[…] The iPhone runs OS X, but that is apparently not the same thing as Mac OS X. Steve Jobs has confirmed that the iPhone will not be open to outside developers, ostensibly because Apple and Cingular don’t want to introduce security risks. This has provoked a vigorous response from many in the Macintosh community who are anxious to use Mac applications on their iPhones. Merlin Mann says it well when he says, “I’d take “OmniOutliner Mobile” or “iTerm Lite” or “Textmate for iPhone” in a heartbeat. No question.” […]

I’m less concerned that the iPhone is closed to 3rd-party developers than I am about it being locked to Cingular. A carrier-locked iPhone is so very 1984.

While it’s not possible to install software on the iPod under the default firmware, it is possible to install additional software under alternative firmware such as Rockbox and ipodlinux. With any luck, similar open-source projects will pop up soon for the iPhone!

As a side note, are there any favorite open-source GTD-type apps that people can recommend for Linux? I haven’t seen any mentioned on here (or maybe there are and I’ve just missed them?)

~TuxGirl

[…] And that leads naturally to my other really big disappointment: Lack of developer support. […]

Frankly, if this thing costs $500 + monthly minimum and doesn’t allow for, say vpn/ssh or other 3rd-party apps, I’m not sure exactly who it’s for. Except maybe the junior-league Paris Hiltons out there. Although even that seems doubtful to me, since there’s much cheaper alternatives that do more.

Then again, maybe I underestimate how much technolust will blind the average geek with some disposable income.

Apple has it’s new toy. It’s new toy has so many possibilities it’s amazingly insane. Will Apple actually accomplish what is possible? Likely not. I say this from past experiences with Apple. There are numerous items we could list. Unx that’s not really unx, moving files on coders and not telling anyone where they go, or that they replaced them. Hardware crippling on purpose, randomizing and hiding data files, forcing DRM on its purchasers… it’s not the first time that Apple would move in for the kiss and then turn their heads at the last moment. Isn’t this what used to frustrate us MacEvangelists so much? And yet, they’re still the prettiest girl on the block, and have the most potential. And that’s why we are still here.

iTunes and the iPod wasn’t really a light-year advancement. Anyone who was familiar with the online music scene knew someone was going to make a device and webstore. Most of us wished we had the funds to do it ourselves, and some tried but couldn’t get the music industry to play along. In fact, many of us were asking “Why the hell hasn’t anyone done this yet?!” The music industry links is what made the iPod. I suspect Apple learned well… the same industry links will make the iPhone. Yahoo, Google, etc. (hollywood for movies on iTunes/iPhone/AppleTV?) Why else would we get talks from these leaders at the Keynote as well as specific coded apps for the iPhone from them? This bodes ill for developers, it means Apple has signed up exclusively with a few people to develop with. (my suspicion)

and that same question: “Why the hell hasn’t anyone done this yet?!” is easily asked with the iPhone. For example- doing a 3-way call- hell, it should be that easy- it should have been that easy a decade ago. Non-linear phone messages? Lordy lordy, we all wished that a decade ago as well. These ideas aren’t new, and they aren’t advancements. The sorry state of the smart-phones have had us all scratching our heads for years and years… and only a few willing to actually attempt to use them. So, Apple finally stopped us banging our heads against the wall wishing for a device that was easier to use, that had Wifi and real web-sites… but should we give them an award for thinking this up? Not really. We should give them an award for just being the first to actually spend the money to do it. (And we said the same thing with the iPod, didn’t we?)

Now, they have on their hands a device that has enormous potential: business IT guys could use to change websites, update blogs/company news, watch server stats, write code in vi/emacs- ssh into home machines to run scripts (as mentioned above), almost everything that a computer can do now on the Wifi link, this phone likely could do. [Especially the lower memory CLI options.] Will Apple let go of it’s baby and let people develop for it? Likely not. Apple will closely guard this device. Because Apple knows you’ll come and use it, and hang on Apple’s every update to the next widget- hoping that this time, you can read your scientific research articles in PDF form. Likely- it won’t happen anytime soon.

About the interface- It’s cute, it’s an advancement- but can a single button pressed and held get you a phone call? Doesn’t seem like it- so we’re looking at a phone that is going to be a bit more difficult to use to get the every-day phone call (that I can do with a speed-dial easily with one hand) and does a bunch of other stuff that likely you’ll have to sign on for high-cost data link time and be allowed to only run the few killer-apps they develop.

At least we can finally sync Contacts. How long did it take to get that? Is this an advancement in thought? No, but, an advancement yes. So, thank God we can finally sync contacts and finally browse with a real browser from a phone. Very cool. Now- how easy will it really be to use it? How many wifi spots can be found and used? And honestly, will I be able to do more than what I was just shown- even though what I was just shown is very cool… the possibilities for this device is really what makes me want it. [Give me a cli, give me SSH, give all coders ability to code front-ends to applications we use daily- OOp, OmniFocus, Acrobat, etc. etc.- and you’ll find me a user who will be eating out of your hand.]

Hell, the blogging capabilities with a built in camera and fully-featured web-access alone are amazing…

The possibilities are endless… all Apple has to do is let Developers do what they do best.

I’ve rather been hoping for a general iTunes API, something to interface with the data on any iTunes extending device (that would be any iPod, iPhone and Apple TV now). I really want to have a few simple extensions like synchronising to my GMail contacts and Google Calendar.

Imagine a mobile version of Quicksilver…

Ohhh, I think I just crapped myself!

I will be thrilled if I can use the iPod connector to jack into my MacBook and use the phone as a modem via the EDGE connectivity when I can’t find a wifi connection. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in unfamiliar territory with a need to connect, and no easily accessible wifi or even wired connectivity (can anybody say “Woodland?”); wardriving isn’t my speed, so I’ve been forced to make note (as best I can in the fervor of idea-land) and hope that my thoughts can get back to where they’re at when I once again reach civilization…er…connectivity.

Yes, this could make or break the iPhone’s utility for me. One of the first things I thought of when it was announced was: OSX + internet access + WiFi means that I can SSH into my home machine from any hotspot, set it to work on something, access needed files, or send files back home. Just like I do from other machines now. There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be possible, but with no 3rd party development, it’s unlikely that Apple will feel that it’s a universally useful enough feature to develop itself, even though the functionality almost has to be built in, given OSX’s Unix underpinnings. Of course providing command line access to the iPhone seems like it would open up the iPhone to a world of hacks, which may be something Apple wants to avoid. Oh well. It looks like a beautiful piece of work. I just hope too tightly wrapped development and Cingular’s traditionally high data rate packages don’t cripple it too much.

Even if Apple released the new DashCode in Leopard to have an option to port your widget over to iPhone, that would be good enough for me. Just like how the new XCode has those check marks for build for intel, ppc or UB. I feel that for what I would be using my phone for, I would love having RSS reader, Traffic Webcams and even gogo Red ball =D

There really had better be some way to get 3rd party apps onto something I’m going to pay out the yazoo for.

Some cool uses for the iPhone ( (R) Cisco Systems) that I would like but I wouldn’t expect the masses to:

• Flash cards
• Speed-reading applications
• Creating and editing ASCII/Markdown files
• Reading Project Gutenberg etexts

And some mainstream-ish stuff that I didn’t see get mentioned:

• IM
• RSS readers
• Post picture to Flickr/Picasa

My only beef with the hardware is that it includes yet another phone with no flash. Is a tiny LED so expensive or such a design travesty? Then, you could also use it as a flashlight. I see people all the time using cell phone screens as pathetic little flashlights.

Is there some way of getting notified when 43 folders goes back to being a site about personal productivity and stops being a rabid apple fanboy blog?

If Cupertino doesn’t open up the iPhone (or whatever its name will be eventually) I can see how there will be a lot of clandestine ways to sneak an app into it.

How difficult would it be to develop an installer for the iPhone and for developers to use this hack to let their programmes in, especially if the phone runs a real operating system, like OS X lite?

@Geoff: Sure. Post your email address here, and I’ll drop you a line. From my Mac. That I love.

Yeah. It should be open…

That will be the killer feature for me.

The rest of it is just…eh…cool… yeah, like that doesn’t work on me or anything….

I don’t know now the first flush of lust has washed over me. I can sync my contacts/calendar/tasks perfectly fine with my SE k800i and my MBPro…It has a 3.2Megapixel camera with a flash… I have 1 Gb of storage which is expandable and a speaker and I listen to news podcasts on it which sync over via Missing Sync…. and I’m sorry to say it but it’s easy….

is there something wrong with me?

What excited me was it being open…

The key question is what they mean by ‘of their choice’. Do they just mean it will come with a fixed set of apps, and that is all, or do they mean that there will be additional apps but only ‘officially sanctioned’ ones?

It seems dumb that they’re restrict the platform that much - I can already see an immediate opportunity in developing an app based around the Salesforce.com APIs, which is the kind of thing that would sell the phone to some people, but irrelevant to most. So I hope they’re taking a middle path (third party apps for sale via some Apple controlled system).

Daily Report, Jan 13…

Team Collaboration Funding for Presence Networks … Presence Networks received £250,000 of venture financing from The Capital Fund. Presence Networks is a developer of secure instant messaging technologies, and has recently moved from R…

Does Cingular’s pricing vary by location, because I’m in the DC area and I pay 20 bucks a month for unlimited internet. Currently using a Palm Treo 650, but the internet plan does not vary by phone.

re: Mathew says…

“Implementing everything as web applications isn’t acceptable because Cingular charge way too much for Internet access. Web 2.0 isn’t fun when you’re paying by the kilobyte. As a result I don’t really use the web on my Cingular phone, but I do use Java applications on it.”

I’ve also heard rumblings that this “full” safari doesn’t support flash or java. I’m going to seriously assume that what was shown at the keynote was an alpha model. Since it has core animation, I think this thing runs embedded Leopard, and they are not done with Leopard. I’ve lost track of all the articles I’ve read, but Steve Jobs was quoted somewhere as saying “yea, there’s no reason we couldn’t put iChat on there”, so this thing isn’t done. It has all the stuff your basic “cell phone” user would want to have. Since this is a product of Apple Inc. and not Apple Computer Inc. (RIP), maybe we have to wait for the Mac Mobile.

http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS2986976174.html

http://www.openmoko.com/press/index.html

Or, you could bend over and wait for Apple…

Sure, the iPhone is hella sweet looking device. But there comes a point at which it’s just rediculous to beg and plead for access to your own damn phone, at twice the price.

The possibility to create exciting mobile apps on cool hardware is already here. Go make it happen.

I can understand not wanting it to be open with the first release — there are bound to be stability problems at first, and it’s much easier to hammer those out if there isn’t a lot of extra stuff going on. If that’s the thinking, it would be nice if they would just say so, but why would they change their ways now? I say this as an openstep developer who saw them lose their entire enterprise market after acquiring NeXT by refusing to make any commitments to their customers.

I agree with Ian. You’ve got a real browser on a very mobile device. It’s ubiquitous access to the web through what looks to be a very usable interface. While open development for the iPhone would be great, we can do quite well using “the web as a platform.”

I’ve been writing about this at my web site too.

If it’s true that the iPhone is crippled because Cingular say it has to be, then let’s hope the rumors of a phoneless version are true, and that Apple ships an SDK for that.

Implementing everything as web applications isn’t acceptable because Cingular charge way too much for Internet access. Web 2.0 isn’t fun when you’re paying by the kilobyte. As a result I don’t really use the web on my Cingular phone, but I do use Java applications on it.

(Heck, Cingular even ream you for SMS messages, which cost them practically zero bandwidth.)

But right now, I’m looking at the Nokia N800 as being far more interesting than the iPhone. Just not as pretty.

[…] Link: 43 Folders: Let OS X developers at the iPhone. Please. […]

[…] Let OS X developers at the iPhone. Please. (Via 43 Folders.) This now familiar plea for 3rd party development on iPhone… […]

[…] Two recent articles in the New York Times would seem to put to rest — at least for the foreseeable future — any hopes or speculation that the new iPhone will be allowed (nb: I did not say able) to run third-party OS X applications (previously: 43F Podcast: Snell & Gruber on iPhone applications and Let OS X developers at the iPhone. Please.) […]

Cute, Geoff. Just give us a little time to finish mopping the drool out of our keyboards and blink away the reality distortion field…

For what it’s worth, Merlin’s post casts light on one of the major flaws in the iPhone. That makes him a bit less of a pure fanboy and more of an independent thinker than many of the other starry-eyed bloggers I’ve been reading.

Has anyone gotten concrete information from apple yet? I’ve contacted Apple Developer Connection. Here’s what I sent:

The iPhone is described as having software based on OSX. Will this platform be open to third party developers? If so, where and when will information on iphone development be available?

Thanks! -Andy

I got the following response:

Re: iPhone

Hello Andy,

Thank you for contacting the Apple Developer Connection regarding the iPhone. We are currently reviewing your inquiry and will get back to you very soon.

Best regards,

Brunon Rogowski Apple Developer Connection Worldwide Developer Relations

Merlin:

It will be the cell carriers that force Apple to lock down the apps that can be installed. They all run walled gardens. They don’t want the traffic if they don’t get paid.

Nick

ps: it has been a long while, but you met me and my wife when you came to Atlanta to see REM with Penny. Ring a bell?

I think this is probably down to Cingular rather than Apple. Imagine if you could just write and install any app on the phone and someone, either accidentally or maliciously, wrote an app that bought Cingular’s network to it’s knees ‘cos it used the phone functionality to grab an SMS-fed RSS feed every 5 seconds…

I think it’s more likely we’ll see a games console approach once Apple has gained a bit more leverage with the carriers and a bit of market share: 3rd party developers will be able to write apps for the device, but they’ll have to go through a certification process before release. And that release will probably be via iTunes, so Apple get to ‘control’ (and take a cut) of what’s out there.

I don’t think for a minute it will be a 100% closed platform, if only because all the developers will lynch Steve et al at the WWDC if it is.

Steve was careful to push the ‘3rd Apple Platform’ line, so I’m sure it’s not just a phone to them, even if they want a little more control than on the Mac itself.