has been dropped, it seems to me that developing for iPhone is no better or worse than developing for any other closed-source platform--Windows, Palm, etc. Maybe not ideal, but not that bad.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

apple is gay, and everyone who likes apple is gay.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Llywelyn]

Melodramatic much?

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[tyrione]

Developing for the iPhone platform is exactly like slaves manufacturing shackles to be used on other slaves. When shiny is more important than freedom, it says something about one's lack of intelligence/integrity. IMHO. Heh, I laugh in the face of bad karma...

Dem sum rich f'n slaves, masser.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[NilObject]

"exactly like slaves manufacturing shackles to be used on other slaves"?

Seriously?

Are you comparing one of humanity's most shameful acts to some inconsequential policy issues with a damn smartphone? Surely you're not because doing so would be blindingly stupid. Honestly.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, people are making money hand over fist with the iPhone app store.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhone is the platform to develop for and where the money is.

You didn't think people developed for Windows because it's good, did you?

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of moron throws a brick at a duck and then advertises that he did that?

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Only a troll would compare a cushy job developing software for the iPhone to slavery. Mods: Please adjust parent comment accordingly.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

Only a disingenuous lackey would downplay the loss of freedom inherent to the iPhone development model. Mods: Please adjust parent comment accordingly.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Why even bother with a proper reply to someone who won't even put their name to their post?

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

You've already shown your unwillingness to "bother with a proper reply" to someone who did put their name to their post, so just how much weight do you suppose your insipid response carries? :)

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[teh kurisu]

You have the option of not buying an iPhone. You have the option of not developing applications for the iPhone. If you work for a company that develops applications for the iPhone, you have the option of leaving that company.

These are options that the slaves on the plantations simply didn't have.

I guess you should feel lucky that you equate the iPhone development model with slavery. It shows that you're lucky enough to never have experienced the real thing.

Re:Stupid iPhone devs

[Anonymous Coward]

Except the whole "we can reject your applications from our store, the only legitimate method of purchasing applications"
That tends to be a bit of a bummer

Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Toll_Free]

When are people going to start bitching about Apple providing an email application in their phone, and then locking others out (as was discussed here earlier).

This is > Microsoft Antitrust (think internet exploder), ESPECIALLY with all the people screaming iphone iphone iphone (think, market penetration).

Not intended as a troll, but I have to wonder, when Apple can INTENTIONALLY lock vendors out of providing applications for their phone (and Apple is the OS and hardware provider here, make no mistake about it, NOT AT&T), but Microsoft gets raked over the coals about bundling internet exploder?

What the fuck? Seriously, what the FUCK?

No IPhone or Apple fan (although I do have a Mac), just gotta wonder, WTF is Jobs thinking?

--Toll_Free

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[ProzacPatient]

Oh god, that is exactly what I was thinking!

Apple always manages to piss me off because, in my opinion anyway, they are worse then Microsoft when it comes to this type of thing, furthermore I don't understand how Apple can make one mistake after another and still have an angelic godly image that would otherwise instantly give Microsoft an assload of bad P.R.

I just don't understand people...

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[jamboarder]

While I'm no fan of this lockout, this is not antitrust related since the iPhone platform does not constitute a monopoly in the same, or similar, way that the Windows platform was declared to be. Sure the iPhone platform is the only way to develop for the iPhone. But the iPhone (platform + device) has nowhere near the market share of phones that Windows PCs (platform + hardware) did.

Apple's bundling is not nearly as prohibitive to competition as Microsoft's bundling was. You can develop apps for Symbian, Palm, Blackberry, Android and have a decent chance at competing in a significant share of the phone market. If the iPhone ever gets more than 80% mobile phone market share, then we can start making comparisons to Microsoft.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Microlith]

This is > Microsoft Antitrust (think internet exploder)

No it's not. Microsoft was ready to kill entire pc manufacturers over the IE/Netscape issue, and they more than had the power to do so.

No independent developer -has- to release on the iPhone.

Seriously, people HATE Apple for completely irrational reasons and back them up with poorly constructed arguments. At least the Microsoft hate has -legal backing- behind it.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Anonymous Coward]

So far I've read a page of (mostly) rants against Apple - Apple hates our freedom, Apple doesn't want developers to write apps, Apple ate my first born child, blah blah blah - and you have the nerve to complain about Apple's spotless, "godly" image? Come on, even Gruber at Daring Fireball has taken them to task over the flimsy rejection justifications - they've had far from good PR lately.

It's hard enough reading the true (and rare, these days) zealot fanboy posts, but you anti-fanboys truly astonish me.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Ilgaz]

I think Apple trusts to their fanatics and fans while doing such absurd things. Such people also has potential to lead them in wrong direction as we have seen in Amelio times.

They made Microsoft Windows Mobile look as "freedom" and people started to defend Symbian on all platforms. Usually Symbian users will buy the device, enhance it to a point that nobody will understand how their phone can boot and bitch about it on Web.

That is a real achievement.To repeat: Windows Mobile looks "open" with "freedom" compared to iPhone Unix/NeXT based OS.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Anonymous Coward]

When are people going to start bitching about Apple providing an email application in their phone, and then locking others out (as was discussed here earlier).

At the latest, I think people started bitching when it was discussed here earlier...

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has about 3% of the phone market. Hardly a monopoly. So no "monopoly abuse". Secondly, MS was convicted of monopoly abuse because they DON'T make the hardware and were coercing HW manufacturers into bundling IE and not Netscape. Thus they were using a monopoly position in one market segment (the PC operating system market) to affect competition in another segment (the web browser market) in a way that was adverse to consumers.

If MS made their own PCs and wanted to put IE on them and not Netscape I'd be 100% for it but requiring others to do the same is not on. If Apple wants to make an iPhone and ruin it (in your opinion) by not allowing developers to do stuff, well it's their phone and they can do that.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Anonymous Coward]

What Microsoft did with IE free+installed/Netscape pay+download was ILLEGAL because they have monopoly power over vendors of PC hardware (in terms of installed OS), so Netscape had no hope of getting return on their product. That is what anti-trust is- using monopoly power to crush a competitor in a different market.

And funnily enough, that was just one of the anti-trust things they did. They had a pattern of making ILLEGAL moves to leverage their monopoly power over PC hardware vendors to crush competitors.

You are proof that people hate Apple just as much as they hate Microsoft. But Apple aren't breaking the law. The iPhone software marketplace (where Apple has OS power) cannot be considered a monopoly until a vast majority of cell phone users use iPhone- that will never be the case.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Toll_Free]

Seriously, people take a real question posed to others, and try to make it something it isn't.

I don't hate Apple for any reason. I was looking for an intelligent answer that didn't have anyone looking down their nose at me for asking.

Guess the maturity factor came into play :(

And, to this day, I don't see why MS couldn't give away a program if they wanted to. I actually like having an Operating System that works and does a lot out of the box.

Sure, I don't USE IE as my browser, but it sure is nice to actually HAVE a browser to download Opera with :) lol.

Not that that was MS's intention with bundling, but it works for me lol.

--Toll_Free

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Toll_Free]

I was talking the more mainstream populace.

IE (pun intended) the IE / MS fiasco of the 90s.

--Toll_Free

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Toll_Free]

Legally, I believe your right, but to say that IE wasn't better than nutscrape during those days... That's just CRAY-ZEE.

Well, like I said earlier. I thought it GREAT to have IE part of my OS. Gave me something to download Opera with lol.

--Toll_Free

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you aware that "lol" is an acronym that says "I'm a fucktard"?

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[geekoid]

"Microsoft gets raked over the coals about bundling internet exploder?"

You really show a lack of understanding about that issue.
Apple traditionally releases a small tightly controlled items, and then slowly expands it. It's about control of the product, being nimble to unexpected market changes. It works for them.

Apple has always been tight lipped about everything, good and bad.
The operate one of the, if not the, greenest computer production. They didn't tell everyone what they were doing, it's not there style.
If a business can have style, Apple has it.

No, I dno't own a mac. The less computer system I woned from Apple was the apple IIc. I do own e iPods, including my shine new touch *pets ipod*

The first two were gifts, and I loved them. I bought the Touch for myself.
I wouldn't call myself an apple fanboi.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[geekoid]

What mistakes? This wasn't a mistake. It was a sound decision based on many factors. When those factors changed, Apple responded with what the market wanted. That's Good business.
Apple knows full well you can't put the monkeys back into the barrel once it has been opened, so they go slow.
We can complain that this isn't the best way for them to go forward, but that's a different topic.

Also, Apple has a friendly nice guy image, MS has a corporate bully image.

Deal with an Apple employee, and they are almost always nice, pleasant and honest. Deal with an MS employee, and you are probably on the phone with a problem. MS seems unreachable compared to Apple.

People forgive a lot from the people they like.

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[anomaly256]

If apple become the largest mobile phone manufacturer in the world, THEN this will be a case of anticompetitive practice. So if you want to 'teach apple a lesson', perhaps stop buying their products. Or, tell everyone to buy them :P

Re:Antitrust, regulations, Apple is full of shyt

[ProzacPatient]

Thank you, you just provided a real life example of my point.

Anyhow the point of this thread is that Apple tells developers that they can't develop; an email app, a web browser, a music store and so forth because it competes with Apple's products and furthermore they can't talk about it and then the developers are left thinking "WTF?" but the general public goes out and starts screaming "HEIL JOBS! SEIG HEIL! HEIL JOBS!" despite that.

Meanwhile Microsoft bundles Internet Explorer with Windows and that somehow makes Bill Gates and his company so evil to the point they should all burn in hell.

I'm not debating that Microsoft is any less evil than Apple or vice versa but I'm pointing out that there is really a double-standard going on here.
You must not forget that Apple is also a corporate giant that uses corporate tactics; just like Microsoft.

same ol, same ol

[Ukab the Great]

We mac developers were led to believe that by WWDC, we'd have an SDK with a lifted NDA. Nope. Didn't happen.

We mac developers were led to believe that by July 11 when the iPhone 3G was released, we'd have an SDK with a lifted NDA. Nope. Didn't happen.

Now they tell us that the NDA will be lifted at some point in the near future. What's changed?

Re:same ol, same ol

[SaDan]

Android.

Re:same ol, same ol

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a difference between what you believed and what's been publicly stated.

Just because the first two things were common sense things on your wish list doesn't mean that it was on Apple's wish list either.

Re:same ol, same ol

[Ilgaz]

Also Symbian fixing their only issue. The closed source kernel. It was taken way more seriously than some people in Cupertino expected. No industry fight happened too.

Funny is the Android release and Symbian going open source is also happening thanks to iPhone. Nobody can say Apple doesn't change things. I could never imagine Nokia and their biggest rivals agreeing to make Symbian open source. Even Flash 3 lite release which is rumoured to be free download for end user is Adobe's iPhone and Silverlight reaction. They asked millions of dollars from manufacturers before.

If Apple just allowed actual competition in iPhone itself without lame excuses like security and battery life?

Re:same ol, same ol

[phamlen]

You still believe things you hear at WWDC? The WWDC is great primarily because it tells you what won't happen in the next year. It's kinda like when you add "in bed" after a fortune cookie fortune; except in this case, you add " ... NOT!"

Re:same ol, same ol

[Saint Stephen]

The OP has too many TLAS in his SP. GP says WTF?

Re:same ol, same ol

[caseih]

Let me know when there's a nice ipod-like device with 8-16GB of flash, a nice touch screen (with or without keyboard), sans-phone that runs Android, for about $250. Then I'll get excited about Android. In the meantime my ipodtouch is everything I've ever wanted in a PDA, except that the open source ecosystem is very stunted, thanks to Apple's controlling view of things, and also the so-called shareware scene that has always pervaded Macdom. Paying a buck for some stupid little app doesn't sit well with me, especially when I'd often write the app for myself for free based on OSS if I could, but I can't. I don't own a Mac that I can run Xcode 3.1 on, I don't want to pay apple for a provisioning key.

The moment I can get an equivalent device to the ipod touch that runs Android, I'm there.

Re:same ol, same ol

[tlhIngan]

Let me know when there's a nice ipod-like device with 8-16GB of flash, a nice touch screen (with or without keyboard), sans-phone that runs Android, for about $250. Then I'll get excited about Android. In the meantime my ipodtouch is everything I've ever wanted in a PDA, except that the open source ecosystem is very stunted, thanks to Apple's controlling view of things, and also the so-called shareware scene that has always pervaded Macdom. Paying a buck for some stupid little app doesn't sit well with me, especially when I'd often write the app for myself for free based on OSS if I could, but I can't. I don't own a Mac that I can run Xcode 3.1 on, I don't want to pay apple for a provisioning key.

So why not go the next step and jailbreak your iPod Touch? It is still a valid option, and there's tons of little apps (many of which Apple obviously won't allow in their app store). If you had an iPhone, you could download a tethering app rather than pay for NetShare (which is gone). Heck, Podcaster started as a jailbreak application. And given the installer of choice is Cydia, well, apt-get and dpkg are your friends. And you can develop your own apps, too!

Here's a small list of 10 must-have apps for your jailbroken iPhone/iPod Touch. In particular, I do recommend MxTube - download and watch YouTube videos (rather than stream the videos). I don't think there's any other mobile platform that has a YouTube app that downloads the videos for later replay (offline).

Sure it's not a true open platform, but more like console systems that everyone finds fun in hacking.

Re:same ol, same ol

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been doing some Symbian development on Nokia S60 3rd ed. platform and let me tell you, that it's a horror story.

The API documentation is horrible and spotty, debugging is a pain in the ass and the error messages are non descriptive at best. And that's disregarding the draconian and expensive certification requirements...

Re:same ol, same ol

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Who lead you to believe any of that, exactly?

Re:same ol, same ol

[marsu_k]

In particular, I do recommend MxTube - download and watch YouTube videos (rather than stream the videos). I don't think there's any other mobile platform that has a YouTube app that downloads the videos for later replay (offline).

Here's one for the Nokia N8x0 tablets.

New NDA

[GottliebPins]

There are three rules for the new non disclosure agreement: 1) Don't talk about the non disclosure agreement 2) Don't talk about the non disclosure agreement 3) Don't talk about the non disclosure agreement

Did uncle Steve have any alternative?

[linhares]

Let's just check the facts:

Número uno: The internet hated the NDA. Not only the goodwill and fanboyism that Apple gets for free was up for grabs; but also there was a real chance that Apple might become the new Microsoft in public opinion.

Número dos: Google does not fight the internet, and brought out Android. Android is gonna get some traction, not least for being open-source, for coming up with cool apps that google awarded prizes for, and for securing your developer's rights to distribute.

Número três: The market is down. It's going to get worse. In fact, we may have crossed the point of no return. The USA might have hyperinflation and all that comes with it.

So Steve had no alternative. The question is, for how long will the draconian measures at the app store still exist?

When will developers be sure of their investment?

That can't be right!

[David Gerard]

Apple has made a vast success of evil! The slickness of total control. Freedom from the burden of choice.

Never mind. I'm sure there'll be an article on RoughlyDrafted explaining precisely how this was all part of the plan and is absolutely the best possible move anyone could ever have made and we'd all have to be foolish not to have realised this was precisely how it was going to play out, and also Microsoft sucks. It'll probably have that really funny graphic of a Zune-headed Ballmer running screaming from the Zune Hindenburg.

(I like RoughlyDrafted, and his facts are generally accurate, it just gets a bit monotonous at times ...)

Re:That can't be right!

[argent]

All corporations are evil... or at least certifiable sociopaths.

You can only trust a corporation (any corporation) as far as the market will let them go.

Apple is no exception.

When Apple has 90% of the cellphone market, I'll worry about how evil the iPhone is.

Open source?

[linhares]

How about open source? Can we build FOSS for the thing now?

Re:Open source?

[2nd Post!]

Why can't you?

1) Write app for iPhone
2) Release source; mention availability of source in app
3) Host source outside iPhone

Just because the end user needs a $99 dev key to upload the app to their phone doesn't make the app non Open Source. Does the requirement that you own a several hundred dollar computer make RockBox any less open source? In this case the cost of the devkey can be considered the cost of the PC.

What is going to happen in the future as more devices use open source but cannot themselves download, compile, or modify the source? Will it be not considered open source if you are forced to purchase a PC in order to modify and compile the source?

Share Cropping Slaves too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's say one spends their spare time writing a fabulous calendaring widget that syncs Google calendars without jumping through quite a few hoops.

It turns out to be a very successful product. So much so, there are copycats doing the same thing. Let's say that calendar syncing becomes a huge sales category for the iphone. Like all large companies, Apple will swoop in and wipe the devs out by extending calendaring features.

Apple does it. Microsoft does it. I don't understand why anyone would consider building a business solely around either one of those platforms unless you are sticking to a tiny niche.

I think you misunderstand antitrust...

[argent]

When are people going to start bitching about Apple providing an email application in their phone, and then locking others out (as was discussed here earlier).

When Apple is a monopoly with 90% or more of any market?

If I had to buy an iPhone or put up with not being able to call some people on the phone at all, then it might matter that the iPhone is a closed platform under the control of a single company. Actually, I have a better smartphone (since it's actually a smartphone, and can run any damn software without having to let Apple or T-Mobile or anyone certify it) than the iPhone and I don't even bother to use it because, well, I don't even need a smartphone (let alone an iPhone).

Contrast that with Windows. Even with a Mac I *have to* keep a virtual machine running Windows so that I can run software that I need to do my work. That's the difference.

Apple: 5-20% of the home computer market, depending on who you ask, and a negligible part of the phone market.

Microsoft: Phenomenal Monopoly Power (teeny weeny breathing space).

Re:I think you misunderstand antitrust...

[Anonymous Coward]

Contrast that with Windows. Even with a Mac I *have to* keep a virtual machine running Windows so that I can run software that I need to do my work. That's the difference.

And more importantly, back when Microsoft were prosecuted and convicted for antitrust violations and when said violations happened (i.e. mid to late 1990s), there was no Apple to speak of. Mac OS was clinically dead and Apple seemed to be going down with it, various Unixes were just as niche as they are now, Linux had barely became stable and featurefull for server use and OS/2 had been freshly smothered by Microsoft. If you wanted to have a flexible, multipurpose OS or if you wanted to make money developing software you ware very much stuck with Windows.

The situation with the iPhone is nowhere even remotely near that.

While you're rewriting history...

[argent]

Prior to [android], they were pretty much the only game in town, so there wasn't really anywhere for disgruntled developers to flee to.

Damn, you mean I've been hallucinating that Palm, Microsoft, and Nokia have been shipping smartphone software since the '90s?

While you're rewriting history, why don't you take care of that annoying hohocaust thing as well?

Re:While you're rewriting history...

[2nd Post!]

If what you imply is true, that MS, Palm, and Nokia are "competitors" to Apple, why are developers even bothering with the iPhone?

Let me answer: The iPhone is more lucrative, is growing faster, and is more attractive to the consumer.

If a developer could "simply" switch from the iPhone to a WinMo, Palm, or Symbian phone, then the iPhone wouldn't even need to exist in the first place.

Re:While you're rewriting history...

[ShieldW0lf]

Damn, you mean I've been hallucinating that Palm, Microsoft, and Nokia have been shipping smartphone software since the '90s?

Like comparing Apples and Oranges.

While you're rewriting history, why don't you take care of that annoying hohocaust thing as well?

I don't need to. It was done before I was born, and taught to me in history class. Here's a hint: it didn't happen because the secret police intimidated everyone into following a bunch of crazies. It happened because the state of the world was such that people were ready to follow anyone who was crazy enough to lead them against their oppressors, so they elevated the least crazy people around that were willing to do it.

It all has to do with the contrast between societies based on the association of free men and societies based on the rule of law. In societies based on the rule of law, you end up with conniving bastards who twist a societies laws against itself for personal gain, and eventually, inevitably, you need to shatter the fabric of society and massacre the perpetrators. It's a cyclical thing.

This apparently isn't apple-related news...

[WillyDavidK]

Is anyone else still trying to figure out why this wasn't posted under Apple-related news? I monitor the regular /. feed as well as a specific apple-related feed, and if I hadn't signed on at just the right time to notice this one flying by in the main feed, I would have completely missed it.

Re:This apparently isn't apple-related news...

[WillyDavidK]

apparently someone fixed it now. Thanks guys.

You should be citing

[randyest]

Do you have any actual evidence or citations to support your claims?

71st Post!

[KingAlanI]

71st Post!

[citation needed]

[Llywelyn]

We were "lead to believe" by *who*?

I have no memory of Apple saying that we would have an SDK with lifted NDA by WWDC or July 11th. Can you cite any example to the contrary?

A day late, a dollar short

[Anonymous Coward]

Screw Apple -- at every turn, they try and be the biggest dick the can get away with. Only after an uprising about this, cancelled books, etc, do they relent.

Plus, you still can't create better email clients and web browsers, so screw them.

Hopefully android will kick ass -- at least it's not hobbled by a bunch of beret-wearing douchebags.

Re:A day late, a dollar short

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Yeah, an uprising, that's right. Job's saw the comments here on Slashdot, panicked, and decided to partially remove the NDA. Get real, this was bound to happen all along. Sometime in the future, when Apple's lawyers have figured out every little detail, and their developers have finalised the SDK more, then I'm sure more restrictions will be dropped. All this NDA stuff is basically just Apple's way of allowing 3rd party developers to start writing apps for the iPhone while they're still setting the whole thing up.

The Joke Speaketh

[SuperKendall]

Apple is facing a mass exodus of phone developers with their constant blunders from secrecy and rejecting apps that threaten their own apps.

As an iPhone developer, I could only pray that would be true. Contrary to your assertion though there seems to be a pretty good inlflux of new developers, and thus new competition, into the iPhone application development realm. And of course, lifting the NDA means all of the most experienced developers can now offer help to everyone, further increasing developer interest and retention and shared knowledge (not that a lot of that was not happening already, but now that books can be published...).

The cellphone industry is rapidly moving to Android as their standard platform with Motorola being the latest large cellphone company to embrace Google's open source OS with a ramp up of their internal Android team to 500 people.

Awesome for Android (which I like and may also develop apps for at some point), sucks to be Windows Mobile. Not sure I see any impact on the iPhone though.

To suggest that there is some sort of secret and valuable information in the iPhone SDK that anyone cares about is absolutely inane.

To suggest that many best practices for advanced development techniques have been easy to find is far more inane. Yes you know there's a UITableViewController. Do you know how to make cells using Interface Builder? Or how to have a text view become first responder as you enter a screen?

This is just the first step in Apple's fade into niche irrelevance in the cellphone market.

Careful there, your spittle is starting to obscure your writing.

Just another funny Apple Hater I guess. Tired of having his normal user ID pummeled by reason...

You aren't thinking legally

[SuperKendall]

I highly doubt it. Google has their own Mac developers and one of the first apps bundled on the iPhone was a YouTube video program. Google has had access to the iPhone API's long before most other developers.

Well of course they had early access - all under an even tighter NDA. Google being able to see the API doesn't matter so much as Apple's ability to say in a lawsuit "there's no way Google could have seen this patented API technique outside of the context of an NDA because the API was not public at that point".

Now it's a whole different argument if that is right or good or would even hold in court. But that's the thinking behind such an NDA, there are not really many other reasons that make any sense at all.

Re:You aren't thinking legally

[GaryPatterson]

Just to support you - Google would have developed using 'clean' developers. That is, staff who had no knowledge of the iPhone SDK. That is perfectly legal and all above board, but if any hint arises that the staff were not 'clean' then Google can be sued for copyright violation.

Companies do this stuff every now and then, and with a little care, there's no problem.

You always could

[SuperKendall]

How about open source? Can we build FOSS for the thing now?

There are already a number of iPhone projects on Google Code that were there before. It was just a question before if you wanted to risk you developer status and App Store distribution ability to add to them... now that's lifted iPhone OSS should be more abundant.

You're rewriting economics too?

[argent]

If a developer could "simply" switch from the iPhone to a WinMo, Palm, or Symbian phone, then the iPhone wouldn't even need to exist in the first place.

A developer can no more "simply" switch from the iPhone to Android than "simply" switch from the iPhone to any other programmable handset. Different languages, different APIs, different developer platforms.

But setting that aside, the point is really... the iPhone is a competitor to existing smartphone platforms. The question a year ago was "should developers start developing applications for the iPhone as well as PalmOS, Symbian OS, and Windows Mobile?". Obviously the answer has turned out to be "yes", but it was never a given that it would succeed if you couldn't see iPhone as an option on sites like Handango, and there really was some question as to whether it would take off.

But that's how the market works. Not because there's a "need" for any specific new competing platform, but because competition drives improvement. Just because the iPhone is flavor of the week doesn't mean that there's no competition for it.

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[2nd Post!]

If we want to be specific/pedantic, we're talking about consumer oriented smartphones, and for the majority no Palm or Windows device qualified.

Nokia had a few, but they were expensive or largely unavailable (N95) until the iPhone was also available (in the US). If we are therefore talking about consumer smartphones and software, then NO, Palm, Nokia, and Microsoft have not been shipping software nor smartphones since the 90s. Consumer smartphones are a recent (in the last two or three years) thing.

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[hvm2hvm]

It's not about switching development environments. That's something you have to deal with in every IT business. It's about the attractiveness of the market and how easy it is for developers to make money.

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[argent]

If we want to be specific/pedantic, we're talking about consumer oriented smartphones, and for the majority no Palm or Windows device qualified.

I disagree emphatically. Unless you want to argue that Windows itself is not a "consumer oriented home computer" or something silly like that, both Palm and Windows handhelds are "consumer oriented smartphones".

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[2nd Post!]

You're telling me that in 2006 and 2007 that the same people who would buy an iPod went out and bought WinMo and Treos?

http://www.phonemag.com/smartphone-sales-up-60-in-2007-iphone-captures-growing-market-share-02860.php

In 2007 when the iPhone was only available for half a year and only in the US, it was the number 2 handset!

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[argent]

You're telling me that in 2006 and 2007 that the same people who would buy an iPod went out and bought WinMo and Treos?

No, they probably bought RAZRs. And most of them are still buying something like RAZRs. The market for smartphones (even if we include the iPhone) is tiny.

In 2007 when the iPhone was only available for half a year and only in the US, it was the number 2 handset!

In 2000 when the iPaq was only available for half a year, it brought the Windows Mobile share of the PDA market from single digits to maybe 15%... but for the next four years until Palm decided to self-destruct by ostentatiously dissing PalmOS in favor of the yet to be released (and now apparently never to be released) BeOS based OS... Windows Mobile didn't break 20% of the market.

And the iPhone wasn't the #2 handset in 2007, it was #2 smartphone. This August it was... hmm, #2. And #1 was... Blackberry? Not Nokia? Well, with a tiny market like that, a single device can create a sudden surge, and Blackberry's new touch screen device is apparently selling really well. I guess all those app developers need to switch from iPhone to Blackberry.

Re:You're rewriting economics too?

[2nd Post!]

Now you understand. The only real competitors for the iPhone are Blackberry and Nokia, not Palm or WinMo. And it looks like Android will remove Palm and WinMo from the map entirely :)

Thank you google ?

[Anonymous Coward]

So should apple devs be thanking Google for this or is it just cooincidence?

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is, a big side effect that the NDA had was that it prevented people from putting together books, tutorials, videos, etc. on how to actually develop using the SDK. Apparently, Apple thought that everyone already knew how to program in Cocoa and Objective-C. At least iPhone book an Amazon lists in the description "this book will be released as soon as Apple drops the NDA".

I'm not sure if this was an oversight on Apple's part or if they intended it this way. Remember that Apple initially didn't even plan on offering an SDK -- they were going to make you program sites to Safari. Apple makes great products from a user's standpoint, but from a developer's standpoint Microsoft has kicked their butt for years.

Laughable

[SuperKendall]

Do you work in the PR or marketing department? What does that statement really mean? Every cell phone ever produced has hardware and software and they are integrated.

Yes, poorly.

Oh now I see - you posted AC so as not to taint your real user account with the stain of your complete lunacy.

Re:Laughable

[Anonymous Coward]

My god are you a total fucking loser.

Did you tinkle your panties when the iPhone was announced?

Did you post your 'unboxing' video on youtube?

Do you hold your iPhone up in front of mirror at home just like Steve Jobs did in the unveiling keynote conference?

Is your sad little life fulfilled now that you own an iPhone?

Only books

[SuperKendall]

The thing is, a big side effect that the NDA had was that it prevented people from putting together books, tutorials, videos, etc.

Actually there were already a lot of videos and tutorials around for iPhone development. The only thing the NDA really affected was books (since publishers are very risk adverse) and more widespread communication from developers leery of violating the NDA.

Parent post should NOT be modded "troll"

[Apotsy]

The parent post is just saying what everyone secretly knows is true.

People are making massive amounts of money from the iPhone App Store. There is nothing else out there like it. Google doesn't even have their store up yet, and after their last attempt at something like that, it is not at all certain that they can actually make it work.

Not to mention the fact that Android hasn't so far turned out to be the open-source panacea that everyone thought it would be. You have to program in Java and don't have access to low-level hardware like bluetooth any more so than on the iPhone.

The cellphone industry isn't "rapidly" doing anything other than playing catch-up to Apple. So far they still have a long way to go.

Smart move, Apple!

[amohat]

Clearly, Apple's stranglehold cannot last, especially with google phones popping off.

So it will be the tango....remember when google led the free email account dance, and everyone else rushed in afterwards? Eventually everyone settled into a new groove, one that was very consumer-friendly. So, too, will go the cellphone lockdowns.

Apple will match google's open platform or be forgotten. And they will follow. I do not give Apple any credit for following, though, as so will everyone else.

What I'm curious about is if there was some sort of gentleman's agreement between the google boys and Jobs to give Apple a head start to grab some market share before google took all of it. Surely there is preferential treatment at some level.

Sorry, don't agree at all

[Shivetya]

Disclaimer, I have an iMac, a 20gb iPod (3rd gen), and now a Touch. I also am working with the SDK.

Apple is just as bad if not worse, their entire cover is "lack of market share" but if your in their market share your just screwed. I don't care, I want an alternative to Mail. Sorry but there are lots of features it does not have on the Touch UNLESS I buy ME. Sorry, but locking out competing applications is anti-competitive. Especially when they offer features they don't and only don't offer because they have paid products.

The problem really becomes annoying because when you get close to their "line" you don't know when it gets crossed. You post your app to iTunes and have to wait. If its a harmless app it gets in, if it comes close then your throwing dice.

Then we can toss out the fact they forbid their software on non-Apple provided machines. At least with IE if it didn't render a site for whatever reason I had alternatives, though during the time of contention Netscape 4.xx was out and it was such a suck product they couldn't help but lose.

No, they just mince words to pull off the same or worse than MS. Their saving grace is lack of market share and a clique mentality amongst some of their supporters. They make great software and hardware but are too draconian in its application.

Re:Did uncle Steve have any alternative? [OT]

[Jisakiel]

Tres, without the circumflex. Três means "so much", more or less, in french, but I think you were counting in spanish. O eso creo ;)

Re:Did uncle Steve have any alternative? [OT]

[Free the Cowards]

The French one would be trÃs. (That's a ` over an e in case Slashdot fucks over non-English like it usually does.) I'm not aware of trÃs meaning anything.

You opensource weenies are always behind

[diggory]

We Apple fanbois are already on to G5 - http://support.apple.com/specs/powermac/Power_Mac_G5_Late_2005.html

By whom, not by who.

[Anonymous Coward]

We were "lead to believe" by *who*?

In this sentence, "we" is the subject, the last word should be whom. http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/who.html

Tutorials dripping in

[egghat]

Ars Technica: iPhone SDK

Anyone with other tipps?

You're arguing over *what*?

[argent]

My point wasn't "Palm and Windows Mobile are the bomb", it's that "we've had smartphones for years, iPhone and Android aren't the market".

I mean, Jesus Bloody Christ On A Rusted Out Harley, I already mentioned Nokia and RIM, and the site I pointed you at (Handango) sells Nokia and RIM downloads. If you're gonna change what you're arguing about every damn message then argue with someone else.

Re:You're arguing over *what*?

[2nd Post!]

Nothing has changed. My point is completely opposite: We've had smartphones for years, but they were irrelevant until they were targeting consumers. The application developers under NDA we are talking about? Consumer applications, not enterprise applications (though enterprise applications and developers are sure to be attracted too).

And Handango... I wasn't familiar with it so I wasn't aware it also sold for Nokia and RIM. Thanks for the clarification.

Re:You're arguing over *what*?

[argent]

We've had smartphones for years, but they were irrelevant until they were targeting consumers.

Well, setting aside that Palm has always targeted consumers (up until they decided to pull an Osborne with their Vaporware OS).

Do you really mean that nobody but Apple and Google is capable of putting a glossy UI on a smartphone?

I had no idea.

Wait, wait, RIM's doing that too... and they're selling a bunch of them.

And I'm pretty sure I've seen Windows Mobile phones in iPhone style.

Palm? Palm decided on slow suicide four or so years ago.

And Handango... I wasn't familiar with it so I wasn't aware it also sold for Nokia and RIM.

It's right there on the front page. You *did* follow the link to see what I was referring to, right? I mean, that could have been Rick Astley.

wrong again

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny is the Android release and Symbian going open source is also happening thanks to iPhone.

Google started the Android project long before anything was known about the iPhone. You can find out for yourself by looking at when they hired the developers away from Danger.

And I talked to guys at Nokia when they started thinking about open sourcing Symbian; that was also before the iPhone. They weren't quite specific about the reasons, but it sounded like they felt threatened by Linux and they realized that their OS was really getting long in the tooth.

What the iPhone can claim some responsibility for is the renewed interest in touch screen phones (they were already tried about a decade ago, with mixed success). Whether that's a blessing remains to be seen.