Apple's iPhone SDK Press Conference

[Lqv2015]

It's all about greed on Apple's part here. What ****es me off is that they could've easily release updates that wouldn't interfere with the Jailbreak hack. But soon as they found out people shouldn't get anything free, they immediately start releasing apps & charging for them. Capitalizing on what the people want.

[WelshBluebird]

both the Zune and 360 have subscriptions.

But the updates were and are available to anyone, whether they have a sub to XBL (or Zune pass) or not.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Yes, because they offer the subscription.

the iPod Touch doesn't have any subscriptions, while the iPhone does (and the iPhone gets the new features for free)

[Lqv2015]

IF its free the iPhone there should be no reason it isn't for the Touch. they only want to stop people buying the touch because it would be an iPhone without the phone. Something i'd much prefer over the iPhone. I have a decent camera phone too. no reason for the phone. Its all comes down to business but its a ****.

That's exactly what they're doing. They don't see much profit from the Touch. They want us Touch users to slowly migrate to get an iPhone. I have no use for the iPhone. Too damn expensive. I'm happy with a cheap flip phone with a cheap contract. I'm not an obsessive phone user.

You bought the Touch knowing full well what was promised to you.

We Touch users are somewhat stuck in the middle. The Nano & Classic models aren't advance enough to do anything with. So those people knew exactly what they're buying. Touch users knew there were going to be apps release in the future. What I didn't expect is having to pay to enter the store. Otherwise I have no problem paying for the apps themselves. What they're selling isn't even theirs. Dev teams are releasing them. It's just another way to spread the wealth to themselves & their provider, AT&T.

Here's what they're basically telling us Touch users.

NO, you can't use our iphone/ipod touch SDK, although you could if you had bought an intel based mac.

Yes, we're going to ask you to pay more money just for not buying an iPhone and getting a Touch instead. If you don't, then you won't get access to the free and retail priced applications that otherwise might make your Touch much more useful and valuable to you. (This sounds alot like blackmail to me).

Also, we are going to make you even madder when all the Touch's released after a certain date will get FREE the stuff YOU have to pay for just because you were stupid enough to support us and spend an unusually high amount of money for an original Touch that was obviously unfinished.

Edited March 7, 2008 by Lqv2015

[giga Veteran]

That's exactly what they're doing. They don't see much profit from the Touch. They want us Touch users to slowly migrate to get an iPhone. I have no use for the iPhone. Too damn expensive. I'm happy with a cheap flip phone with a cheap contract. I'm not an obsessive phone user.

We Touch users are somewhat stuck in the middle. The Nano & Classic models aren't advance enough to do anything with. So those people knew exactly what they're buying. Touch users knew there were going to be apps release in the future. What I didn't expect is having to pay to enter the store. Otherwise I have no problem paying for the apps themselves. What they're selling isn't even theirs. Dev teams are releasing them. It's just another way to spread the wealth to themselves & their provider, AT&T.

Here's what they're basically telling us Touch users.

NO, you can't use our iphone/ipod touch SDK, although you could if you had bought an intel based mac.

Yes, we're going to ask you to pay more money just for not buying an iPhone and getting a Touch instead. If you don't, then you won't get access to the free and retail priced applications that otherwise might make your Touch much more useful and valuable to you. (This sounds alot like blackmail to me).

Also, we are going to make you even madder when all the Touch's released after a certain date will get FREE the stuff YOU have to pay for just because you were stupid enough to support us and spend an unusually high amount of money for an original Touch that was obviously unfinished.

Touch users knew there were going to be apps released in the future? How so? Steve Jobs himself at first said that an SDK wasn't coming and that the future was Web Apps.

If you think it's a way to spread wealth for themselves and ATT, then you didn't follow the keynote yesterday. ATT is most likely getting zip, if any at all of the 30% apple is taking from pay apps from the developers. That 30% saves you marketing/hosting/cc fees and gives you enormous coverage through the App Store.

"We have great relationships with our carriers, and apple's responsible for the software on the phone, so we define the software, we distribute the apps, you have an iTunes account with a credit card, and really, this is our program, and we're running it." Do the carriers get a revenue share? "We're not going to get into details, but generally we like to see the revenue flow the other direction."

Now, if you honestly think you're getting blackmailed--then I have no hope for you. A nominal fee is by no means a threat against you. Sure it may be more useful to you but its by no means a forced update. What exactly were you expecting when you paid for your Touch? Surely you didn't buy it because you "expected" to get these updates rather than buying it for what it was?

As for your closing statement--welcome to the electronics business. Things get upgraded over time and early adopters always pay the price for it. You honestly can't take that attitude when buying new products--specifications will always generally improve over time.

(Also, i'm not sure where you're headed with your SDK comment. The reason i'm assuming it was left to Intel only was for the development of the iPhone simulator/emulator. It's not as simple as "recompile for PPC".)

[Lqv2015]

Touch users knew there were going to be apps released in the future? How so? Steve Jobs himself at first said that an SDK wasn't coming and that the future was Web Apps.

If you think it's a way to spread wealth for themselves and ATT, then you didn't follow the keynote yesterday. ATT is most likely getting zip, if any at all of the 30% apple is taking from pay apps from the developers. That 30% saves you marketing/hosting/cc fees and gives you enormous coverage through the App Store.

"We have great relationships with our carriers, and apple's responsible for the software on the phone, so we define the software, we distribute the apps, you have an iTunes account with a credit card, and really, this is our program, and we're running it." Do the carriers get a revenue share? "We're not going to get into details, but generally we like to see the revenue flow the other direction."

Now, if you honestly think you're getting blackmailed--then I have no hope for you. A nominal fee is by no means a threat against you. Sure it may be more useful to you but its by no means a forced update. What exactly were you expecting when you paid for your Touch? Surely you didn't buy it because you "expected" to get these updates rather than buying it for what it was?

As for your closing statement--welcome to the electronics business. Things get upgraded over time and early adopters always pay the price for it. You honestly can't take that attitude when buying new products--specifications will always generally improve over time.

(Also, i'm not sure where you're headed with your SDK comment. The reason i'm assuming it was left to Intel only was for the development of the iPhone simulator/emulator. It's not as simple as "recompile for PPC".)

Yes I think we did. Not in SDK sense. I didn't think 3rd party will be developing apps for it, just Apple. And web apps are pretty much useless unless you're around wifi hot spots whereever you go.

They way I took it is, that 30% is for keeping the store running. So what's this nominal fee about? Having to pay to enter the store? If that turn people away, Apple is losing profit. And I REALLY don't believe AT&T isn't getting anything out of this. It's all behind close doors & we'll never know.

Most people knew there's going to be future apps for it. Otherwise they wouldn't have bought the Touch for what it was in the beginning. I know I didn't.

If Apple keeps screwing early adopters, then people won't be buying from them anymore. Apple's loss in the long run.

[Ricardo Gil]

Do you not understand that the iPhone and Touch run the same software, line of code for code? Do you not realise that when people bought the $20 upgrade for the touch all they did was change one .xml file on the device to unhide the icons for the apps?

You do realise they are making money by just hiding icons on the device. They don't to anything to port the code or do anything from the iPhone, just disable the features. 2.0 Will be no different and we will have to pay for yet another .xml file.

Nifty business strategy, but really.... Come on?

IF its free the iPhone there should be no reason it isn't for the Touch. they only want to stop people buying the touch because it would be an iPhone without the phone. Something i'd much prefer over the iPhone. I have a decent camera phone too. no reason for the phone. Its all comes down to business but its a ****.

Just because they share the same platform doesn't in any way imply that you should be entitled to any kind of future improvement. Added functionality along a product's life is an added bonus, not an obligation, but people seem to forget that.

Suppose you buy an iPod Touch. That's it. There's product support, bug fixes, whatever. Extra apps? Ok, I'll take them if I want to, if they're free even better, nothing more.

[Ricardo Gil]

Most people knew there's going to be future apps for it. Otherwise they wouldn't have bought the Touch for what it was in the beginning. I know I didn't.

If Apple keeps screwing early adopters, then people won't be buying from them anymore. Apple's loss in the long run.

Call me crazy but I guess most people still buy iPods for music, and guess what: most people don't even know there's more to the touch than the "base pack".

And again with the screwing early adopters... you got what you bought, or didn't you? If it's so hard being an early adopter for you, then wait indefinitely for the better thing, ok?

[troist]

Yes, because they offer the subscription.

the iPod Touch doesn't have any subscriptions, while the iPhone does (and the iPhone gets the new features for free)

My Nokia N95 on pay as you go has no subscription, neither did my Motorola before that. I get/got free updates with new features and apps on both of them. My netgear/linksys/2wire/belkin wireless hardware gets free updates and I don't pay a subscription for any of them but I get new features.

[Lqv2015]

Call me crazy but I guess most people still buy iPods for music, and guess what: most people don't even know there's more to the touch than the "base pack".

And again with the screwing early adopters... you got what you bought, or didn't you? If it's so hard being an early adopter for you, then wait indefinitely for the better thing, ok?

People that bought it just for music, movies, or pictures didn't know what was expected for the future. Or simply, they just bought it for the wow factor. I myself, knew before hand that there was going to be a bright future for this device. It was so obvious. Otherwise, I wouldn't have paid $420 for just being a music player. If I wanted simple music player, I would've gotten the Classic or Nano. Apple advertised the Touch for more than a music player.

Overall, I think the future is bright for this device with the release of SDK. I just don't think we should be charged from entering the store.

[azz0r_wugg]

I'm disgusted they expect me to pay AGAIN for a firmware update.

Apple: F you.

[Lqv2015]

I'm disgusted they expect me to pay AGAIN for a firmware update.

Apple: F you.

Again, you're not paying for bug fixes. Just the ability to buy the apps.

[osirisX]

Again, you're not paying for bug fixes. Just added features.

Fixed it for you.

[Ricardo Gil]

People that bought it just for music, movies, or pictures didn't know what was expected for the future. Or simply, they just bought it for the wow factor. I myself, knew before hand that there was going to be a bright future for this device. It was so obvious. Otherwise, I wouldn't have paid $420 for just being a music player. If I wanted simple music player, I would've gotten the Classic or Nano. Apple advertised the Touch for more than a music player.

Overall, I think the future is bright for this device with the release of SDK. I just don't think we should be charged from entering the store.

What Apple advertised came with the iPod and you got it. I guess maybe you'd like a refund from your $420 because your dreams didn't come true, right?

[Lqv2015]

What Apple advertised came with the iPod and you got it. I guess maybe you'd like a refund from your $420 because your dreams didn't come true, right?

Haha, you made no effort to discuss what I just said. Rather than resorting to "If you don't like it, don't buy it!" A typical Apple lemming. Nice effort though.

[Lqv2015]

(Also, i'm not sure where you're headed with your SDK comment. The reason i'm assuming it was left to Intel only was for the development of the iPhone simulator/emulator. It's not as simple as "recompile for PPC".)

Meaning, you need to be on a Mac to write softwares for it.

[giga Veteran]

Yes I think we did. Not in SDK sense. I didn't think 3rd party will be developing apps for it, just Apple. And web apps are pretty much useless unless you're around wifi hot spots whereever you go.

They way I took it is, that 30% is for keeping the store running. So what's this nominal fee about? Having to pay to enter the store? If that turn people away, Apple is losing profit. And I REALLY don't believe AT&T isn't getting anything out of this. It's all behind close doors & we'll never know.

Most people knew there's going to be future apps for it. Otherwise they wouldn't have bought the Touch for what it was in the beginning. I know I didn't.

If Apple keeps screwing early adopters, then people won't be buying from them anymore. Apple's loss in the long run.

Apple's not looking to make a profit out of it--or else they wouldn't be allowing developers to set their prices for $0. You can sure as hell bet that ATT is mad about that.

Early adopters remorse has nothing at all to do with Apple. It's a natural process in the industry--prices fall, specs get upgraded. That's all there is to it--just a fact of life you have to deal with.

Meaning, you need to be on a Mac to write softwares for it.

iPhone SDK relies on far too many mac frameworks and libraries. Instruments (DTrace) itself inherently relies directly on the internal OS kernel.

[BigDaddy5]

Haha, you made no effort to discuss what I just said. Rather than resorting to "If you don't like it, don't buy it!" A typical Apple lemming. Nice effort though.

His point was you got what you paid for. You may not realize it, because you thought you were promised more, but you got exactly what you paid for. Now apple is offering you the choice to upgrade your device to a more feature rich device, which you did NOT pay for. You say:

I myself, knew before hand that there was going to be a bright future for this device.

I only ask you "How?" How did you know, since Apple did not promise you anything, that the future was bright for this device? How did you know you were paying for more than you were buying? How did you know you were making an investment if nobody told you?

You bought it based on your feeling that something might improve on it. Heck, jailbreak isn't enough? That alone shows you that your speculation was right and you got everything you hoped for. Now Apple is trying to upgrade your device, and you cry foul because they're charging to give you features, applications, and compatibilities you didn't have? Man, I should be mad at Adobe for releasing a new version of Photoshop, and then charging me for it. Or Microsoft for releasing a new Office and charging me.

[Lqv2015]

His point was you got what you paid for. You may not realize it, because you thought you were promised more, but you got exactly what you paid for. Now apple is offering you the choice to upgrade your device to a more feature rich device, which you did NOT pay for. You say:

I only ask you "How?" How did you know, since Apple did not promise you anything, that the future was bright for this device? How did you know you were paying for more than you were buying? How did you know you were making an investment if nobody told you?

You bought it based on your feeling that something might improve on it. Heck, jailbreak isn't enough? That alone shows you that your speculation was right and you got everything you hoped for. Now Apple is trying to upgrade your device, and you cry foul because they're charging to give you features, applications, and compatibilities you didn't have? Man, I should be mad at Adobe for releasing a new version of Photoshop, and then charging me for it. Or Microsoft for releasing a new Office and charging me.

Apple was treating the iPhone & Touch as a PDA. I forgot if it was either the iPhone or Touch MacWorld that he insisted that there was going to be software release for them made by Apple themselves. There was not hint of the SDK release. I clearly remember Jobs mentioning that those open spaces on the main menus are for future software releases.

I'm not whining about having to pay for the apps themselves. That I'll be happy to buy if the software is justified for my needs. It's the "privilege" to be apple to buy them is what's bothering me. I don't get charge for entering BestBuy & buy stuff.

iPhone SDK relies on far too many mac frameworks and libraries. Instruments (DTrace) itself inherently relies directly on the internal OS kernel.

OK, that I can understand.

[BigDaddy5]

Apple was treating the iPhone & Touch as a PDA. I forgot if it was either the iPhone or Touch MacWorld that he insisted that there was going to be software release for them made by Apple themselves.

No, apple was treating the iphone as a PDA. While underneath it, they might seem the same, they are two separate products. Watch the speech Steve Jobs gave when he announced the Touch. He called it a "revolution in how you enjoy your music," and compare that with the iphone, in which he called a smartphone, an internet communicator, a revolutionary mobile phone, and specifically said "full desktop-class applications," when he mentioned the mobile OS X on it.

It wasn't until January of this year that apple referenced the ipod touch as anything more than an ipod.

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/22/ipod-t...obile-platform/

And nobody ever said Apple themselves was going to be releasing software. Simply that the iphone could run such software.

You seem to have a lot of your facts blurred in with your opinion. This may be why you are so upset over it, but the reality is the ipod touch was never released under the guise of a mobile device. It was released as an ipod. All of the rumor sites were quick to speculate about it, but the bottom line is there was no evidence backing them up from Apple.

[KeR]

What has happened here again, Apple nay-sayers joined a thread and turned it into; Apple this, and Apple that. I am honestly sick and tired of this, and to top it all off its always the same users. If you don't have anything constructive to add, except for your hatred of everything that is Apple then just leave...there are millions of other threads for you to post in. I think the mods need to start being stricter in regards to people trolling!

[Lqv2015]

No, apple was treating the iphone as a PDA. While underneath it, they might seem the same, they are two separate products. Watch the speech Steve Jobs gave when he announced the Touch. He called it a "revolution in how you enjoy your music," and compare that with the iphone, in which he called a smartphone, an internet communicator, a revolutionary mobile phone, and specifically said "full desktop-class applications," when he mentioned the mobile OS X on it.

It wasn't until January of this year that apple referenced the ipod touch as anything more than an ipod.

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/22/ipod-t...obile-platform/

And nobody ever said Apple themselves was going to be releasing software. Simply that the iphone could run such software.

You seem to have a lot of your facts blurred in with your opinion. This may be why you are so upset over it, but the reality is the ipod touch was never released under the guise of a mobile device. It was released as an ipod. All of the rumor sites were quick to speculate about it, but the bottom line is there was no evidence backing them up from Apple.

OK, thanks for clearing that up.

What has happened here again, Apple nay-sayers joined a thread and turned it into; Apple this, and Apple that. I am honestly sick and tired of this, and to top it all off its always the same users. If you don't have anything constructive to add, except for your hatred of everything that is Apple then just leave...there are millions of other threads for you to post in. I think the mods need to start being stricter in regards to people trolling!

Uhh, this is a form where I can voice my opinion. Millions of other threads to post in? Like where? You don't like it, don't read it. You make it sound like Apple can't do no wrong.

[KeR]

^^ I see what you did there, with my words - anyhow, you should re-read what I said; you missed the point the first time around.

[crazzyyfool]

Sun announced that they are developing a Java Virtual Machine for Apple's iPhone with the newly released Software Development Kit (SDK)."We're going to make sure that the JVM offers the Java applications as much access to the native functionality of the iPhone as possible," he said.

The specific version of Java will be based on the Java Micro Edition (ME) and will open the iPhone to a large library of existing Java applications. Sun's announcement comes after reviewing the iPhone SDK since its release just on Thursday. Sun expects to release this version of Java "some time after June".

Sun maintains a sample library of Java ME games and applications. This list includes EA Sims Bowling, Scrabble, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, Libris eBook reader, and more.

Sun adds its name to a list of other developers who have already announced support for the iPhone. Others include Gameloft, Omnigroup, Freeverse, SixApart, reQall, EA, and Epocrates.

Source: InfoWorld

[MrA]

Now for Adobe AIR, Google Gears, Flash and Silverlight, and we'll be set.