Sign In
Register
Help
Post your comments for Apple: 200,000 iPhone developers so far here
Apple: 200,000 iPhone developers so far
MultiQuote
#4
fribhey 
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 819
- Joined: 21-May 04
Posted 23 April 2008 - 07:01 PM
iron_chef said:
I bet one of them wants to make the first trojan for the iphone.
it won't happen. this is the exact reason why iphone apps will only be sold through the iphone app store controlled by apple. apple has super tight quality control over these apps and they won't be sold without apple's seal of approval.
#5
iphonewiz
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 27-February 08
Posted 23 April 2008 - 09:15 PM
That is simply a staggering number of developers. I wonder if Apple will be able to support this many developers and applications on iTunes, or will they shut down the vast majority of them by denying by not publishing their work.
What is a budcase?
What is a budcase?
#6
zensunni
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 264
- Joined: 11-September 04
Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:00 PM
So 200,000 'signed-up'? As stuville points out, that says nothing about how many were actually sanctioned by Apple to develop. Considering only half of those that signed-up actually downloaded the software, I'm guessing there were a lot of frustrated developers. And considering that not all that downloaded it were sanctioned themselves...
Seems Apple's only happy to throw us the biggest number they can. Why not tell us how many they've actually approved?
Seems Apple's only happy to throw us the biggest number they can. Why not tell us how many they've actually approved?
#7
zensunni
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 264
- Joined: 11-September 04
Posted 23 April 2008 - 10:14 PM
[quote name='fribhey']
>
Famous last words. You've heard it here first, folks.
Despite Apple's draconian measures in attempting to milk developers for every dime under the guise of security and stability, malware most certainly will be distributed at some point via the AppStore. Developers certainly don't have to provide the source code for each app to Apple before distributing, all they need to do is submit some very personal info (which can be faked), pay a $99 fee, hope for approval, and off they go.
Right now a very limited number of people (i.e., commercial enterprises, possible some well known small-time Mac devs) are getting this approval, but this is supposed to change. Apparently even I should be able to get approval, and I only work for a charity.
Once the floodgates are open, it's a simple matter for a sneak to distribute some form of malware. Most likely this'll be something that won't do any damage right way, but will be timed to go off in the future so that a number of people download it. When Apple realises that a piece of software is malware, they'll certainly void the certificate, but that won't reverse the fact that malware had been officially distributed.
All Apple is trying to do is make as much money as possible without any consideration for the consumers that are buying the products. Like charging $1 (or however much it was) to download a ringtone for the iPhone for a song a person already owns. Ridiculous, yet some Macolytes backed Apple. Now they've satisfied Macolytes by allowing 'free' software, but does anyone actually think this means truly free software, or just cut-down versions of paid-for software so that people can try and then 'upgrade' to the full version?
No, this has nothing to do with security and stability, as both will be affected negatively despite the whole certification process. Indeed, the whole farce is going to give people a false sense of security, making them (e.g., you, {quote:title=fribhey) }{quote}think that anything on the AppStore is clean and wholesome, which only time, not Apple, will be able to tell.
>
iron_chef said:
> I bet one of them wants to make the first trojan for the iphone.it won't happen. this is the exact reason why iphone apps will only be sold through the iphone app store controlled by apple. apple has super tight quality control over these apps and they won't be sold without apple's seal of approval.
Famous last words. You've heard it here first, folks.
Despite Apple's draconian measures in attempting to milk developers for every dime under the guise of security and stability, malware most certainly will be distributed at some point via the AppStore. Developers certainly don't have to provide the source code for each app to Apple before distributing, all they need to do is submit some very personal info (which can be faked), pay a $99 fee, hope for approval, and off they go.
Right now a very limited number of people (i.e., commercial enterprises, possible some well known small-time Mac devs) are getting this approval, but this is supposed to change. Apparently even I should be able to get approval, and I only work for a charity.
Once the floodgates are open, it's a simple matter for a sneak to distribute some form of malware. Most likely this'll be something that won't do any damage right way, but will be timed to go off in the future so that a number of people download it. When Apple realises that a piece of software is malware, they'll certainly void the certificate, but that won't reverse the fact that malware had been officially distributed.
All Apple is trying to do is make as much money as possible without any consideration for the consumers that are buying the products. Like charging $1 (or however much it was) to download a ringtone for the iPhone for a song a person already owns. Ridiculous, yet some Macolytes backed Apple. Now they've satisfied Macolytes by allowing 'free' software, but does anyone actually think this means truly free software, or just cut-down versions of paid-for software so that people can try and then 'upgrade' to the full version?
No, this has nothing to do with security and stability, as both will be affected negatively despite the whole certification process. Indeed, the whole farce is going to give people a false sense of security, making them (e.g., you, {quote:title=fribhey) }{quote}think that anything on the AppStore is clean and wholesome, which only time, not Apple, will be able to tell.
#8
adobephile
- Veteran
-
- Group: Banned
- Posts: 757
- Joined: 03-February 01
Posted 24 April 2008 - 05:45 AM
The reported number doesn't matter nearly as much as the fact that a LOT of developers are signing up. As much as a few of you people are fixated on "tabloid"-type ramifications, there are far more of us who seem to be just getting down to taking advantage of this "new platform" opportunity.
#9
fribhey
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 819
- Joined: 21-May 04
Posted 24 April 2008 - 06:43 AM
zensunni said:
Despite Apple's draconian measures in attempting to milk developers for every dime under the guise of security and stability, malware most certainly will be distributed at some point via the AppStore. Developers certainly don't have to provide the source code for each app to Apple before distributing, all they need to do is submit some very personal info (which can be faked), pay a $99 fee, hope for approval, and off they go.
Right now a very limited number of people (i.e., commercial enterprises, possible some well known small-time Mac devs) are getting this approval, but this is supposed to change. Apparently even I should be able to get approval, and I only work for a charity.
Once the floodgates are open, it's a simple matter for a sneak to distribute some form of malware. Most likely this'll be something that won't do any damage right way, but will be timed to go off in the future so that a number of people download it. When Apple realises that a piece of software is malware, they'll certainly void the certificate, but that won't reverse the fact that malware had been officially distributed.
All Apple is trying to do is make as much money as possible without any consideration for the consumers that are buying the products. Like charging $1 (or however much it was) to download a ringtone for the iPhone for a song a person already owns. Ridiculous, yet some Macolytes backed Apple. Now they've satisfied Macolytes by allowing 'free' software, but does anyone actually think this means truly free software, or just cut-down versions of paid-for software so that people can try and then 'upgrade' to the full version?
No, this has nothing to do with security and stability, as both will be affected negatively despite the whole certification process. Indeed, the whole farce is going to give people a false sense of security, making them (e.g., you, {quote:title=fribhey) }{quote}think that anything on the AppStore is clean and wholesome, which only time, not Apple, will be able to tell.
Right now a very limited number of people (i.e., commercial enterprises, possible some well known small-time Mac devs) are getting this approval, but this is supposed to change. Apparently even I should be able to get approval, and I only work for a charity.
Once the floodgates are open, it's a simple matter for a sneak to distribute some form of malware. Most likely this'll be something that won't do any damage right way, but will be timed to go off in the future so that a number of people download it. When Apple realises that a piece of software is malware, they'll certainly void the certificate, but that won't reverse the fact that malware had been officially distributed.
All Apple is trying to do is make as much money as possible without any consideration for the consumers that are buying the products. Like charging $1 (or however much it was) to download a ringtone for the iPhone for a song a person already owns. Ridiculous, yet some Macolytes backed Apple. Now they've satisfied Macolytes by allowing 'free' software, but does anyone actually think this means truly free software, or just cut-down versions of paid-for software so that people can try and then 'upgrade' to the full version?
No, this has nothing to do with security and stability, as both will be affected negatively despite the whole certification process. Indeed, the whole farce is going to give people a false sense of security, making them (e.g., you, {quote:title=fribhey) }{quote}think that anything on the AppStore is clean and wholesome, which only time, not Apple, will be able to tell.
there's a big difference between paying $99 and being accepted as a developer and actually having apple accept and distribute the applications that you develop. you are under the impression that once you get accepted then anything you make will be sold in the iphone app store and that is wrong. apple specifically said that all of the applications created have to go through them to get approval to prevent any malware/trojans/viruses/etc.
#11
stuville
- Newbie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 23-April 08
Posted 24 April 2008 - 07:07 AM
I for one am totally excited about developing apps for the iPhone. I agree with adobephile on the "new platform" and believe this is a tremendous opportunity. I welcome the approach that Apple is taking for the app store and the financial aspects for both Apple and the developers. I think people tend to forget that the cut that Apple is taking from app sales not only goes for general maint and credit card processing, it also goes to advertising and getting your app in front on customers! I am just anxious to be accepted and obtain a developer certificate.
#12
Peter Cohen
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 4,646
- Joined: 05-February 03
Posted 24 April 2008 - 07:12 AM
nittany4 said:
any idea when there will actually be an application available?
Uh, try reading the article. :)
#13
cweber
- Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 10-November 06
Posted 24 April 2008 - 08:43 AM
I am one of those 200,000 who downloaded the SDK, because I am intrigued by the ramifications of this new platform: How applications need to be designed to efficiently interact with a user. How apps need to fit into the tight constraints of limited memory, bandwidth and non-multitasking.
Have I actually developed a real app? No. I haven't signed up for the $99 program either. But I have learned a ton, and I think the iPhone and iPod Touch, along with Android, are harbingers of future devices which aren't computers as we currently know them, but also not dumbed down and awkwardly designed devices like current cell phones.
Have I actually developed a real app? No. I haven't signed up for the $99 program either. But I have learned a ton, and I think the iPhone and iPod Touch, along with Android, are harbingers of future devices which aren't computers as we currently know them, but also not dumbed down and awkwardly designed devices like current cell phones.
#14
jdb8167
- Veteran
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,583
- Joined: 30-August 04
Posted 24 April 2008 - 02:02 PM
Yeah, without the certificate, most developers will be holding off from developing much of consequence. The SDK simulator is fine if you just want to learn to write OS X apps in Cocoa but outside of some UI experiments, it isn't that useful.
Apple has been slowly adding features to the simulator which is great but without the ability to load applications onto the phone, I've gone about as far as I'm willing to go.
I write software professionally. My time is money. If Apple can't see their way to giving professional software developers the ability to actually target a real phone, I don't see myself spending much effort. What if they decide to never let me have a certificate?
Apple didn't do anything as far as I can tell to discover who were professional developers and who were hobbyists or people just looking. That is kind of disappointing.
The irony is that Google's Android is fully open but there is no hardware to use. The iPhone is wonderful hardware but I can't get a license to target the hardware that I already own. This is very frustrating.
Apple has been slowly adding features to the simulator which is great but without the ability to load applications onto the phone, I've gone about as far as I'm willing to go.
I write software professionally. My time is money. If Apple can't see their way to giving professional software developers the ability to actually target a real phone, I don't see myself spending much effort. What if they decide to never let me have a certificate?
Apple didn't do anything as far as I can tell to discover who were professional developers and who were hobbyists or people just looking. That is kind of disappointing.
The irony is that Google's Android is fully open but there is no hardware to use. The iPhone is wonderful hardware but I can't get a license to target the hardware that I already own. This is very frustrating.
