“The invite to the media event next week suggests that Apple has figured out how it wants to tap demand from all those corporate types that wish their employer would support the iPhone,” Peter Burrows writes for BusinessWeek.

“The iPhone—essentially a Mac in a tiny, keyboard-less package—is more of a general purpose computer than is the Blackberry,” Burrows writes. “Who knows what new apps corporate programmers will come up with to exploit the iPhones’ many talents?”

“Anyhoo, this invite clearly rings the bell on a new fight that will be worth watching: Apple v. RIM,” Burrows writes.

Full article here.

Tom Krazit writes for CNET, “We’re quickly closing in on the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the iPhone, one that could signal just how far Apple can take its maiden voyage into the smartphone world.”

Apple “can allow unfettered access to the iPhone to anyone, it can allow anyone to develop applications for the iPhone but only those applications that have been digitally signed by Apple or a certification authority can be installed on the iPhone, or it can be the sole arbiter over who can create applications and what can be installed on the iPhone. There are also shades of gray within those scenarios, which leads to a lot of speculation on what exactly Apple has in mind,” Krazit writes.

In his open letter announcing the iPhone SDK, “Jobs hinted that Apple was considering an application development model used by other members of the smartphone community, notably Nokia. This model would require any application bound for an iPhone to carry a digital certificate that would verify whether the application was created to meet certain standards for security and reliability. In this system, if you tried to install an application on the iPhone, the iPhone’s OS X operating system would check for that digital certificate and either allow or prohibit the application from being installed,” Krazit writes.

“Symbian, the world’s largest smartphone operating system developer owned in large part by Nokia, offers application developers three options (click for PDF) based on different factors such as cost, proliferation, and access to core operating system technology,” Krazit writes. “…Expect Apple to implement some sort of digital-signature requirement on iPhone applications. This would be for two reasons: to control the quality of applications that run on the iPhone, and to allow AT&T a chance to approve or deny applications that might compete or hinder its own services.”

Krazit asks, “And what of the iPod Touch? Will there be two separate SDKs, one more restrictive model for the iPhone that addresses the concerns of wireless carriers, and one more open one that’s designed for the Wi-Fi-capable iPod Touch?”

More in the full article here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Brawndo Drinker” (It’s got what plants crave!) for the heads up.]