Apple May Greatly Restrict iPhone and iPod touch Applications

[Ed Hardy]

Although Apple, Inc. is going to finally allow developers to release approved applications for the iPhone and iPod touch, according to an unconfirmed report the rules for this will be very stringent.

After many months of trying to prevent users from installing third-party applications on its smartphone and handheld, the Mac maker is relenting. And although the details on how this is going to work won't be revealed until March 6, iLounge claims it has been given a preview by several unnamed sources.

If these sources are correct, then the rules are going to be in line with some of the most pessimistic predictions: Apple is going to insist on approving all iPhone applications before they can be released, and require that they be sold only through the iTunes Store.

There are advantages and disadvantages to such a system. It will mean that users will be able to completely trust that any application they purchase through iTunes will be high quality and won't cause problems for their device. On the negative side, the need for Apple to pre-test all software is likely to greatly cut down on the number of applications available.

Accessory Drivers

In addition, Apple is supposedly going to prevent developers from writing software drivers that make use of the Dock Connector, which essentially closes the door on many third-party accessories, such as keyboards.

What role Bluetooth might play in this in unknown. So far, Apple has reduced the functionality of this short-range networking standard to only headsets.

Enterprise Announcements

According to iLounge's sources, Apple is going to release a beta of the Software Development Kit (SD) next week, with the full version not scheduled until the company's developer conference in June.

Still, Apple is supposedly going to use the March 6 event to announce that these products will support Microsoft Exchange and Lotus Notes. If true, this will likely go a long way toward making these devices more accepted by, and useful to, many business users.

Not Following the Rules

If too many people find Apple's rules for distributing third-party iPhone and iPod touch applications too restrictive, then it's likely there will continue to be an alternate, unauthorized system. 

That's what's happening now. There's a growing library of software available for Apple's mobile products that have been modified -- called jail breaking -- to allow them to run these applications.

At this point, it should be emphasized that iLounge's report is unconfirmed, and that no one will definitely know the details of Apple's mobile software system until March 6.

Related Articles

• Apple Doubles the iPhone's and iPod touch's Storage Capacities
• Apple iPhone User Review
• Apple iPod touch Review

[J.R. Nelson]

This is utterly unsurprising. All it means is that there will remain a reason for people to jailbreak their phones.

[berylrb]

or the glass is half full response, there will continue to be two users, those who must have a 3rd party app out there, and those who are productive and/or entertained enough with what Apple and approved developers supply!

[timepilot84]

there will continue to be two users, those who must have a 3rd party app out there, and those who are productive and/or entertained enough with what Apple and approved developers supply!

Too right. And there will always be people who are happy with whatever Apple decides, even when the company is playing the role of control-freak tyrant.

[PDA Bach]

If I may make a historical observation: Once upon a time, Apple had the "open" Apple ][ and its variant machines. It was doing a bang-up business and there were many third party hardware and software developers happily making products for it.

Then Apple tightened everything down... and along came the PC, which was more open.

As time went on, well, you know what the market is like now.

It seems to me that people want to be able to modify, add to, etc. on their machines and I think Apple's efforts to restrict that hurt them in the long run.

JMO

[epp_b]

Duh, what did you expect Gestapple?

[PDA Bach]

Not sure what you're referring to PDABach - I have a wealth of quality third-party applications on my Mac. No more or less open than a PC.

It was in the halcyon days of my youth. You may have a bunch of stuff for your Mac, but in the early days of the PC, you would be hard pressed to buy things to put on your Apple computer.

[r0k]

If I may make a historical observation: Once upon a time, Apple had the "open" Apple ][ and its variant machines. It was doing a bang-up business and there were many third party hardware and software developers happily making products for it.

Then Apple tightened everything down... and along came the PC, which was more open.

As time went on, well, you know what the market is like now.

It seems to me that people want to be able to modify, add to, etc. on their machines and I think Apple's efforts to restrict that hurt them in the long run.

JMO

There is a danger for this to happen again.

Time Machine
There are a lot of users angry at Apple over Time Machine not working with their Airdisks and Buffalo Linkstations. It is possible that Apple has it locked down due to some lingering bugs. But wait. Apple just came out with the Time Capsule which is the only NAS that will "officially" work with Time Machine. So here I sit with over 300 gig of NAS I already own and I find myself pondering whether to buy a Time Capsule which isn't priced all that badly but which is something that I strictly speaking should not need to buy. There are already quite a few 3rd party workarounds for this Time Machine limitation and it is my hope that Apple relents and updates Time Machine to support any NAS and more importantly they update it so it doesn't automatically fill whatever volume it is writing to.

WHS
Meanwhile, M$ will happily take your money to sell you Windows Home Server to put on one of your old windows boxes. Never mind that you could install Ubuntu for free and share your disk with SMB and be good to go. It's a $200 check for M$ for something you absolutely don't need.

Hardware
Apple is trying to stay in the hardware business and the software is still viewed as a vehicle to sell hardware. M$ sells a few Xboxes and Mice and happily rakes in billions for pure software. Apple has had a taste of success selling music with itunes, but I suspect that entire exercise started as an infrastructure to ensure the success of iPod.



Closed vs Open
As a mac owner for several years and several recent purchases, I appreciate the stability a "closed" hardware environment has to offer. But I'd still like to be able to slam OSX on that collection of windows boxes I have lying around the basement.

So on the one hand, as a desktop, Apple computers are "open" when it comes to installing software. On the other hand, the company is pursuing many of the same closed tactics that didn't serve them well in the past.

Apple very nearly winked out of existence with their closed desktop architecture and lack of "clone" manufacturers. The quality of their pre OSX software offerings didn't do them any favors, either. I'm hoping Apple has learned their lesson and are flexible enough to respond to market conditions. It is the only way to avoid a repeat of the debacle that almost did them in.

Show Me
I may not be from Missouri, but you still gotta show me. Saying they are absolutely committed to 3rd party apps on iPhone is not the same as making it easy for developers to deliver them. Telling end users Time Machine would support NAS and Airdisks and then pulling the plug on this feature around the time of the introduction of the Time Capsule seems a lot like Apple is reverting to some of their bad old habits. Letting this "high hurdle" rumor for iPhone application developers circulate this long with no official response from Apple is not a good sign.

[questionfear]

Just an observation (and feel free to shunt this into it's own thread, mods), but I think articles like this one highlight some of why the Apple forums are not as active here.

Brighthanders really want the iphone and the itouch to be smartphones and pdas in the same vein as WinMob and Palm. But Apple doesn't necessarily want that, and unfortunately it's their bat and ball. On other forums, Apple is taken to task but no one is waiting for the proverbial Godot the way they are here. If you read websites devoted to mac fans, everyone has mostly shrugged and jailbroken, or accepted the iphone for what it is. Maybe we all need to remember that, liberal use of the word "smartphone" aside, Apple has never set itself up to be the next Palm OS; running these kinds of articles in depth on a rumor sets up expectations that aren't going to be met.

I love Brighthand and the community here. I am just pointing out that if we want to build a community of Apple product users the way everyone here built a community of Palm users the approach needs to be more about what IS available, and not what is HOPED to be available. Nothing can match the desires of true PDA lovers.

[berylrb]

There is a danger for this to happen again.
...
Apple very nearly winked out of existence with their closed desktop architecture and lack of "clone" manufacturers. The quality of their pre OSX software offerings didn't do them any favors, either. I'm hoping Apple has learned their lesson and are flexible enough to respond to market conditions. It is the only way to avoid a repeat of the debacle that almost did them in.
...

I was with you up to this point. I was an early clone user after my Mac LC, and those days sucked! So from my early clone adopter days, I am on the other side of the fence, pleeeeeeeeeeeease stay closed Apple! with limited SDK options, LOL ;P

...
I love Brighthand and the community here. I am just pointing out that if we want to build a community of Apple product users the way everyone here built a community of Palm users the approach needs to be more about what IS available, and not what is HOPED to be available. Nothing can match the desires of true PDA lovers.

OK, I'm hearing you QF so take this article/thread how would you rework it? Or like you said, maybe that's just another thread.