Apple changes course, will allow third party development tools

Apple has officially announced today that it is back tracking on its previous statement of not allowing third party tools. Apple has specifically stated that they are relaxing their rules to allow for third party development tools as long as they do not download code.

Apple states, "In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need."

This sharp course direction could be a result of many things, but for Adobe, this is particularly good news. While Adobe did go public with its complaints against Apple, many feel that it may have been the developers who were actually doing most of the complaining. By allowing third party tools, developers can use their preferred software package to create Apps for the iOS platform.  

Apple has also published their App Store guidelines for all to see. This is the first time Apple has publicly disclosed its policy and will hopefully give developers better insight to Apple's policies prior to development.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows Phone 7 to launch on October 11?

Next Story

Apple hits out at amateur developers and fart apps

37 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

We all know Apple did this to poke a stick in the eye of Adobe, I mean just look at the timing.. Now that it'd done, Adobe got their bad press for a few weeks and probably lost more than a small amount in sales from potential app devs, Apple can loosen up..

It seemed silly and childish that they banned them to begin with. If someone creates a quality app using Adobe Flash that sells well in the App Store, how is that any skin off of Apple's back?

At the same time, if Adobe Flash based apps are considered "crap" in user circles and don't sell well at all....again, how is that any skin off Apple's back? The whole thing seemed petty to begin with. The notion that they were placing limits in order to have high app quality standards was ridiculous...there are a TON of examples of crappy apps in the App Store that were made entirely with Apple's IDE.

Shadrack said,
It seemed silly and childish that they banned them to begin with. If someone creates a quality app using Adobe Flash that sells well in the App Store, how is that any skin off of Apple's back?

At the same time, if Adobe Flash based apps are considered "crap" in user circles and don't sell well at all....again, how is that any skin off Apple's back? The whole thing seemed petty to begin with. The notion that they were placing limits in order to have high app quality standards was ridiculous...there are a TON of examples of crappy apps in the App Store that were made entirely with Apple's IDE.

I agree with banning some useless and stupid Apps like the fart ones as they serve no purpose. Never understood the whole deny flash thing

"as long as the resulting apps do not download any code."
looks like they learned from one of the problems in android apps. you can scan the code all you want but if it doesn't get the bad code until after its gone live, the pre store searches are pointless in preventing security problems.

Apple, as far as I can remember, has always restricted apps from running code that was downloaded after the fact, it's not something they learned from Android.

/- Razorfold said,
Scared of WP7 and Android?

Of course they are. Why else would they all of a sudden change their practices when they stood firm for so long. And why else would Mr Jobs go out of his way to make false statements and bash Google during their last press conference.

/- Razorfold said,
Scared of WP7 and Android?
Basically it's just Android for now. WP7 is more of a threat to Android.

FMH said,
Basically it's just Android for now. WP7 is more of a threat to Android.

I think WP7 is more of a threat to BB...especially in the corp environment.

techbeck said,

I think WP7 is more of a threat to BB...especially in the corp environment.

I totally agree with this one. Microsoft has put a lot of effort on business technologies such as Sharepoint for WP7.

techbeck said,

I think WP7 is more of a threat to BB...especially in the corp environment.

I totally disagree with this statement. Microsoft has put a lot of effort into Xbox Live, Zune, Facebook and Windows Live integration, etc. They have everything for the developers and consumers to create a healthy market for Windows Phone 7.

I do enjoy that Office is available but when Neowin reviewed Windows Phone 7, Office had the least change to it since it was last seen. Everything else is more important at this point. Plus a corporate environment requires their own set of apps usually that can't be on the market for obvious reasons.

Electric Jolt said,

I totally disagree with this statement. Microsoft has put a lot of effort into Xbox Live, Zune, Facebook and Windows Live integration, etc. They have everything for the developers and consumers to create a healthy market for Windows Phone 7.

I do enjoy that Office is available but when Neowin reviewed Windows Phone 7, Office had the least change to it since it was last seen. Everything else is more important at this point. Plus a corporate environment requires their own set of apps usually that can't be on the market for obvious reasons.

I wouldnt really use Zune as a selling point for MS. People who use Zune love it...but its not to popular. At least only one person I know has it.

Android and Apple are similar in how their phones work and what they are used for...since it looks like Google took what Apple did and just put a little different spin on it. So if WP7 was good competition towards Android, it would be towards Apple as well. However, WP7 is more geared towards the workplace so that why I said BBs. Since MS didnt update their software for a while and bring anything new to the game, BBs took over.

ObiWanToby said,
All first party ... but yeah.

But in MS case few are trying to compete because they are mostly free tools, or very cheap, or designed very well in comparison to what other options that are available. With Apple you had to buy an entire system... it was almost like game consoles with the development system but less focused.

techbeck said,

Of course they are. Why else would they all of a sudden change their practices when they stood firm for so long. And why else would Mr Jobs go out of his way to make false statements and bash Google during their last press conference.

I thought that was his usual behaviour (at least Win Vista and Flash come to mind...)

ObiWanToby said,

All first party ... but yeah.

Well, Silverlight and XNA are free and the other 2 are not necessar, as you can use mono to develop in .NET (altought VS2010 is the best dev tool in the market).

techbeck said,

Of course they are. Why else would they all of a sudden change their practices when they stood firm for so long. And why else would Mr Jobs go out of his way to make false statements and bash Google during their last press conference.

Umm, "so long" has been since June. (Similar clauses were in place before, but the most onerous ones, the ones which caused the greatest "backlash," were introduced this summer.) And I'm sure the instantaneous antitrust interest from the Justice department had more to do with this change over the short interval of time.

techbeck said,

I wouldnt really use Zune as a selling point for MS. People who use Zune love it...but its not to popular. At least only one person I know has it.

Blackberries aren't for gaming letalone connect to Xbox Live.

It doesn't matter how popular Zune is. Everybody already said that if Zune went international, it would be a whole lot more popular.

Zune offers so much for 15 dollars a month, and to be able to have your music streamed anywhere and everywhere is what I'm looking for. Blackberries don't offer this, not Android, and not iOS.

If anything, Game Center and Ping on iOS can compare to the social integration and Zune on Windows Phone 7. Not Android or Blackberry.

So you can continue saying it's for the workplace but the Office hub is just one out of the many hubs for Windows Phone 7. And with the type of phones coming out, it's definitely geared toward for the consumer. Maybe next release will focus more on the workplace.

FMH said,
Basically it's just Android for now. WP7 is more of a threat to Android.
I don't think WP7 is a threat to anything. Have you seen that UI?!?!?!

Ji@nBing said,
I don't think WP7 is a threat to anything. Have you seen that UI?!?!?!

agree, the UI needs more work.

Electric Jolt said,

So you can continue saying it's for the workplace but the Office hub is just one out of the many hubs for Windows Phone 7. And with the type of phones coming out, it's definitely geared toward for the consumer. Maybe next release will focus more on the workplace.

I understand that WP7 is more than just a work related phone. And I agree with your points. I guess time will tell how WP7 does and if people like it and the new user interface.

Ji@nBing said,
I don't think WP7 is a threat to anything. Have you seen that UI?!?!?!

It's people like you that keep the world boring... ZOMG KLSDJFKLSDJFKLLSDFJKLJSDF?!?!?! Like seriously, grow the **** up please.

The UI is the best I've ever seen and it looks truly beautiful and innovative. I can't wait to hold it in my hands!

Electric Jolt said,

It's people like you that keep the world boring... ZOMG KLSDJFKLSDJFKLLSDFJKLJSDF?!?!?! Like seriously, grow the **** up please.

The UI is the best I've ever seen and it looks truly beautiful and innovative. I can't wait to hold it in my hands!

You find flat, blue squares with monochrome text and incredibly ugly icons the most beautiful you've ever seen? Wow, you're easy to please!! A 12 year old could come up with that (in fact, it looks as if a 12 year old in fact did).

/- Razorfold said,
Scared of WP7 and Android?

I'd expect that they are more afraid of the federal government making a stink about their anti-competitive behavior with their blocking of AdMob, and Flash (as an application development framework; I still think it should be up to Apple to block Flash in Safari, but not to block people from using Flash to develop a program that, to the iPhone is compiled into the same code as the Objective C that Apple uses).

techbeck said,
I think WP7 is more of a threat to BB...especially in the corp environment.

I second that - if there is any consumer market share gained it'll be gravy on top but from what it appears all the focus on WP7 launch is around those tools that enterprise customers need. If they can move enterprise developers off native code and onto Silverlight then one can have a single application that scales from the desktop down to the hand held device with no recoding at all - it'll be great for corporations looking to cut costs.