Our compatriot Rob Griffiths has posted a provocative piece on the Mothership called “iPhone 1.0 forever,” where forever is defined as, “until those hackers crack Apple’s code and get iPhone 1.1.1 running with third-party apps.”
It’s a good piece and it’s worth a read. Rob is clearly upset about this, and I understand why. But I differ somewhat with Rob’s take. Here’s what Rob says:
I think Apple blew it here, and blew it in a big way. Instead of embracing and extending the development of third-party applications, it seems it has gone in the opposite direction: to make it as hard as possible for third-party applications to exist.
The thing is, we can’t see into the future. Yes, with iPhone 1.1.1 Apple has made it harder for hackers to jailbreak the iPhone. But does that mean Apple has decided to, forevermore, prevent third-party app development on the iPhone? Not hardly.
Yes, it’s entirely possible that Apple will never, ever allow third parties to write apps for the iPhone. But look at the state of Apple right now: It had to delay Leopard to get the iPhone out the door. And now Leopard is about to ship in its delayed state, presumably with engineers feverishly working to squash bugs.
Despite all of Apple’s successes lately, this is a company that clearly can not walk and chew gum at the same time when it comes to Mac OS X. And as a result, I have a hard time accusing Apple of lollygagging when it comes to releasing an iPhone development kit. Once Apple ships Leopard, though, I think the clock starts to tick. And if there’s no movement by Macworld Expo, then it’s time for the volume of complaints to get cranked up to 11.
Rob mentions a third scenario that I have suggested since the day the iPhone was launched:
My colleague Jason Snell, believes there's a possibility of an Apple master plan at work here-the iPhone Store, which would operate much like the iTunes Store, allowing you to purchase approved third-party applications for your iPhone directly from Apple. Apple would, of course, take a cut from each developer (and perhaps charge for the iPhone development kit), and it would have the final say over what applications wind up in the store.
This “Apple-approved” approach would provide a market for third-party software, and it would certainly allow Apple to indulge in its worst control-freaky tendencies. But it’s a bit too Soviet for me. Any program that didn’t strike Apple’s fancy for whatever reason would be banned.
Finally, there are a lot of people out there complaining about complaints such as Rob’s. To which I can only say this: Yes, some people will never want any other applications on their iPhone. And yes, it’s only a tiny percentage of people who have hacked their phones today to take advantage of third-party apps. But for the iPhone to be truly useful, it needs to be flexible. Apple has always done a pretty good job of providing 80% of the functionality required by 90% of its users.
When it comes to that last must-have feature that will push someone into buying an iPhone, Apple can’t do it alone, or it risks turning off a segment of their audience that would buy an iPhone if only it did something personally vital, yet so obscure that Apple would never expend its own engineering resources on it.
For the iPhone to succeed in the long term, Apple needs help in broadening the phone’s reach as much as possible. The people who work at Apple are smart — really smart. They have to know this. And I assume that they’re working toward it, albeit slowly.
But if we’re still sitting here on the iPhone’s first anniversary with a completely locked-down system with only a couple of new Apple-generated applications sitting on that home screen, the iPhone will have failed to fulfill its potential.
"But if we're still sitting here on the iPhone's first anniversary ... the iPhone will have failed to fulfill its potential."
- I can't disagree with this statement, but this isn't Apple on its own here. With AT&T involved, and something as federally locked down as a phone, it would be highly unrealistic to expect the kind of feature-blossoming that such a device is truly capable of. The third party potential was very clearly illustrated, but again, they are playing in someone else's backyard, and can't expect the freedoms one might usually get with a single manufacturer device.
It's just the way it is. Don't blame Apple for anything other than getting into the cell phone business. That's the only thing they really did wrong here, if you want to blame them for anything.
Personally, I'm pretty damn happy with my iPhone. Sure, it would be nice to have some nifty new features on it sooner than later, but patience is a virtue, and it's not worth bricking an expensive device over.
If every other phone out there was like the iPhone, I'd agree with you. But I could install software willy-nilly on my Treo. Even my super-old Symbian phone had an IM client on it that I had downloaded and installed myself.
So it's not "the way it is." Other phones allow third-party apps on them, and the iPhone doesn't. I still think the chances are good that it will, eventually, but in the meantime it's one of the (few) areas where the iPhone is woefully behind its competition.
Everyone is upset at Apple but not looking at the big picture. For Apple to release the iPhone to do the things it wanted it to do, it needed a carrier to give them complete control. In return, that carrier asked for exclusivity. Neither of these positions is unreasonable and is why we have the great tool that the iPhone has become. Hacking the phone to allow third party apps is a good thing. However, AT&T wants to make their lick on each and you can't blame them since their deal with Apple allowed the iPhone to be what it is. Unlocking the phone is good cause for bricking the phone. Apple had to protect it's carrier/partner and did. Nobody should be surprised at that. Third party apps are going to work as long as you don't care to update your phone or sync it. Trade-offs are always a part of life and this is no different.
re:"So it's not "the way it is." Other phones allow third-party apps on them, and the iPhone doesn't."
Looking at how well other phones work I can only wince that you'd think that open "standards" (a flat-out contradiction in terms) and device breaking apps with shoddy UI would be an enviable position.
I counted myself out of the unusable feature-set game with my dollars. I'm willing to bet that many other adopters were the same way. But if you love Linux and dream in open-source then please - knock yourself out. Of the gene pool. Permanently. I'll stick with Photoshop instead of GIMP with the rest of the productive real-world.
Don't forget that eventhough it might be a small group who are adding 3rd party apps to their phones, I believe that the vast majority of iPhone users would embrace 3rd party apps if it were supported by apple and as easy as adding them with installer.app or as easy as adding it from iTunes.
I'm voting with my wallet.
I was due to refresh my current PowerBook with a 17-inch MacBook Pro glossy at the next bump (when it arrives with LED backlighting).
I was due to buy Leopard.
I will not buy any more Apple products until third-party apps are blessed, and not in the Soviet style. This means a supported toolchain and the same support and documentation that XCode has for PPC/Intel app development.
No iPhone apps, no more money from me. No more iTunes Store tracks. No gift cards for friends and family on the holidays. And actively explaining why to f, f, and acquaintances (all those switchers I've encouraged) why Apple isn't looking out for their customers.
If a good number of us postpone any Apple purchases until Apple decides on a good rationalization why third-party apps are a good idea after all, their bottom line will show it.
Put your money into a savings account, put half as much energy into educating folks as we did on campaigns to save Firefly or Babylon 5, and we'll be enjoying blessed third-party apps in short order.
Or we can just bitch about it and keep buying from Apple.
@ mgabrys: I think that's a fallacious argument. You only get in the "device-breaking apps" game if you want to play. Nobody will force iPhone users to install additional apps on their iPhone. The issue is, what about those people willing to risk loss of stability in order to add features?
The iPhone is not yet available in my country. But even when it appears, I'm not in the market for one, thank you. 90% of my current phone usage is spent on one 3rd-party app: Mobipocket. No e-book reader, no sale. Now that will be different for others, of course: I NEVER use IM, but I can understand that it is a must-have for other people. So, Apple Inc, I am saving those pennies for a Nokia E90 now. I know you'll understand.
I hear what you're saying 'Mickey'. But there is no better than Apple. Period. I think I'll stick with the best and continue buying Apple.
Man, I am stunned by how many people, even though Apple warned folks, that adding apps could brick their phone, decided to do it anyway. You people doing this are nuts. Really nuts. I spent WAAAYYYY too much money on this lovely device to do that.
I've read countless posts about people's iphones being bricked after installing the latest update from apple. I hacked my iphone about two weeks ago using instructions from the net and put it on Tmobile. It works awesome, by the way. I have a VERY simple solution to preventing an iphone from being bricked. Don't update it. Don't sync it to your computer. My ipod video is my main ipod, and the music I already put on my iphone (before the firmware update was released) is my favorite stuff anyways. Just keep backups on your computer, and you're good. For me, there's never been any reason to take the risk. Apple can't force you to update it.
WOW.
First of all, I bought my iPhone to replace my phone and my now-dated WM2003SE based PDA. It shipped with FW 1.0.2.
I unlocked the phone without issue.
I used a fair number of third party apps. They have proven NOT to affect stability. There are some that do, but they are easily UNINSTALLED.
1.1.1 is not a MANDATORY firmware update (if it were, then Apple would be in a LEGITIMATE legal bind.)
I hate Apple and their products, but I will say this - the iPhone in an unlocked state is a powerful device. Once locked, you lose any functionality above and beyond what is "out-of-the-box" which is MOSTLY entertainment based.
Keep Firmware 1.0.2 and be done with it. The 1.1.1 "update" does not bring any seriously beneficial functionality to the phone.
It's just a matter of time before someone decides to hack the 1.1.1 firmware and "locked down" baseband code.
My 1.0.2 iPhone is kicking azz right now working well without stability issues, and I have MORE than 8 additional 3rd party applications installed.
THE FIRMWARE UPDATE DOES NOT OCCUR AUTOMATICALLY - you can sync safely - there are a couple of "OK"s that you must go through for the update to occur.
Anyways, "mad props" to Apple for trying to make my iPhone less functional! LOL...
@ Jason: I think that's a fallacious argument. You only get in the "device-bricking" game if you want to play. Nobody forced users who install additional apps - to buy the iPhone.
@mgabrys Did you read a word I wrote? Device bricking and third-party apps are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUES.