Jobs woos devs with iPhone OS iOS 4
The iPhone OS has changed its name, and when it's released for the iPhone and iPod touch this June 21 (free), it will be juiced with expanded money-making opportunities for developers. Today, at his Worldwide Developers Conference keynote, Steve Jobs let his 5,000-or-so most ardent admirers know that iPhone OS 4.0, announced on …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Jailbreakers
Jailbreakers like to say it's so they have the freedom to do what they like with their phone, but it seems like they want the freedom to pirate all the apps.
One developer said his game could tell the difference between a jailbroken or non jailbroken phone, something like 73% of scores submitted to his online scorecard were from pirate copies. None of these went on to buy the app either, so try before you buy is a joke.
#Jailbreakers
>but it seems like they want the freedom to pirate all the apps.
Developers lacking the self-respect to abandon development for Apple's insipid control model deserve to be ripped off. By tolerating it they feed a beast which is doing far greater damage to the rest of us than a handful folk who don't want to pay for a crappy toy they'll probably delete a week later anyway.
Let me get this straight...
He's making the assumption that the phone being jailbroken automatically means his game has been pirated?
What a fucktard.
My phone is jailbroken. I did so to install yellowsn0w (and then blackra1n) so that I could use an O2 payg phone on T-Mobile.
However I have spent quite a bit of money on apps. I would hate to think that the people whose apps I regularly use would accuse me of pirating their app simply because my phone is jailbroken.
If they're going to have that attitude I'll have my money back and run a pirate version - it's only what they're expecting anyway!!
DPA breach. ;)
Was this guy in the UK? This sounds like spyware, didn't Jobs have a rant about stuff like this a few days ago?
So very little for end users then...
Adverts and more adverts basically.... As if being locked into iTunes was bad enough, it's about to get a WHOLE LOT WORSE....
Re: So very little for end users then...
Actually, there's quite a bit for end users there.
If we accept that developers of free or cheap apps will use ads to support their development, then they will go with the advertising system that offers them the most convenience or money, or both.
Up until now, all they had to chose from has been a series of sleazy companies that collect and hoard as much personal information from users and attempt to make money out of this by selling it around, diluting privacy and control of such data.
This is bad.
Now Apple promises to deliver a purportedly more effective advertising system that will be even more convenient for developers since it is included as part of the SDK and iTunes environments. With this system, iOS developers can get paid directly as part of their app transactions, easily and conveniently.
However, the real news here is that Apple has already said that developers--and advertisers--will get *NOTHING ELSE*. The ads will show, users may click on them or not, and impressions will be marked and in-ad sales will be tallied. The Advertisers will get aggregate data of impressions; the developers get aggregated sales totals. That's it. Just like traditional newspaper or TV ads.
Apple made a point that the end-user's privacy will be respected, inasmuch as the devices try to do today by controlling the user experience and requiring the user's consent for certain transactions. The user will be able to exit from an interactive advert at any time, and none of his personal or device information will be collected nor shared with developers or advertisers, ever. The advertiser nor the developer may impose anything on the user, other than a display of a banner on his app. Attempting to extract additional information from the advert transaction by non-approved means will violate the license agreement, and you know how Apple deals with this in the App Store.
This is--if not good--a much better situation than the status quo. Developers and advertisers will complain about the lack of information and control (and indeed, already have), but will use the system because of its convenience and effectiveness.
I agree that more adverts are never a good thing, but hopefully this will not mean *more* adverts, but actually less sleazy, annoying, and invasive adverts. If the user must be subjected to ads, let he be in control.
-dZ.
Which court case first?
Cisco already has an operating system called IOS. I assume Apple is paying for the name privilege.
Apple's proposed advertising model is blatantly anti-trust. There is no need to be so greedy.
BUT!
Don't Cisco have the trademark on IOS? (Internetwork Operating System on their routers & switches).
Trademark?
I wonder if they asked Cisco before using their trademark this time?
iOS? I wonder what Cisco will make of that?
Especially since Cisco have been using the trademark IOS (Internetwork Operating System) for over 20 years!
And just what does the "i" in Apple's iOS stand for anyway?
@AC 21:42
"And just what does the "i" in Apple's iOS stand for anyway?"
The "i" in "iOS" is the same as the "i" in iPhone, iPad et cetera which is a super short form of "Irritating incompetent inept impotent idiot".
Steve Jobs is a thief and an idiot
"And just what does the "i" in Apple's iOS stand for anyway?"
Maybe an idiot (as in Steve Jobs)?
I mean, he stole iPad name from Fujitsu, then bought it when they complained. Wasted money, he could come up with better name. Now he is riping of Cisco. I think Cisco would not be so eager to sell since they are still using it (Fujitsu's iPad was product from 2003).
And as a grand finale, Jobs riped FSF too. He resold GPL'd apps in his GPL-incompatible store which says you can run apps only on 5 phones. I think he is what he said Psystar is.
You have your nuts in a ball with this one!
The upload of the app was done by an independent developer and not apple directly!
Why?
Why would lawyers be "at the ready"?
What are they going to do?
I mean, you do realise that Apple have licensed the rights to the name iOS from Cisco, don't you?
You didn't know that?
Ah. Now you have learned the dangers of going off half-cocked in your rush to bleat about things of which you know bugger all!
Go on then. Fact me.
'I mean, you do realise that Apple have licensed the rights to the name iOS from Cisco, don't you?'
Please provide link to this fact.
Re: Go on then. Fact me.
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios_trademark/
Consider yourself facted.
That's gonna sting.
Will Cisco's own words be enough for you?
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios_trademark/
Deal with it.
Cisco
Because last I heard, IOS was Cisco's OS for their networking gear. And they've been using it for much longer than Apple.
@Lusty
Couldn't you be arsed to google it either? There's an explanation, see a later comment. :-)
They have "previous" with Cisco
Cisco already had the iPhone trademark long before Apple started making phones:
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/news/2007/12/linksys_iphone
The Name
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/cisco_and_apple_agreement_on_ios_trademark/
Beat me to it.
Gents, there are cleverer people than you or I working on this stuff...
Ever seen the movie, Idiocracy?
It's a movie set in the future.
I'll wager that the lawyer's big screen TV, in the movie, was running iOS.
If you've seen the movie, maybe it's an "inside joke."
If you haven't: The actual television content is quite difficult to actually spot, on the TV, for the massive glut of advertising, assaulting the visual acuity of the viewer. It's kind of a theme for the city of the future, in fact. Of the future, I say. Yeah, just the future....
Yep
I have and am reminded of it every time a user says "I just need it to work" when you are trying to explain it was their fault and they will do it again... Like using shift-delete or buying an iOS device...
Not again
Didnt Apple make the same mistake with Cisco with the iPhone as they're making now with IOS?
iOS 4? Bah...
"... gave an overview of iOS 4's capabilities, ..."
We generally IOS 12.2(33)SXI and 12.2(52)SE, with a few devices running 12.4 GD or even 15.0M. Who would want to downgrade to IOS 4?
iOSX
When they get to iOSX will they leave it on "x" for 10 years and just sell service packs?
IBM has an IOS too
the OS for the I series is the I5OS, a previous incarnation was I4OS.
Isn't it a pity that the same people who build such beautiful hardware are control freaks of the worst kind?
We're actually lucky that IBM did not team up with Steve to build their business machines. We'd have even less competition and Linus would have fallen victim to an "accident".
New features of iOS4
Wow... those are supposed to be NEW features.
Apple welcomes its users to multitasking (although still restricted if you read the specs), folders (!), e-mail the way it should work,...
I'm sorry, my n900 already has all of that, and for quite a while now. Might as well call this iRunBehindTheRest...
Sony Ericsson
My old SE K800i had a front facing camera, and I'm pretty sure it had the same level of multitasking. :p
Increasing Developers
Are they increasing the number of developers by allowing people not using macs to develop iOS software?
Oh Goody, Unavoidable Adverts
Yet another reason not to buy an iThing
Re:Oh Goody, Unavoidable Adverts #
Don't be an idiot.
Of course you can avoid the adverts. Don't download free, ad-supported, apps.
There's that's not so hard is it?
iAd a bit of that
Ah iAd, the way to make ad supported demos even more annoying so that users who want the functionality will pay for it. And at the same time, potentially monetizing the free app as well. And of course, people with no iTunes credits can support their fave free app developers by clicking on the ads.
Unless you're a complete freetard, what's not to like ?
iOS Fail
Just loaded the new Apple iOS onto my Cisco Router and it says something about ROMON...
I would say that is a smart switch
I would say that is a smart switch! Darn good Cisco product!
IOS 4 ?
IOS 4 ? NACK. I remember those days... these days we run with 12.2(33)SXI3 and 12.4(15)T15 with a smattering of 12.2(53)SE2 - i recall how ropey pre IOS 11 was...would never want to run version 4.
I mean, thats like running BIND 4 when everyone else is now running BIND 9 with their eyes on BIND 10 ;-)
This topic is closed for new posts.
