Apple patent app details 'accessory detector' for mobile handset

Just days after hearing that Steve Jobs was indeed looking into the possibility of letting third party applications play nice with his precious iPhone, along comes a suitable patent application that further proves his hesitance to let it happen. Jobs didn't shy away from suggesting that non-native apps aren't usually cellphone-friendly, and a new filing from Cupertino's lair details an "accessory detector" that would "detect whether an external accessory coupled to the connector may interfere with wireless communication with the handheld device." Of course, no direct mention of the iPhone is given, but it sounds like this here invention would alert the user via on-screen messages and flurries of frightening noises if the inserted / installed accessory did not match up with an internally stored "list" of okayed devices. Additionally, the handset would be able to adjust itself on the fly if the add-on did indeed "interfere" with operations, and while no verbiage mentioned any kinds of shut downs or undercover dial-ups to Apple HQ for unauthorized use, there's always the possibility that this type of scrutiny could lead to an easier implementation of a "Made for iPhone" type royalty program.

[Via UnwiredView]

[Johnny @ Jun 1st 2007 10:18AM]

It could be to keep things 'Made for iPhone' and restrict third-party add-ons, but it could also just be to "detect whether an external accessory coupled to the connector may interfere with wireless communication with the handheld device." Which could simply be a way of making sure you're getting a good signal.

[Karma @ Jun 1st 2007 10:18AM]

Why is this a bad thing? Apple wants to make a phone that doesn't completely suck and end up being something you hate after 12 months of ownership. The 3rd party app complaint crap needs to die already - he's going to let it happen, but only when the quality of those apps have been properly tested.

[brendan Sheehan jnr @ Jun 1st 2007 11:56AM]

Hear hear!! Stop with the Apple hating already Engadget. They are allowing third party apps, now get the hell over it.

[Dan @ Jun 1st 2007 11:32AM]

Apple still hasn't learned the lesson they should have learned 20 years ago - trying to control the hardware is not the best way to go.

All you Apple fanboys need to see the light. The *only* outcome of these kinds of controls (detecting "unauthorized" accessories or having an expensive app testing program) are higher prices and fewer choices, neither of which has any benefit to the consumer.

[Johnny T. @ Jun 1st 2007 2:54PM]

"Apple still hasn't learned the lesson they should have learned 20 years ago - trying to control the hardware is not the best way to go."

Yeah, that iPod thing really turned out badly for them, didn't it?

[brendan Sheehan jnr @ Jun 1st 2007 12:01PM]

I thought the same thing. Isn't this thrid party accessories, and not apps. Why does he say third party apps, yet he mentions 'made for iPhone' in the article. This is all about speakers, gps dongles, radios etcetera, etcetera.

[clemonator @ Jun 1st 2007 12:50PM]

HP and others have been chip coding things like toner carts, fusers, etc. because they wanted to control the quality of components going into their products but in reality the only thing they wanted to control was their bottom line. I see this as yet another example of the same practice. But since this is coming from Apple I am not surprised one bit.

BUT I could be wrong... I often am. sheez.

[len @ Jun 1st 2007 8:42PM]

Apple cultists are be the most submissive people on the planet.

"Oh, the iPhone doesn't allow third-party applications? Oh well, it's for my own good anyway."

The "security" excuse is a red herring. Every other smartphone allows third-party applications, with various levels of restrictions, and most restrictions have more to do with the carrier crippling the phone so that it doesn't compete with their add-on services than security.

The Treo has hardly any security features of a modern OS, and it's been selling the longest and on the most carriers, and never brought down a network or unleashed a worm. The suggestion of that occuring on an open iPhone is FUD, pure and simple.

Leopard introduces code signing, and Darwin itself has the security model of BSD. They have everything they need to make the most robust smartphone on the market, so they fact that they don't indicates

1. They are beholden to AT&T
2. They want a captive consumer market, like the iPod
3. The device is so fragile third party developers would easily expose it's flaws