“A couple of PC Magazine folks met with Apple marketing honcho Greg Joswiak yesterday to talk about the new iPods,” Sascha Segan reports for Gearlog. “First of all, the iPod touch and iPhone use the same software platform – they’re both running OS X on basically the same hardware, Joswiak said.”
“The iPod touch does not have Bluetooth. Any images on the Internet that may have implied that it did were errors, Joswiak said. Also, there are no games coming for the iPod Touch right now,” Segan reports
“Apple will neither forbid nor support native code on the iPhone/Touch,” Segan reports. “They will not design software updates specifically to break native apps, but if the updates happen to break native apps or your native apps turn your iPhone into a rutabaga, don’t go crying to Apple, ’cause it ain’t their problem. Capiche?”
More in the full article here.
Capiche.
skype?
Makes sense. Isn’t Jobs a capiscetarian?
Cant get more straightforward than that!
Mess with your iphone at your own cost.
Apple wont support it if you hack it or try to mess with the software.
You have been warned!…
To say “let’s call it the Mac Micro” or “it’s the next handheld PC platform and by this time next year we’ll be able to use it like one.”
Someone, call the marketing police!!!
1. Throwing out a new phrase “Mac Micro!!!” Ahhh!!! Please don’t let that start to stick!
2. By this time next year!? Why don’t you just tell people to wait 12 months to buy an iPod touch or iPhone!? And then when that one starts shipping tell people to wait again and buy the newer one coming out in another year becuase it’ll be so much better!
Man, he was out of control, and will get scolded accordingly I am sure.
Who uses “rutabaga” and “capiche” all in the same sentance?
The iPhone and now Touch could be so much more useful if Apple would open it up to native third party applications. Too much control is going to hurt them. I know they say it is for security, but when they are charging for “certified” ringtones it makes me wonder. The truth is they are holding back the effecttiveness of the iPhone for financial reasons. I understand a business needs to make profit, but when it is at the expense of the product or satisfied customers (ATT.. what a joke) there will begin to be problems.
Cat fish?
Translation:
“<i>As long as no one writes a malicious application, or gets a native Skype VOIP going to interfere with our relationship with AT&T;, we won’t interfere.</a>”
“Who uses ‘rutabaga’ and ‘capiche’ all in the same sentance?”
The Sopranos Cookbook?
at Bart,
can you do the trick with the little loop and the tricycle?
I get why people want 3P apps on their iPhone/iPod. But when installed, if it messes with the user experience, people will relate that directly back to Apple. Apple is trying to ensure that Apps meet its’ solid approval before allowing that to happen.
My big beef is not allowing iPhone apps like Mail onto the Touch.
Fine, but what would really be nice is some kind of supported viewer for books and reference material.
I know you can email yourself a PDF, or browse to some of that stuff on the web, but it would be nice have a richer application for storing, searching and reading it locally, without needing to push it all through a WiFi or EDGE connection. I’m thinking of things like reference manuals, lookup tables, religious texts, short stories and novels (including stuff from Gutenberg project) and so on.
Apple could make a way to package this stuff up in the right format on the computer (which would also take care of indexing it) and then the reader on the device could be safari-based, but with a local search and other features geared toward reference-type access (think HelpViewer)
For that matter, it would be nice to have even the functionality of the classic iPod notes (which can be hyperlinked together and so on) on iPhone and iPod touch.
Have I ever mentioned that I NEED MY IPHONE NOW?
“as long as no one writes a malicious application, or gets a native Skype VOIP going to interfere with our relationship with AT&T;, we won’t interfere
“My big beef is not allowing iPhone apps like Mail onto the Touch.”
I do believe that’s a part of Product Differentiation.
In America,
first you get the sugar,
then you get the power,
then you get the women.
@Steven
Tounge? rhymes with lounge?
or
Tongue? rhymes with bung?
Also, y’all should head over to RoughlyDrafted to bone up on why it is unlikely that the iPhone will ever be open.
And why should it have to be, for that matter?
If Apple keeps closed native application support on the iPhone and iPod Touch for now, there will be more hacked in 3rd part native apps then if it were an open fully available API. Closed means more attention to development and even better development in most cases. It also means Apple doesn’t end up eating the cost to support native apps on the iPhone or iPod Touch from the user masses that will install any trash app that is out there to install. In their first generation of release this make perfect logic. These devices are ground breaking and the code that runs them is very compact and complex. One of the reasons the Newton failed was because it was open to everyone to create any trash app they wanted and Apple spent tons of cash because after installing app XYZ the handwriting recognition stopped working, it caused the calendar to lose appointments or the ir sync stopped working. To the masses this was Apple’s problem not the developer that created and sold the crapware that they installed that broke the function. Most of the developers support was you’ll need to call Apple to get that fixed, it’s not our fault call Apple, and some had no support at all to contact. Stripping OS X down to run in such a small memory footprint as it does on the iPhone and iPod Touch and still have Quicktime, Graphics, IP Stack, DNS, DHCP, UI and the muilt-touch support as well as everything else that it supports is, well, a work of art, to start adding things like full Flash to Safari, would bloat up the footprint not a little but a lot. It will take Adobe to create a full Flash designed and coded for Safari iPhone and iPod Touch to make Flash a viable option. Adobe does not just jump into these ventures, they will need to see that the iPhone and iPod Touch are going to be in the market and that it will add value to their offerings before they jump on, even with Apple’s encouragement and support. In late generation 1 or by mid Generation 2 I’d guess that Apple will start tapping some developers for native iPhone and iPod Touch applications. I don’t think it will ever be a free for all of native applications though. Apple is going to pick, test, reject and choose what applications will be Official and the Official Apps will be sold through iTunes.
wow, could apple be lamer? take a stand. give developers a “real” SDK that we can trust to work…I can’t dedicate a team of people to make stuff that may die after every update…
Capisce?
@Demon
Jeez, man, have you ever heard of a PARAGRAPH?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
(Hint: look down and to the right for a key labeled “Return”)
@Demon
I totally agree with your posting. Why doesn’t Apple have a program where they “certify” 3rd party apps somehow and have them available in their usual Widgets, Automator Actions, Downloads section of the web site? Perhaps it’s just too hard to do. What do you think (since I like your logic)?
@dG
Sorry dG, at work and just typing.
Currently, I think Apple still as some iPhone iTrix up their sleeve. Once the bag of iTrix is empty and they have finalized the platform so to speak, then a SDK for selected developers will be provided by Apple.
Currently if they started a certified application program it would rain on the iTrix still left in the bag. iTrix to date: Youtube, Google Maps, iTunes store direct, custom make your own ring tones, Star Bucks did I miss any?
Still to come… If I ware a betting man I might say iWork Mobile in less then a year.
I demand that we may or may not be philosophers.