iPhone software development to be locked down by Apple?

It was only a matter of time till the serious iPhone SDK rumors started flying, and with Apple's Town Hall event next Thursday, it's possible some of what we're hearing is right on. If that's the case, prepare to be letdown in a major way. According to iLounge, Apple will be severely restricting access on software for the iPhone and iPod touch, only allowing apps to be downloaded through iTunes, hand-picking which applications will make it to the store, and cutting off developer's access to accessories which interface with the dock connector. Of course, this is just about what we expected from Steve, since he's already lauded Nokia for its S60 verification scheme. Additionally, the report claims that the SDK we see next week will be an incomplete beta, with the full version rolling out in June to coincide with the WWDC. Thinking of any good reasons to keep jailbreaking your phone? Yeah, us too.

[Thanks, Omega]

Update: Here comes the counter-rumor, which has it that only paid-apps are get hand selected by Apple, while free apps would supposedly be open for download. Not clear whether that means free apps simply wouldn't be offered in iTunes, but it's all just hearsay until Apple tells us what's up later this week.

[Kiwi616 @ Feb 29th 2008 11:27AM]

This was expected, let the jail breaking continue!

[BK @ Feb 29th 2008 11:35AM]

If this is what it takes to keep the quality of the apps where they should be, then who cares. Some of those jailbreak apps are just ridiculous.

[E71 @ Feb 29th 2008 11:39AM]

Heh. Spotted this link (featured on the 'Sponsored Links' section of this page):

"There’s so much more you can do when your phone runs Windows. See it all at StartDoingMore.com."

That is so true. I feel for you iPhone users, you make the pretty colors flash but you can't do much else with your iPhones.

[fred @ Feb 29th 2008 11:41AM]

So you just toss all of that hard work under the bus just to keep the company line?

Can you imagine if all the OSs on the market forced you to go through a vetting process so your app can work on their system?

No one is forcing you to DL those programs, stupid or not.

[Leon Ngo @ Feb 29th 2008 11:43AM]

That means don't expect seeing customize, emulators, radios etc... on iTunes SDK. Keep the jailbreak coming

[JD @ Feb 29th 2008 12:02PM]

On the up side, this is one less reason not to buy an iPhone, since it looks like jailbreaking will continue to be where the true innovation lies. Once a jailbroken 3G iPhone arrives, I'm there -- none of this control-freak Apple crap for me. And if iPhone v2 can't be jailbroken...well, then I guess it's over to Android.

[Bob S. @ Feb 29th 2008 12:27PM]

Sorry, kids, but BK's right. After buying my iPod touch a while back, I went looking to see what third-party apps existed so I could decide whether to jailbreak. (Keep in mind that I'm an enthusiastic homebrew user on my PSP, DS, and Nokia Internet Tablet.)

Anyway, the apps are along the lines of the sliding puzzle that shipped with the first Mac 128K. Or Snake, a game that was on the Atari 2600 in 1978. Or this... *thing* with a crude drawing of a tree, and you shake your iPhone or iPod touch back and forth, and the *leaves fall off.*

And those are the *highlights.*

Lest I be marked as a troll, perhaps I found a site with an incomplete listing of third-party apps. There absolutely was nothing in their list worth jailbreaking and installing. There were a very few clever hacks, like iListen, but too few to talk me into jailbreak. It was all proof of concept stuff as far as I could see.

But if there *are* any worth installing, I'd love to know, because I do support homebrew communities. And for that matter, I could see jailbreaking an early iPod touch to get the apps that Apple later added.

So what third-party apps do you people use on a regular basis? Talk me into this.

[phoomp @ Feb 29th 2008 12:49PM]

To Bob S.

3rd party apps worth installing are:
PDFViewer
iRadio
Books (ebook reader)
Chess
NES (NES emulator)
snes4iphont (SNES emulator)
psx4all (PSX emulator)
VNsea (VCN application)

And, there's more appearing everyday.

[will @ Feb 29th 2008 12:53PM]

I'm probably going back to a Treo. Yes, it's old technology, but the fun factor is wearing off of my iPhone, and I miss all the numerous PALM applications that I used everyday and the refined syncing with Outlook Calendar. I was really counting on getting the same functionalities through 3rd parties for iPhone, but Apple appears to be dashing that hope!

[Boostjunkie @ Feb 29th 2008 12:54PM]

Plus, if Apple actually supported these developers with an SDK the apps could probably be a lot better. When you are fighting against the device you trying to make the apps for, and have no support whatsoever, it must be a lot harder.

[KyleK @ Feb 29th 2008 12:54PM]

I agree that there are a lot of crappy 3rd party apps out there, but I consider them as proof-of-concepts, and after all I don't have to install them :)

Apps I use regularly are:
- MobileCast (listen to podcasts without the need to use iTunes, i.e. download them via WiFi)
- Books (eBook application with lots of books to choose from)
- iSolitaire
- iZoo
- Labyrinth (this is a very nice game, and I mostly use it to impress other people with the Touch :)
- weDict (access to local dictionaries of any kind)
- Funambol (sync Contacts with my Thunderbird)

[Bob S. @ Feb 29th 2008 2:40PM]

Thanks, phoomp and KyleK; I do appreciate the lists. I have to admit, Books was one of the apps that baffled me; as I recall, it opens only text and HTML, so it can't do anything Safari can't. I use a bunch of emulators on my PSP, but while I appreciate the level of hack needed to get them running on the Apple mobile platform, it's just too awkward. The Nokia Internet Tablet has a decent if slow PDF reader, but that screen's just too small for the format, and the iPhone/iPod touch screens are smaller, so I'm afraid I have to be cynical. And for weDict, I'm an editor, so there's usually a print dictionary around, but I've also bookmarked dictionary.com.

Again, don't get me wrong. I think the scene could develop into a good one someday, and as both of you point out, some of those casual apps are useful to a lot of people. And I think Apple's model is based pretty strongly the T-Mobile Sidekick model; I've used Sidekicks since the day the B&W was released (it's why I'd never consider an iPhone), but T-Mo's stranglehold on control has hurt the platform more than it's helped it. So my sympathies are with the white hats on a lot of levels. But just as I haven't bought a single iPod game because they're just so dull, I haven't yet found the killer app for my iPod touch yet. Maybe someday, but it's looking equally like to be through a licensed, Apple-approved developer as through an app requiring the jailbreak.

[Jacob @ Feb 29th 2008 4:02PM]

I'd like to point something out to those people saying, "well, what's the point - there aren't any worthwhile apps for the jailbroken iPhone anyways."

The reason that there aren't any really clever or useful apps for it is precisely BECAUSE Apple isn't allowing people to develop for the platform officially! As a developer, I'd love to create apps for the iPhone - it's a really sexy device, with a lot of potential - but with the number of restrictions and ridiculous crap that I would currently have to go through (and will likely continue to have to go through, based on news like this), why waste my time?

Apple's made it clear they don't want us developers making useful apps for their platform. We get the message... and so we're not bothering.

[Cahlito @ Feb 29th 2008 11:27AM]

this doesn't surprise me one bit. ah oh well, I'll just keep my jailbroken T-mobile iPhone

[Brodie @ Feb 29th 2008 11:29AM]

What a bunch of iCommunists...

[macona @ Feb 29th 2008 11:52AM]

You mean iCapitalists? Get your terminology correct.

[Rich @ Feb 29th 2008 12:00PM]

I thought iCapalists want iFreeMarkets? This is not a free market, this is a dictatorship.

[macona @ Feb 29th 2008 12:07PM]

iCapitalists want to make money from anything and everything. iCommunists want to spread the wealth, so to speak.

Everything Apple does is to protect their interests, as all profit generating businesses do. Their first loyalty is to their investors.

[Ellianth @ Feb 29th 2008 12:13PM]

Well then this would be a combination. Apple is a control freak company. And Apple is a greedy company. The correct term for such a company is neither iCommunists or iCapitalists, it's simple i -scratch that- Apple.

[RJRibeira @ Feb 29th 2008 12:22PM]

I think iFascists clearly fits best

[michael @ Feb 29th 2008 12:38PM]

iFascists?

[michael @ Feb 29th 2008 12:40PM]

Damn you RJ, now i just look as though i don't know what a fascist is.

I'm not happy. ;)

[rockintom @ Feb 29th 2008 12:40PM]

Er... iDictatorship?

[Jonathon @ Feb 29th 2008 1:15PM]

Sounds like you kids need to find an iDictionary.

[r3loaded @ Feb 29th 2008 1:39PM]

Or iAmSickOfEverythingRelatedToAppleHavingToStartWithAnI

[iomatic @ Feb 29th 2008 11:29AM]

How is this different from other platforms?
Thanks.

[Andrew @ Feb 29th 2008 11:43AM]

Ever heard of Windows Mobile?

[Andrew @ Feb 29th 2008 11:50AM]

You know what, it just occurred to me that you may have been genuinely wondering how it differed from other platforms.

Basically with a Windows Mobile phone, you can install applications from ANY source, approved or not, all without having to "jailbreak" your phone. Picture it like using an actual computer, you're able to install pretty much anything you want without limitations.

Cheers!

[SeditioN VII @ Feb 29th 2008 12:04PM]

Now, picture this! ...Your phone crashes all the time & constantly needs a soft reset.

[DonatoM3 @ Feb 29th 2008 12:08PM]

Sedition,

Maybe yours does, but mine doesn't.

[andi @ Feb 29th 2008 12:12PM]

Ever heard of Symbian?..

[SeditioN VII @ Feb 29th 2008 12:13PM]

Donato



I work at an at&t store, its not like this is some kind of isolated incident. I get countless, and I MEAN countless wimo phones brought in weekly do to crashing, freezing and just plain ol d.o.a. Much of it is do to third-party interaction.

[Andrew @ Feb 29th 2008 12:15PM]

Obvious retort from an iPhone user. (I checked your post history)

My phone (HTC Touch) doesn't crash, and it hasn't been hard reset in weeks. I'm very impressed with Windows Mobile 6, and I have some beautiful applications on it that make using it a dream.

One could expect that allowing users the freedom to modify their phone as they see fit will result in the occasional crash or soft reset. I'd rather soft reset every once in a while than not have the ability to load the apps I want, when and where I want without jailbreaking.

Cheers!

[Don @ Feb 29th 2008 12:27PM]

I don't have many problems at all on my Wing. I run two 3rd party applications from time to time. PocketCM and PointUI. They are both BETA apps and I know that they aren't completely stable. PocketCM is getting there, it's a pretty neat app. PointUI still has some major issues. Either way, I accept these faults because it's my choice to install them. This isn't an issue with Windows Mobile, it's an issue with the developers who created these apps. But, without the open platform to do so I would be stuck with a plain vanilla interface that was chosen for me with no ability to customize.

Another option for me is installing customized builds by other developers that make significant changes to the whole OS. Windows on your desktop has always been highly customizable, and so is Windows Mobile. Enjoy your iPhone... it does nothing that my phone doesn't do and hasn't been doing for years.

[Alan Strangis @ Feb 29th 2008 2:24PM]

@ SeditioN:

My circa 2005 HTC Wizard with customized WinMob 6.1 ROM (go xda-developers.com!) crashes maybe once or twice a month, and that's usually when I'm watching native DivX video (mostly with revision3 podcasts) with CorePlayer streamed stereo bluetooth.

I use a 3rd party launcher (SPB Pocket Plus 4), ebook reader (Mobipocket), Opera Mini, Skype and usually have my phone overclocked by about 66% as well.

[iomatic @ Mar 2nd 2008 11:16PM]

Wow thanks for the low ranking. :\

I just wanted to know how this restriction by Apple is different from how other platform owners offering up their own operating systems for application development. I don't know the ins/outs advantages/disadvantages of either, so help explain please, without the vitriol.

Thanks.

[michael @ Feb 29th 2008 5:36PM]

@ any WinMo haters:

WinMo is only really bad if you have a crappy phone in the first place. A crappy phone as in bad specs, bad hardware, bad screen, etc. Same as it is in the PC world - crappy PC's = bad quality, great PC's = great quality. You get what you pay for.

WinMo itself isn't that bad, but it could use a lot more, which I can expect to see in WinMo 7. But at least you're not locked down on it, and I have the freedom of choice and do not need to Jailbreak just to 'make it work'.

Plus it doesn't help that most of these "M$-products-are-crap" stories are made by MS haters themselves, who like to make up stories based from old issues like SeditioN here.

And as for the people who are trying to tone down this bad news, it's still the truth in the end, whether it's Apple or not.

[gravity @ Feb 29th 2008 11:30AM]

not sure what the hoopla is all about. This just means we all get quality apps?!?

Homebrew is always going to be an underground movement.

[68newyorker @ Feb 29th 2008 12:12PM]

The hoopla is because at least one of the iPhone's major competitors, Windows Mobile, doesn't have these kind of controls on software development. Personally I get real twitchy with companies that try to have this kind of control. Not that it's not their right just that I'd rather buy from someone else.

As to the "quality apps" comment, no, that's not necessarily what it means. Despite Apple's propaganda to the contrary, you can be open and have quality. There are tons of quality Windows Mobile apps, certainly more than there is for iPhone at present (SPB produces some really nice stuff). There just also happens to be tons of crap along with it.

If I were Apple, I'd control quality by only putting approved apps on iTunes but not prevent open development and installation outside of iTunes. Kind of like being able to pick up a podcast from a website that isn't necessarily on iTunes.

There's no real reason why Apple has to close down open development to insure quality. Simply state "If it didn't come from iTunes, you're on your own". The non-techies will listen to Steve. The techies will do what they like. Everybody's happy. Sadly, Apple exhibits a real tendency toward over-management of their product.

[Eric @ Feb 29th 2008 1:46PM]

And it's one thing just to push quality apps to the masses. It's another to purposefully make an iPhone/iPod touch owner go through a bunch of annoying hurdles just to use the hardware they own how they want to.

I hope some Apple zealots will have the balls to boo when/if they announce this BS.

[Gravitation @ Feb 29th 2008 2:39PM]

You don't like it then wait a few months when the official apple SDK gets hacked and the home brew community gets to use a better SDK for dev. I worked on one of the third party apps on installer.app. The hacked SDK isn't bad. And... it's free and open.

[Only morons take this seriously. @ Feb 29th 2008 11:32AM]

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.
Maybe it's because Apple continues to give me the shocker. *giggle*

[Ellianth @ Feb 29th 2008 12:15PM]

I've had some of my patients complaining about being shocked. Have you been drinking your daily dose of kool-aid and applying your RDF daily (as prescribed)?

[NHAnimator @ Feb 29th 2008 11:32AM]

Please correct me if I am wrong. But isn't it GENERALLY a good idea to have this sort of device locked down? Otherwise, couldn't a malicious person program a Zuma clone to run happily for an hour before overwriting your firmware and providing you with a free iBrick?

[fred @ Feb 29th 2008 11:37AM]

"Please correct me if I am wrong. But isn't it GENERALLY a good idea to have this sort of device locked down?"

Only if that company is Apple and you need to spin this in a positive light.

If it was any other company, it would be a case of them being greedy and controlling.

It's all relative.

[LesbianHam @ Feb 29th 2008 11:39AM]

Not a problem. Play for 59 minutes then quit it, easy. Next.

[Reilly @ Feb 29th 2008 11:53AM]

I have no idea why you'd think any sane programmer would let 3rd-party apps have access to firmware.

[BeepBoopBeep @ Feb 29th 2008 1:45PM]

Try looking at this from a support point-of-view. (I work in a call center for a piece of consumer hardware, so...) Would you be anxious to answer the flood of calls and emails from unconsolable people who want *you* to fix or replace their phones because they installed some lousy piece of software from some third-rate developer and it wrecked the operating system, bricked the phone, what have you? I'm not convinced that people who install something they perceive to be "made for iPhone" and it hoses the phone will say to themselves, "Oh well, it's not Apple's fault. It's mine."

On a somewhat unrelated note, I used to work at a telco, and you wouldn't believe the number of calls we used to get from customers who didn't pay their bill for three months once we terminated their service. They were convinced that the ability to make calls was a "right". Granted, that was home phone service and not a device, but when people's ability to make calls is screwed up, they feel very cut off and tend to get nuts about it pretty quickly. Again, if i were to be widespread, I can't assume that most people would think they are assuming any real risk on their own by downloading software from God-knows-where.

I don't think I'm totally alone, being someone who would prefer to be largely assured that what I'm about to download and install won't screw up my device. After all, think about all the people out there who choose not to install a new version of Windows until it's been in circulation for a while/a service pack has been released for that very reason.

I

[James @ Feb 29th 2008 3:19PM]

If a third party app can break the iPhone, then Apple did screw up when making it.

[Michael Chastain @ Feb 29th 2008 10:39PM]

There's no reason you can't have certified apps and still allow people to install third party apps. You could even have a default setting that would only allow signed apps to run.

It's not just a matter of application quality. It also allows Apple/AT&T complete control over what applications you can run. That makes it unlikely you'll ever see apps like SlingPlayer, Skype, or multiprotocol IM applications on the phone. It also means Apple is going to get a cut of all applications, which means programs will cost more, and freeware is unlikely.