Apple's iPhone SDK Press Conference


Recommended Posts

I was just wondering, if Apple keeps charging touch customers for software updates, is anyone going to buy iPod touch in the future?

At least I know I wouldn't.

If I can accumulate all that they will charge me for next few years, I am better off getting an iPhone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read the live blog, you would know that they said most developers are opting for freeware. Apple will make sure any free apps are received truly free.

I think he is onabout the 2.0 update that you will need to update to gain this functionality

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he is onabout the 2.0 update that you will need to update to gain this functionality

The 2.0 update is free though (save for nominal charge for itouch). The prices for the applications are completely up to the developer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apple expected me to pay for the iPhone apps, and now expect me to pay for this update too? I could see some logic behind charging for the other update (people paid more for the iPhone so its only fair touch users pay a bit more for the iPhone apps) but now they're just milking it. Theres no reason to charge Touch users over iPhone users for this update other than greed IMO.

I'm sticking to jailbreaking... I'm sure there will be apps similar to SMB/spore on installer soon for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prices for the applications are completely up to the developer.

Which as it should be. If people thought of the iPhone (and the iTouch) the way Apple did, then they'd realize it is a platform like Mac OS X and Windows are platforms.

Microsoft charges for Windows XP Plus!, think of the update to the iTouch as a Plus! package. If you don't like the fact that they're charging for it, don't buy it, no one is forcing you to.

As for the apps, well if I go out of buy an app at Wal-Mart for Windows or OS X, then I'm going to be charged for it. Why can't these developers do the same thing for iPhone apps?

Apple expected me to pay for the iPhone apps, and now expect me to pay for this update too?

Please show me where you have to pay for the update, please.

iphonesdka347.jpg

Look at Jobs' head and read that.

Quoted from MacRumors:

All this will come with the iPhone 2.0 update, in beta today going to thousands of developers. Customers will get it in June as a free software update to iPhone users. Meanwhile, iPod Touch users will be charged a small fee due to accounting issues.

Edited by Hurmoth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Hurmoth: I think he has an iPod Touch.

The way he stated, "Apple expected me to pay for the iPhone apps" I assumed he had an iPhone. If I'm wrong, I apologize, but to be honest I think a lot of people are confused in here though.

Regardless, Apple has every right to charge for the update. If people don't like it, then they don't have to buy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what people say and do are 2 different things.

and apple takes 30% to get return for hosting and other jive, they will be taking a loss for hosting free apps, if the majority of apps are free, it will change/no host.

If you read the live blog, you would know that they said most developers are opting for freeware. Apple will make sure any free apps are received truly free.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

they are charging ipod users again.. this is ridiculous... if it cheap like the N enabler update then fine, i'll do it, if not, jailbreak... but i am excited fo spore.

honestly, am i the only one who wants bejeweled with the touch gestures? i think that game is perfect for the iphone/itouch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what people say and do are 2 different things.

and apple takes 30% to get return for hosting and other jive, they will be taking a loss for hosting free apps, if the majority of apps are free, it will change/no host.

How are you to say that? A little too early to be playing devil's advocate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arghhh. I accumulated dozens of reasons for an iPhone, but since I'm in Canada, I wouldn't pay this 650 bucks price point... now I have YET ANOTHER reason to say that the price/package ratio on the iPhone is much better... and hell, at 650 bucks, I should have almost bought it. ALMOST.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not a to early thing, its almost expected as they have retracted things alot in the past, main points for me was the time Machine over Wifi that was " Suposed " to be included/feature later to be Sold as Time Capsule. and originally apps were supposed to be free for the touch/iPhone ( imho WebApps are not Apps, they are Web Pages as they require a Web Server ). and to even GET the free apps from the SDK you need to fork over 20 bucks for ANOTHER Update

How are you to say that? A little too early to be playing devil's advocate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not a to early thing, its almost expected as they have retracted things alot in the past, main points for me was the time Machine over Wifi that was " Suposed " to be included/feature later to be Sold as Time Capsule. and originally apps were supposed to be free for the touch/iPhone ( imho WebApps are not Apps, they are Web Pages as they require a Web Server ). and to even GET the free apps from the SDK you need to fork over 20 bucks for ANOTHER Update

As for Time Machine over Wi-Fi, there was a statement on Leopard's webpage when it was in beta that all its previewed (as opposed to promised) features were subject to change. It's not the first feature that got pulled. Another one was Home on iPod (from Panther, if I remember right). Pulling features is a common practice (if I got a dollar for every feature pulled from Vista...).

As for free Apple apps for the iPod touch, at no point did Apple promise that any apps would be ever added. People automatically assumed that, but that's their problem. If you have a problem paying $20 for an optional upgrade expanding the iPod's functionality by 200%, don't do it. People knew what the iPod touch was capable of when they decided to buy it, so I really don't understand all the sudden uproar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not a to early thing, its almost expected as they have retracted things alot in the past, main points for me was the time Machine over Wifi that was " Suposed " to be included/feature later to be Sold as Time Capsule. and originally apps were supposed to be free for the touch/iPhone ( imho WebApps are not Apps, they are Web Pages as they require a Web Server ). and to even GET the free apps from the SDK you need to fork over 20 bucks for ANOTHER Update

So what exactly are you expecting? Requiring developers to make their applications payware because they'd be losing money from hosting costs? Not likely--you can certainly bet that even though many developers will make their apps free, not all will. (and for good reason, support the indie developers)

Take notice that the SDK itself is free--you can develop and program applications all you want on your computer. Getting the application listed on the store itself will cost $99--this makes sure your application is able to be distributed to every iPhone/iTouch user over the air or through iTunes. (this is also needed so you're digitally signed in for protection from malicious software)

Not only does the $99 for the iPhone Developer program get your apps listed at the App Store/iTunes (where you pick the price, without any CC/hosting/marketing fees) but also:

index_apply_chart.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome, in my view they started with the bigger news, not the SDK, but the Exchange integration, something tells me RIM aren't gonna be too happy about that. But personally, I'm chuffed, quicker I can lose contact with Blackberries the happier I'll be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really understand the timing, advertising all these features but then don't have them available till late June, erm, arn't they just letting the competition know what they're doing and give them the opportunity to come out with something similar/better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I thought the SDK is available now, and the firmware for users and everything will be implimented until June. So that leaves 3 months for developers to pump something out. I don't know why everyone is so ****ed off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have a problem paying $20 for an optional upgrade expanding the iPod's functionality by 200%, don't do it.

agreed i do have a problem with paying $20 bucks for an optional upgrade that i have had for months on my jailbroken touch, thats why i wont be doing it, and find apple charging for something that is already free jokeable ( aka pay $20 to convert my Jailbroken Touch, to a different version that does exact same thing )

without any CC/hosting/marketing fees)

the Fees are the $99 charge to get hosted by iTunes, and the 30% cut apple takes. if it was free, the ability to add to it Withought using iTunes ( same ability i have now ) would be there, but in order for people to have their apps accessible they are charged $99 ( if they give their software away) and $99 +30% sales if they sell it

that $99 fee to just have it listed and able to be put on the Phone/Touch will ( IMO ) stop people from doing the free software route

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agreed i do have a problem with paying $20 bucks for an optional upgrade that i have had for months on my jailbroken touch, thats why i wont be doing it, and find apple charging for something that is already free jokeable

the Fees are the $99 charge to get hosted by iTunes, and the 30% cut apple takes. if it was free, the ability to add to it Withought using iTunes ( same ability i have now ) would be there, but in order for people to have their apps accessible they are charged $99 ( if they give their software away) and $99 +30% sales if they sell it

John Gruber summed it up nicely:

Apple's 70/30 split with developers is steep, but initial reaction from the developers I follow on Twitter seems to be positive. Paul Kafasis of Rogue Amoeba told me via IM, "70%? That's? that's? livable," which seems to sum up the consensus sentiment.

There is no option to circumvent the App Store. A developer cannot, say, make their iPhone app available for download over the web, and have users copy it over to their iPhone through iTunes by hand. The App Store does allow for free apps, with all hosting costs covered by Apple. But, I suspect, developers won't be allowed to deliver a "free" app through the App Store which requires a registration or license through the developer's own web store.

My question, though, is how will this be enforced technically? If developers can install on their iPhones the apps they're working on, what will stop users from doing the same? I'm guessing it's tied to digital certificates, but that's just a guess. There must be something, though.

The reasons developers are willing to accept a 70/30 split are simple: convenience and exposure. Apps sold via the iPhone App Store will be far easier to register and install than apps are for the Mac. Once you've registered for an iTunes Store account, your credentials are saved. No credit card numbers to type in, no emails to wait for containing serial numbers. It looks as easy to buy these apps as it is to buy songs. And the exposure of getting listed in a store that's availableevery iPhone user in the world is tremendous. It's like Apple's Software Downloads web site, but with one-click Buy buttons.

The $99 fee for getting your app listed in the store is a no-brainer. A bummer, perhaps, for the student set, but I suspect it's intended as a bozo filter to keep the process from being inundated with glorified do-little "Hello World" apps. (I'm almost certain even freeware apps require the $99 listing fee ? although that fee is per-developer, not per-app.)

In short, what developers lose per-transaction from Apple's 30 percent take, they can more than make up for in volume. This is going to be a gold rush.

http://daringfireball.net/2008/03/iphone_s...s_and_questions

From a developer point of view, the penetration your software will get through the App Store is unimaginable which can't be done by yourself. (which itself will oncur more than $99 in hosting, marketing, and credit card fees).

It really is a great deal for developers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agreed i do have a problem with paying $20 bucks for an optional upgrade that i have had for months on my jailbroken touch, thats why i wont be doing it, and find apple charging for something that is already free jokeable ( aka pay $20 to convert my Jailbroken Touch, to a different version that does exact same thing )

Look at it this way:

Jailbreak = Unreliable and can end up bricking your iPod touch (Look at 1.1.3 and 1.14 16GB and 32GB iPod touches jailbroken with ZiPhone. Don't mention restoring your iPod touch, as it hasn't worked for some people).

Firmware 2.0 = Reliable with apps checked by Apple to make sure they work.

I also haven't seen any jailbreak games like the ones demoed by Apple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.