You just had to have a feeling it was going down the 'big brother' route.

Then again, no one seems to note the important facts, like it's another apple 'event' (again, we are just talking about an SDK here), but they'll be shipping off a beta SDK. Which means apps won't be available for several more months (unless you all have no problem with beta apps).

While developers may not like this, it really does create a good quality control for iPhone apps.

So, basically Apple is saying "We know what's good for you, and we'll only allow those apps which we think you should have". And you're happy by this?

As long as I get access to Bluetooth via IOKit, I'll be happy. Want to port my telescope controller over to the iPhone.

Well, that's nice, except then you have to get Apple to allow you to post the software on iTunes, just so you can download it to your iPhone. I wonder if you also have to pay Apple to run your software through their approval process.

And all this makes you wonder what criteria apple will use. Will they prohibit software that duplicates some of their software? Will they specifically prevent certain types of software, like Skype apps? Will they ban software that cuts into their revenue streams (like not allowing an app to buy music from the Amazon store?)? And you know they'll make sure no one has any ability to share files, because that could be used for stealing music!

And what is their definition of a 'quality' app?

What if you wish to create an app for just one small group of corporate users? For example, an extension of a Non-web based CRM system (for security). You have 8 users who need to access this, but you DO not want the software to be available to general public.

Do these users have to go to iTunes store? What if I don't want my competitor(s) to know about the software?

and remember, everything in this article, and subsequent posts, is conjecture. Nothing is finalized.

@testudo

This is first of all about distributed software. For development and debugging, developers will need access to a debugging platform. This is probably their own iPhone. Maybe everybody can compile for their own phone. That would create an opportunity for open source software... Nothing is know yet about the development platform...

Secondly, a system with signed binaries is also used by Nokia with Symbian. Nobody is complaining about that and claiming that the Nokias don't have software available, as they claim now for the iPhone.

Thirdly, maybe quality here just means for Apple to be certain that the developer does not try things with the software that will do things Apple does not want, such as jailbreaking :-]

Pieter.

Can we reserve judgement until the actual announcement is made ?

For all we know, this may only apply to software sold via the iTunes store - it may still be possible to install other software directly outside of iTunes. Apple just, rightly, wants to ensure the quality of software sold under it's name.

Steve? There's this thing called "a calendar" , where if you tell somebody that something will be released by oh, say..."the end of February", they can tell when you're lying if you don't deliver. Y'know, like that SDK.

Sorry Apple, you make pretty, shiny products, but your shipping , developer support, & customer service suck dog-snot.

Do these users have to go to iTunes store? What if I don't want my competitor(s) to know about the software?

Moreso, if you want to create an app for yourself, do you actually have to go through the process of getting it "OK'd" and then purchasing it from yourself, just so you can use it?

Secondly, a system with signed binaries is also used by Nokia with Symbian. Nobody is complaining about that and claiming that the Nokias don't have software available, as they claim now for the iPhone.

Oh, I love these responses. When Apple released the iPhone (or other such hardware/software), people espouse how Apple does things differently, don't just stand in line and follow the crowd. Then when they do something like this, or tie the iPhone to AT&T, you get the "Well, Nokia (or Dell or MS or Motorola or Verizon or whoever) does it that way!"

And can someone explain what is so damned fantastically different/better about a phone (which is limited in abilities) vs. an entire computer? We're not required to go through Apple to use a piece of software on our Macs (which can do a whole lot more, and cause a whole lot more trouble). But a phone? Hold on, we can't just let any old app run on this thing! Think of the security! Think of the children! Someone might write a program that makes phone calls! Can't have that!

Someone writing a program to spam all day and night, steal information from your computer and work as part of a bot net, that's fine. But a phone call? Can't have that.

If true (which it may not be) this definitely will not be good, and I'll be jailbreaking my iPhone. I was hoping the SDK would satisfy me, but if they are exercising this kind of dumb control, I won't stand for it.

Look Apple, we want to put ANY app on our phone, just like we can put ANY app on our computer. Just give it too us.

This thread hits a new low for whining, and that's saying something. Yes, Apple is controlling your life, and you better like it or else.

Why not wait and see what Apple announces? There's a concept. Maybe - just maybe - Apple will allow any apps that won't pose a security threat or break the iPhone OS. Maybe you just have to test your software to make sure - of course, for some of you whiners that's too much trouble.

On second thought, just believe what you believe - you're screwed.

Wow.. I am truly amazed that you can make facts from rumors! great job! keep up the great work

Why not wait and see what Apple announces?

See, that's the asinine problem with Apple. Everything is an 'event'. Everything has to be kept super-secret until they want to 'let the world know!'.

Apple just can't do anything simple. They can't just release an SDK and announce what the rules will be. They make announcements that they'll be releasing an SDK in February. Then they stay mum, making everyone who cares about this in the dark. Then they announce that they will be unveiling it in March. Maybe. Not sure, since, again, they aren't telling anyone anything.

Then we'll wait until next Thursday (an odd day for the unveiling, as it is really late in the news week, maybe they're hoping a lot of people will miss the announcements?) to see what they are even delivering. According to the rumor, it's now just a beta, not even the final, SDK (I guess this is what happens when you have to pull everyone off the iPhone development so they can "finish" leopard by October). And we may or may not find out what Apple has in store for developers, users, etc.

But it doesn't matter, for as we saw with the XServe RAID, Apple may just decide at any moment to kill the iPhone, the SDK, or anything else.

I don't think Apple is "against" jailbreaking. I think what it is is that they do not want to tarnish their reputation of having a strong secure platform. So, that is to say if jailbroken iPods are found to be insecure and/or virus infected, Apple can say that those are not their problem because those phones were jailbroken. Thus, to keep their reputation, they are making sure that third-party applications are approved by them. From that perspective, it makes sense.

STFU

"Apple may just decide at any moment to kill the iPhone, the SDK, or anything else."

As may any other business decide to stop marketing any product they make at any time, without warning.

What is your point?

maybe Apple don't want people slinging any old nonsense in then getting the blame when the phone crashes. This way, if you just want stability etc, they will take responsibility for it (restricting what you can do). If you jailbreak etc, good luck but don't whine if some 0.2 alpha release locks your phone up. There are people starving out there folks. At least whine about something that matters. It's a phone, ok? You can buy a different phone if you want to.

When Apple killed the Newton, people could still write and distribute apps for the existing users, and even today you can get Newton apps and software to install them... even from operating systems that didn't exist back then.

But with signed apps, when they stop letting you sign them, your device is toast.