iPhone SDK already seeding to select devs?

It's not anything more than a rumor right now, but reports are floating around claiming that "select developers" are already receiving prerelease versions of the upcoming iPhone SDK. The kit is said to already be producing native apps, and development is being compared to other sandboxed APIs like Google's OpenSocial -- apps have "clear limits" on what they can do, and interactions with the OS are mediated, presumably to avoid any security or performance issues. That jives with what Steve-O said about managing access, but again -- this is all just a steamy cloud of vaporous nothing till that first app shows up in iTunes.

[Via Mac Rumors]

[xbit @ Nov 26th 2007 6:18PM]

Let me guess - there will be no freeware and all applications will only be available through iTunes?

[Alan Partridge @ Nov 26th 2007 6:22PM]

This is a company which charges you twice to use a song as a ringtone. What do you think?

[Reid Conti @ Nov 26th 2007 7:08PM]

... because clearly there is no freeware available for the Mac?

Sheesh, if anything, the freeware market is better on OS X than on Windows, and the shareware is actually worth paying for. Somehow the platform attracts much better community developers than Windows seems to.

[rawhead @ Nov 26th 2007 8:09PM]

@Alan

"This is a company which charges you twice to use a song as a ringtone."

And all the other companies that sell ringtones for $2.99 a pop... they'd let you download them for free if you already happen to own that song, huh?

[Carlos @ Nov 26th 2007 8:12PM]

Apple has already released a freakin awesome phone - no reason to believe they would stop short and somehow mess up the SDK.

I think its a lot more logical that they are still working out the details and want to get it right the first time around - this is after all Apples very first cell phone - at least give them a shot at releasing the SDK before speculating as to what it will and wont do.

Remember the iPhone has only been out for 5 months! How long do you wait for updates on MS, Palm or Sybian phones - sheesh.

[quandmeme @ Nov 26th 2007 9:53PM]

Isn't the dashboard a better model for this again? They have a bunch of free content they host for users to download. Much of it is free. Other content is available elsewhere but Apple gives its quasi endorsement.

[Alan Partridge @ Nov 26th 2007 10:58PM]

@rawhead

If you download a track from the Nokia Music Store, on a Nokia phone, you can use it as a ringtone without having to pay again. You can also assign any mp3 as a ringtone

[rawhead @ Nov 27th 2007 2:57AM]

@Alan

So arguably Nokia is an exception. But you chose to phrase your original comment as if Apple were somehow an exceptionally evil company for double charging for ringtones.

Also, being able to assign any music file as a ringtone is not quite the same thing (and in fact, it's pretty easy to do with the iPhone too, now with firmware v. 1.1.2 and iTunes 7.5). I think of Apple's $0.99 service as a fee to use their cool little ringtone generator software. Would it be better if it were free? Of course.

But $1.99 for both the song and a cleanly trimmed/edited ringtone is still cheaper than what most ringtone providers will charge for just their ringtones, and only marginally more expensive than what a European Nokia user will pay for music from the Nokia Music Store (1.00€/0.80£ ≑ $1.50/1.60US) but without the nicely edited 30 second ringtone. So, is Apple a saintly company full of charitable intentions? No. Is Apple any more greedy than any other company in our capitalistic society? No again.

[ssuk @ Nov 27th 2007 12:08PM]

1) YOU ALREADY PAID FOR THE SONG. Why am I forced to pay twice for the same song just so it's a ringtone? Who gives a flying shit if other companies do it, Apple shouldn't be playing the game of "Oh well, they're doing it, we'll do it too!" they should be thinking of their userbase for once in their lives.

2) Apple attracts a better fanbase because while everyone can afford a PC, very few will actually get a Mac with it's high price points, meaning that all the 'riff raff' of the computer world are all dumped on Windows platforms.

[rawhead @ Nov 27th 2007 1:42PM]

@ssuk

"Apple shouldn't be playing the game of "Oh well, they're doing it, we'll do it too!" "

Why of course! Apple should also stop charging for Leopard " just because everybody else does it", and while they're at it, why don't they start donating iPods and iPhones to everybody? I mean, trying to make a profit, which they have a legal obligation to their shareholders to pursue, is SO conformist, and not Thinking Different ® at all!

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 26th 2007 6:22PM]

I believe this information is incorrect. It's not even ready yet.

BTW, you can bet apps will only come though iTunes. Apple will be the sole publisher/distributor and take profits from this.

[ssuk @ Nov 27th 2007 12:10PM]

A little birdy sat on my shoulder and said the SDK has actually been ready for several months!

Yeah, unsourced, unreliable information is great, huh?

[Josiah @ Nov 26th 2007 6:24PM]

If SDK apps meditate on every interaction with the OS, third party apps are going to be pretty laggy. ;)

[Benson @ Nov 26th 2007 6:32PM]

Zen and the Art of iPhone Development?

[7of7 @ Nov 26th 2007 6:26PM]

Why are people waiting for an SDK? Apple told developers to politely go to hell. Why don't they politely go to other platforms that have welcomed development from the start?

[bob @ Nov 26th 2007 6:36PM]

i missed that! oh, wait, thats because you just made it up.

[newgalactic @ Nov 26th 2007 6:55PM]

Actually Bob, that's precisely the message I got when Apple shutdown all 3rd party apps with previous iPhone updates. 7of7 didn't make it up at all.

[rp @ Nov 26th 2007 7:55PM]

So why did Apple suddenly re-enable custom ringtones with the latest firmware update? Could it be that Apple wasn't really trying to break anything at all, and things just happened to break because they were tightening up mobile OS X?
Something sure smells down in Cupertino, and it isn't the crisp California air.

[Carlos @ Nov 26th 2007 8:02PM]

Remember that this is the first time Apple has ever made a cell phone and not just any run of the mill cell but a smart phone that sweeps the floor with the competition.

They are trying to get it all right the first time around which means some things will take time - a proper SDK was promised for Feb 08 and in the mean time developers would get help with web based apps - seams fair to me - If Apple shut down 3rd party apps its becuase they were installed by first hacking into the iPhone OS which I'm sure doesn't jive with whatever ATT contract Apple signed.

We all want everything right now and the fact is it will take some time before the iPhone is complete - remember the iPhone has only been out for 5 months!

[starkruzr @ Nov 26th 2007 10:28PM]

Mostly because there aren't any. OpenMoko will fail. Android is the only thing that has a ghost of a chance of success, and that will probably fail too. There are no other GOOD phone software packages out there that have the vision and direction of Mobile OS X.

[Constable Odo @ Nov 26th 2007 10:58PM]

Somehow these deadheads can't quite comprehend that the iPhone hasn't been around that long and it wasn't even designed by a handset company. How many version one products have sold as well in so short a time.

These people are trying to compare a supposedly mature WinMobileSIX phone to an infant iPhone 1.1 or something. They can't understand that it takes time to develop a unique platform. Well, who really gives a darn what these people think. I say let them stick with their ancient OS crapphones and be done with it. Let them stick a hundred of their third-part root level apps and have their handsets freeze up after they make a couple of calls.

These narrow-minded people don't get it. The other handset companies are chasing the iPhone, not the other way 'round.

Hell, if BlackBerrys with their chicklet keyboards are so frickin' perfect, why would RIM even bother to develop a touchscreen 9000 series.

[ssuk @ Nov 27th 2007 12:20PM]

In fairness, Apple shot down 3rd party apps because they want signed content running on the phone. Which in theory benefits us all, but in reality it just ensures Apple can keep tabs on what apps can run on the phone.

The ringtone tomfoolery in iTunes is just coincidence in my oppinion, Apple patched it up for one or more iTunes updates, but suddenly it reverts. Could it be that Apple's changes to iTunes broke something internally or was causing the developers much problems when implementing new features? Because it seems as strange as hell that Apple wants to charge you twice for a song so you can use it as a ring tone, but leave an exploit they once fixed to not give them money. Why charge twice when you can do it for free? Yeah, not making much sense really, does it?

But I'm not sure, to be honest. It COULD be that Apple are rewarding the vigilant out there and trapping the not-so-clever into shelling out twice for the song as a ringtone, or it could be that Apple have been forced to keep the hole open for the time being either because they reverted a portion of iTunes back to a previous version or because their newer code messes with something else. Just don't be so sure one way or another, keep an open mind... It's all I'm saying.

[C @ Nov 26th 2007 6:31PM]

what about my ipod touch? any chance of the SDK apps as well???

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 26th 2007 7:58PM]

for both. Don't worry.

[elan @ Nov 26th 2007 6:34PM]

February 2008.

[Homeboy @ Nov 26th 2007 6:44PM]

Apple are going to keep the iPhone and iTouch closed as a grown man's anus with few developers invited to join the party. So the iPhone will not become the open PDA we want it to be.

[jdoc @ Nov 26th 2007 7:45PM]

open as what? u.u

[Billy @ Nov 26th 2007 6:54PM]

Apple is making possibly the biggest mistake in its history with regards to the iPhone and third party apps. They made a great phone and now they're just taking a shit on everyone's head, realistically that's what it amounts to. I hope this comes back and bites them in the ass, hard.

[AdamY @ Nov 26th 2007 8:38PM]

You sir, are a giant turd.

I won't even get into the quality analysis of "shit[ting] on everyone's head" except to say: WTF?

They've sold tons of product, that tons enjoy, and are continuing to make it more accessible to developers, and all you've got is your "poo-poo" theory? Stock price is up, profits are up, the people Apple is accountable to most (their shareholders and their employees and their customers [p.s. the ones who buy the product, not the ones who show up in the Engadget comments section and bitch]) are pleased with their direction.

Why would you hope it bites them in the ass? You've felt somehow karmically robbed because Apple made the device how they wanted to and not how you wanted to? Where's you engineering degree from jackass?

You = FAIL.

[AdamY @ Nov 26th 2007 8:38PM]

You sir, are a giant turd.

I won't even get into the quality analysis of "shit[ting] on everyone's head" except to say: WTF?

They've sold tons of product, that tons enjoy, and are continuing to make it more accessible to developers, and all you've got is your "poo-poo" theory? Stock price is up, profits are up, the people Apple is accountable to most (their shareholders and their employees and their customers [p.s. the ones who buy the product, not the ones who show up in the Engadget comments section and bitch]) are pleased with their direction.

Why would you hope it bites them in the ass? You've felt somehow karmically robbed because Apple made the device how they wanted to and not how you wanted to? Where's you engineering degree from jackass?

You = FAIL.

[ttyRazor @ Nov 26th 2007 7:34PM]

why are so many of you bitching about stuff that's not even true or no longer relevant? ok, they stiffed us on the SDK for far too long, but they are releasing one. each firmware update may have broken 3rd party apps but they likely weren't explicitly trying to (except to probably prevent carrier unlocking)and never had any responsibility to not break them either. although there likely will be for-pay software on iTunes, it doesn't sound like that will be the only way to get software, either, and the SDK should be freely available.

[Michael LaFramboise @ Nov 26th 2007 7:36PM]

To all the people whining about the SDK not being released earlier - stfu and gtfo -its all just business. Apple wants you to be a salesperson for them - that is to say when you show off your new iPod, iPhone or Mac to someone, it needs to be in perfect shape, and should look its best in order to wow the other party.

Now you take any Windows Mobile (or any other OS for that matter) - and you can't find two alike - everyone has their own wallpaper, own icons, own settings, own effects - the list goes on - and so while you may feel warm and special after you "customize" your phone; lets be perfectly honest here - it makes piss-poor ads.

So please people, grow up and stop whining - or better yet start your own company while licking every customer's ass and see how long it is till you go bankrupt trying to satisfy everyone.

I'll repeat it again; ITS ALL JUST BUSINESS!

[coolwubla @ Nov 26th 2007 7:37PM]

How long til it's on torrrents? Any one see it yet?

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 26th 2007 7:57PM]

I think sprint shoud point forward to R-UIM cards for the CDMA network. More iphone buyers. 3rd party buyers will be after apple. It's a win for apple and for sprint customers. Apple makes more profit on iphones and SDK and sprint customers like me will be very happy with their iphone =)

[AdamY @ Nov 26th 2007 8:45PM]

You're going to have to explain to me how you plan to get the iPhone's QuadBand GSM is going to function on Sprints 800/1900 CDMA network, regardless of how marry the CDMA network to the SIM card...

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 26th 2007 10:17PM]

Well, R-UIM cards act as though a gsm SIM card when in a GSM phone. It pretty much makes sprint a dual standard carrier. Another reason proving this is the article about China unicom wanting the iphone. China unicom is a CDMA carrier that uses R-UIM cards, thus showing the way of using an iphone on a CDMA network. China Unicom would create history for the first cdma network that operates the iphone. In conclusion, R-UIM cards help the customers of DMA carriers to use GSM phones with their dual compatibilty. The R-UIM card acts as if it were on a quadband network in the iphone. Then it'll act like sprints normal network on a CDMA phone. If Verizon got the card too, every phone in the US would be switchable.

[Jaganath @ Nov 26th 2007 10:50PM]

The R-UIM card is not going to automatically convert a GSM phone into a CDMA Phone. It only helps in roaming. Please get your basics right. A SIM card is nothing but a smartcard which stores some information about subscriber identity, validity etc., You need a CDMA baseband chip and the corresponding software on the phone to make it work on a CDMA network. The iPhone, in its current form can never work in a CDMA network.

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 27th 2007 7:41AM]

You better get your facts right idiot:http://www.cdmatech.com/products/ruim.jsp
Dual mode! Works on both networks. It helps roaming but also works as a SIM!!!!! READ up!

[Jaganath @ Nov 27th 2007 12:39PM]

@CUBSWILLWIN,
Sorry for your ignorance, this is only true for Dual Mode Handsets. The iPhone is not a dual mode handset. Period.

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 27th 2007 3:57PM]

@Jagnath
Sorry for YOUR ignorance, but then why would China Unicom want the iphone then? Answer that.

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Nov 27th 2007 4:22PM]

you better read my link cloder too. It says nothing of using dual mode handsets

[Josh L @ Nov 26th 2007 9:00PM]

@Carlos

I didn't wait at all for the "update" that allowed me to write and install 3rd-party aps on my WinMo phone. It did that right out of the box.

[AdamY @ Nov 26th 2007 9:42PM]

No, but you did have to wait two years for:

HTML Email
AJAX and Javascript Web Browsing.

Obviously the point he was making is not the strawman you've pointed out, but rather NO company will ever create a PERFECT piece of software on the first try. Updating the device, and getting enhanced capabilities, as well as working out the kinks is what software is all about (as I'm sure you're aware, mentioning that you write your own for WM, obviously their platform isn't picture perfect for you). I realize that "Native 3rd Party Apps" is a no-go for you, and I'm happy you purchased something that suits your needs best, but treating Carlos' point in the most literal and negative light is the wrong approach to take.

I mean, cripes, WM 5 was the first version to have Photo Caller ID! Some features are deal-breakers, some aren't, but the company MS or Apple is working to provide a better product, and getting snarky in the Engadgets comments section can't be helping anything except for you to hold on to whatever hate you've built against the iPhone or iPhone owners.

Sheesh.

[seanchk @ Nov 26th 2007 9:28PM]

It amazes me that so many people can spend so long arguing about something that at the end of the day is just a phone. I've had various phones and PDAs over the years, some of which allowed me to add extra software, others that didnt. Usually the 3rd party apps were pretty crummy to be honest, although as a bit of a geek I still liked being able to add them (yes even when they crashed my device). However I never really cared that much about being able to add stuff so long as the device as a whole was cool. The iPhone is a phone, a very cool looking phone. Yes it would be great if we could add whatever to it, but at the end of the day why not just enjoy having a damn cool looking phone (and iPod/camera/etc).

p.s. I'm actually buying myself an iPhone today (at last)

[T-Bone @ Nov 26th 2007 11:30PM]

How can you say it is just a phone? If you do buy one today, I think you'll find it is much more than just a phone. The phone part is definitely not the most-used part of my phone.

[seanchk @ Nov 26th 2007 11:37PM]

@T-Bone

I realise its much more than a phone, my point (poorly made) was that I don't see why people can't just be grateful that they have what is possibly the coolest phone and stop making so much fuss about not being able to add 3rd party apps to it.

Yes its fun to be able to add stuff, but then so is having a great device in its own right. Not all phones have the ability to add stuff to them, yet you don't hear people making a big deal about phones that are just phones.

[Russell McKinley @ Nov 26th 2007 9:43PM]

I work in the medical field and am helping my hospital pick software that doctors will carry around on their phones; ie: Palm OS, Blackberry, Microsoft Mobile, to get patient’s lab reports, vital signs, etc.

In a recent meeting with one of the largest of these medical software providers, the question of doctor’s with iPhones came up. I mentioned that the SDK would be coming out in early 2008. A software developer from this company told me that his company already had the SDK and was working directly with Apple. So this news of some companies already having the SDK was not a big surprise after hearing this.

[Michael LaFramboise @ Nov 26th 2007 10:26PM]

It's as you say, there's no surprise in this whatsoever. It's only natural that Apple will give out its SDK to some of the big players first, in order to create some impressive apps in order to show of the capabilities of the SDK when its released to the general public (or whomever else Apple allows to use the SDK).

[jake.michaelson @ Nov 27th 2007 12:59AM]

Good grief - it's *jibe*, people! Not "jive". This is becoming an epidemic among bloggers.

[Andy M @ Nov 27th 2007 1:49AM]

FWIT- This is no longer a rumor- confirmed by Apple marketing Exec as part of an interview released at 11:30PM (EST)

this is a good thing. everyone wins...