1. cellmatrix's Avatar
    Bottom line though, not one "bad" app that you will load on your palm, will cause the cingular network to go down, as Jobs suggested.
    you mean, will a bad app make my network connection go down and force me to reboot or will a bad app make the whole cingular system go down? The former happens all of the time on the treo, sometimes with supposedly "good" apps. The latter sounds physically impossible, where did Jobs say this?
    01-18-2007 02:22 PM
  2. meyerweb#CB's Avatar
    “These are devices that need to work, and you can’t do that if you load any software on them,” he said. “That doesn’t mean there’s not going to be software to buy that you can load on them coming from us. It doesn’t mean we have to write it all, but it means it has to be more of a controlled environment.””

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/te...prod=permalink

    This quote from Jobs seems to contradict the prevailing view here and suggests that we will be able to install third party software on the iphone, after it is control tested by apple. Jobs is a perfectionist and I believe has learned enough from the palm example and does not want to repeat it.
    Funny, my Palm has a lot of 3rd party software on it, and it WORKS just fine. And Job's comment would also seem to suggest that it's going to be really difficult for hobby software writers to supply apps for the iPHone. And, frankly, it's that hobbyist software that adds most of the functionality to the Palm OS, at the most reasonable prices. Apple will certainly charge for the priviledge of testing and certifying software, and that cost will be borne by the software purchasers. Say goodbye to the kind of $10 apps that do so on the Palm platform. And Apple will certainly take a significant amount of time in certifying each app, and each significant update. Say goodbye to instant turn around of bug fixes, and rapid upgrades based on user suggestions.

    There is a lot of good software on the palm that I am a big fan of, but you have to admit there are a lot of crappy buggy palm programs which are misrepresented as finished products which waste people's time and money. It would be nice to have a mechanism to sift through these two categories of programs IMO and I believe that is what Jobs is proposing, we will see.
    Yep, we'll see. While eliminating buggy software is a good idea, I'm not sure it's worth the cost of eliminating so much good, inexpensive software.

    There is one thing I wonder about, though. If Apple opens up the platform at all, how will it prevent other 3rd party ISVs from writing apps? I guess the only way to buy & load software will be through the iTunes store. Say goodbye to price competition.

    There will not likely be the equivilent of a Butler, or a TakePhone, or a FileZ for the iPhone. Nor an equivilent to PalmInternals or iRing. Apple may allow applications, but I can't see them allowing alternatives to the built in functionality, nor utilities that extend or modify the built in functionality.
    01-18-2007 02:43 PM
  3. surur's Avatar
    Again, if its a full OS, should it not have the protections full OSX has, ie. levels of privilege and access, and file protection. Or has this been dropped, meaning its not full OSX after all? And Jobs certainly spoke of the whole west coast going down, so he's making a major outrageous claim.

    Surur
    01-18-2007 02:49 PM
  4. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    The man-who-can-do-no-wrong has said in different interviews that badly written phone applications can take down the phone network, and that is bad. Hence no 3rd party apps for the iPhone.
    Any links?
    01-18-2007 03:42 PM
  5. icewingdog's Avatar
    I've been drooling over the iPhone, and I'm a Mac owner and Apple fan, but there are 2 things that will prevent me from buying one, the memory limits and not being able to load apps.

    The MOST used app on my 650, besides the phone and calendar, is my Bible software (www.olivetree.com). Then there is the password safe, and the absolutely incredible conversion functions in the built-in Calc, not to mention games....

    Well, I really want an iPhone, but it's just not going to have all the functions I need and use on a regular basis *sigh*

    I'd REALLY like to have a decent music player and a fast web browser....maybe someday.
    03-31-2007 08:35 PM
  6. marcol's Avatar
    Update on 3rd party app situation:

    Is the iPhones platform closed? And if it is, will it be open to developers in the future? Jobs says its a security issue, but Apple is working to find a way to allow developers to build applications for it. Jobs says he doesnt want the iPhone to be one of those phones that crashes a few times a day. He adds: We would like to solve this problem and if you could just be a little more patient with us, well do it.

    http://d5.allthingsd.com/20070530/st...-ceo-of-apple/

    Sounds like they might end up with something like the Symbian Signed program.

    https://www.symbiansigned.com/app/page
    05-31-2007 06:13 AM
  7. surur's Avatar
    Update on 3rd party app situation:

    Is the iPhones platform closed? And if it is, will it be open to developers in the future? Jobs says its a security issue, but Apple is working to find a way to allow developers to build applications for it. Jobs says he doesnt want the iPhone to be one of those phones that crashes a few times a day. He adds: We would like to solve this problem and if you could just be a little more patient with us, well do it.

    http://d5.allthingsd.com/20070530/st...-ceo-of-apple/

    Sounds like they might end up with something like the Symbian Signed program.

    https://www.symbiansigned.com/app/page
    Isn't that all rather pathetic and contradictory? He claims the device has FULL OSX under the hood, but is scared as hell that it will crash daily. Do OSX laptops crash daily, or is there really no 3rd party apps for macophiles?

    His paranoia makes me really wonder how buggy and fragile REAL OSX is. Or maybe he's just lying and has other motivations. Its really one or the other, isn't it.

    Surur
    05-31-2007 08:31 AM
  8. marcol's Avatar
    Isn't that all rather pathetic and contradictory? He claims the device has FULL OSX under the hood, but is scared as hell that it will crash daily. Do OSX laptops crash daily, or is there really no 3rd party apps for macophiles?
    OS X is the most stable desktop/laptop OS I've ever used. Stability is one of the things I really like about it. And, yes, I use a whole bunch of third-party apps.

    His paranoia makes me really wonder how buggy and fragile REAL OSX is.
    I guess we'll find out at least a bit more soon enough.
    05-31-2007 10:11 AM
  9. surur's Avatar
    I guess we'll find out at least a bit more soon enough.
    With him trying his best to shelter his OS behind a certification curtain we may never find out the emperor has no clothes.

    Surur
    05-31-2007 10:59 AM
  10. marcol's Avatar
    With him trying his best to shelter his OS behind a certification curtain we may never find out the emperor has no clothes.
    The only mobile device I've used (for any length of time) that's never crashed is the only device I've used that has an app certification program. That observation alone doesn't of course prove that certification is the cause of the fantastic stability of my E61, and it's true that not every app I've used has been Symbian Signed, but I'm pretty sure that it's at least not doing any harm

    Anyway, the main thing here seems to be that it does look pretty certain that there will be third-party apps for the iPhone. Now if they'd just add 3G to the European version...
    05-31-2007 11:41 AM
  11. mikec#IM's Avatar
    Jobs is just stalling until Apple can figure out how to control all the apps, and/or charge a lot of $$ for some lame widget.

    I think the 3rd party apps issue has Job very nervous...I think he expected people to love the fact Apple would control your phone...guess what Steve, we don't.
    06-02-2007 08:01 PM
  12. archie's Avatar
    Update on 3rd party app situation:
    Is the iPhone’s platform closed? And if it is, will it be open to developers in the future? Jobs says it’s a security issue, but Apple is working to find a way to allow developers to build applications for it. Jobs says he doesn’t want the iPhone to be “one of those phones that crashes a few times a day.” He adds: “We would like to solve this problem and if you could just be a little more patient with us, we’ll do it.”
    http://d5.allthingsd.com/20070530/st...-ceo-of-apple/

    Sounds like they might end up with something like the Symbian Signed program.

    https://www.symbiansigned.com/app/page
    Isn't that all rather pathetic and contradictory? He claims the device has FULL OSX under the hood, but is scared as hell that it will crash daily. Do OSX laptops crash daily, or is there really no 3rd party apps for macophiles?

    His paranoia makes me really wonder how buggy and fragile REAL OSX is. Or maybe he's just lying and has other motivations. Its really one or the other, isn't it.

    Surur
    Your tone is unquestionably negative and slanted. There is no paranoia or lying or sneaky motivation involved.

    What IS involved is the development of an SDK? Even if a person does not develop applications, they would realize this to be necessary. This SDK development takes time and was not completed when Steve Jobs last commented on this (probably still isn't - I don't know). At the very least, it depended on further development of the LLVM (low level virtual machine) that Apple is now incorporating into OS X.

    Why did it take so long? Incorporating LLVM like Apple is doing for the iPhone has never been done before. 90% of LLVM contributions have been from Apple and it has occured only over the last year. But it is far enough along now that he can say with certainty that there will be development opportunities.

    Why is this so? Well, only recently has the LLVM matured enough to reinvent the way code (applications) will be run on this new computer called the iPhone. With this new incorporation of LLVM in OS X for the iPhone and soon, Leopard, I can assure you this device will be extremely stable and safe — and fast.

    So your statement saying, "Its really one or the other, isn't it." should have been a question because you do not realize that it isn't "one or the other". Rather, it's something else altoghter that you are not aware of.



    On a side note, this LLVM in Leopard will have a lot to do with, in what many will consider, the one big feature of Leopard. No, it doesn't have anything to do with the interface.
    06-04-2007 02:52 PM
  13. marcol's Avatar
    Hi Archie! Welcome back. That all seems plausible to me with my not so great knowledge of LLVM (all of which was gained from Wikipedia and llvm.org in the last 10 minutes )

    This SDK development takes time and was not completed when Steve Jobs last commented on this (probably still isn't - I don't know).
    Obviously I don't know either but I did notice this rumour:

    A person briefed on Apples plans said that at its software developer conference this month, Apple intends to announce that it will make it possible for developers of small programs written for the Macintosh to easily convert them to run on the iPhone.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/04/te...=1&oref=slogin
    06-04-2007 05:36 PM
  14. surur's Avatar
    Archie, no need to rewrite history. He was talking about the IPhone crashing long before he agreed to let third parties in. No need to invent waiting for some LLVM to justify his reticence.

    Surur
    06-04-2007 05:48 PM
  15. archie's Avatar
    I wasn't "invent(ing) a waiting for some LLVM to justify his reticence".

    In fact, this IS the reason he waited. You see, the LLVM sits directly atop the hardware, right below the OS level. It is for this reason, and its necessary completion, that Steve was unsure of developer contributions. Without it being completed, how could Steve state the strategy. This LLVM seperates apps (at runtime anyway - not to familiar with it) from the OS keeping any... shall we say misbehaving, or maybe... deviant application out of harms way.

    There are other factors involved I am sure, but this is at the heart of it.

    Apple has one chance to make an impression here and they are doing they're darnest to make it the best phone anywhere at its introduction. If the iPhone crashes throughout your daily routine because of a poorly implemented scheme for outside development, that will not be good.
    06-04-2007 07:04 PM
  16. surur's Avatar
    I wasn't "invent(ing) a waiting for some LLVM to justify his reticence".

    In fact, this IS the reason he waited. You see, the LLVM sits directly atop the hardware, right below the OS level. It is for this reason, and its necessary completion, that Steve was unsure of developer contributions. Without it being completed, how could Steve state the strategy. This LLVM seperates apps (at runtime anyway - not to familiar with it) from the OS keeping any... shall we say misbehaving, or maybe... deviant application out of harms way.
    Oh, so you are fake steve.

    Surur
    06-04-2007 07:10 PM
  17. archie's Avatar
    Keep reading. I say there are other factors I am not aware of. I am not trying to pull the wool over anybodies eyes here.
    ... shall we say misbehaving, or maybe... deviant application out of harms way.

    There are other factors involved I am sure, but this is at the heart of it.
    There was a lot that still needed to be completed even before submission to the FCC. Heck, if you check the records, they didn't even get the iPhone submitted until a month and a half ago because they were still working on this stuff.
    06-04-2007 07:13 PM
  18. surur's Avatar
    Why does desktop OSX not need this protection to be stable, but IPhone OSX does?

    Surur
    06-04-2007 07:17 PM
  19. archie's Avatar
    I don't fully understand how the LLVM works and to what degree it will serve Apple.

    What I understand though is that Apple's reliance on LLVM for Mac OS X will be more inline with the technology's namesake.

    That's it. You have to guess from there.
    06-04-2007 07:27 PM
  20. surur's Avatar
    LLVM I understand is a translation layer, which would allow software written in one language to be decompiled into an intermediate platform-independent bytecode. Its a bit like .Net in that you could write in Java and still use the .Net VM to execute your code. What this means in theory is that it would be easy for MacOs apps to be recompiled to run on ARM processors. I do not see much at all in the specification regarding sandboxing code, so I see it more as a compatibility layer than a security layer. I though MacOs already had user and kernel separation, and that User-mode could not change system settings and system files in any case.

    Surur
    06-04-2007 08:22 PM
  21. MacUser's Avatar
    I'm not techno-master, but it seems like a simple concept. You don't want buggy apps on a new product to ruin the initial experiences. I HAVE installed buggy crap on my Mac, in OS X, and had to uninstall it because it was buggy. What's the point?

    I'm sure they just want to make sure that poorly designed 3rd party apps won't crash, lag or ruin the iPhone experience.
    06-07-2007 05:38 PM
  22. Kupe#WP's Avatar
    I'm sure they just want to make sure that poorly designed 3rd party apps won't crash, lag or ruin the iPhone experience.
    Or bring down all the communications systems of the free world!!! What silliness!
    06-07-2007 06:23 PM
  23. lschiedel's Avatar
    Or bring down all the communications systems of the free world!!! What silliness!
    Actually, If someone wrote a VOIP app for the iPhone, that could take down Cingular's network because people would use data minutes instead of paying long distance fees!

    Especially if it worked while you were at a WIFI hotspot (ie no Cingular minutes at all!).

    Of course they may just be referring to viruses or Denial Of Service attacks.
    Say someone wrote a virus that spread and was designed to all call at the same time.

    But then why hasn't this happened to Palm phones?
    (oh yeah, no WIFI).
    06-08-2007 11:37 AM
  24. volwrath's Avatar
    Actually, If someone wrote a VOIP app for the iPhone, that could take down Cingular's network because people would use data minutes instead of paying long distance fees!
    Well except for the fact the iphone isnt 3g, so the data connection would be too slow to use voip
    06-08-2007 11:46 AM
  25. Kupe#WP's Avatar
    Actually, If someone wrote a VOIP app for the iPhone, that could take down Cingular's network because people would use data minutes instead of paying long distance fees!

    Especially if it worked while you were at a WIFI hotspot (ie no Cingular minutes at all!).
    Given the lack of any emoticon I can only assume you meant that in seriousness. VOIP cellphones have been around for at least 3 years (Windows Mobile - heard of it?) with Verizon and it hasn't caused so much as a dent in their business.

    Of course they may just be referring to viruses or Denial Of Service attacks.
    Say someone wrote a virus that spread and was designed to all call at the same time.
    LOL - so your only point is you feel the most unique/new thing the iPhone brings to the world of wireless communication is significantly increased vulnerability to malicious software? Are you as clueless as Steve Jobs on this topic?
    06-08-2007 01:05 PM
126 12345 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD