constructive nonconformist

Observations on David Tucker's Observations

DavidTucker.net — Observations about Apple, the iPhone, PhoneGap, and the Flash Player

If you choose not to follow the link above, understand that David develops in Flash and AIR.

Observation #1 — Apple has proactively sought to eliminate any cross-platform development platform on the iPhone.

What David wants is to be able to develop once to Flash and target multiple platforms including the iPhone.

He also mentions PhoneGap and quotes a section from the iPhone SDK agreement that prohibits applications that install or launch other executable code and he links to an Ajaxian post about apps that have been rejected from the App Store because of their use of PhoneGap. But the PhoneGap site says the iPhone is supported and has a gallery of apps that are in the App Store.

It’s not clear that the PhoneGap approach is actually prohibited. As I understand it, PhoneGap wraps a WebKit shell around your code and I would think that WebKit qualifies as an Apple API or interpreter. Maybe it’s a loophole Apple would like to plug. Maybe the App Store rejections were based on a misunderstanding of what PhoneGap is. The PhoneGap situation seems unclear.

There is no doubt about Flash. Flash is unequivocally prohibited.

Observation #2 — The Flash Player hasn’t been approved because it is a threat to Apple’s App Store Revenue.

There has been much concern within the development community about the downward race in prices on the App Store. Some developers have expressed disappointment that Apple hasn’t taken steps to curb the downward pressure on prices. Yet in terms of prices Apple has been very laissez-faire.

Apple is a hardware company. The App Store could be a loss leader. I know it isn’t. But the primary purpose of the App Store is to sell iPhones, not apps.

Observation #3 — Apple is only interested in helping Mac developers.

By ‘Mac developers’ David means Mac and iPhone developers. He’s essentially restating observation 1.

I don’t expect a Windows version of Xcode any more than I expect a Mac OS X version of Visual Studio.

Since the iPhone was unveiled in January 2007 attendance at WWDC has risen dramatically because of an influx of iPhone developers. And there’s a growing trend of developers that started as iPhone developers moving into Mac development. It would seem that learning “Objective-C, Xcode, Interface Builder, Cocoa, etc…” is not a high barrier.

David says that performance and battery life issues with Flash on the iPhone are “just not true.” I see performance and stability issues with Flash in Safari on Mac OS X. If Abode is uninterested in resolving these issues on the ‘full-size’ OS why should I even imagine Flash is better on an iPhone? If David is right, Adobe isn’t helping themselves.

David concludes:

Why is [Flash] not approved? In reality – because of Apple’s revenue stream.

The revenue David is talking about is revenue from the App Store and revenue from developers. I think this conclusion is wrong.

Time for a little history. Once upon a time there was a small computer company named for a piece of fruit. It developed and marketed a wonderful new peripheral for its computers. It was called a laser printer. The laser printer created a new market segment known as desktop publishing. Part of the magic of the laser printer was a built-in interpreter for a specialized language. The language and its interpreter were developed by an even smaller company. The even smaller company was able to leverage its technology into a lingua franca and take a large piece of the desktop publishing market for itself.

Apple doesn’t want Flash on the iPhone because they don’t want to repeat the ‘mistake’ of PostScript on the LaserWriter.

So yes it is about revenue but not on the tactical scale of App Store revenue today; it’s about long term strategy.

Apple is supporting HTML 5 in Safari. It’s not about being against cross-platform development. It’s about not ceding control to another company. Everything critical in the stack must be either proprietary to Apple or be an open standard. That’s why there’s no Flash plugin and no Java VM on the iPhone. And I don’t expect there ever will be.

iPhone SDK: Rogue Amoeba's Code Signing and You

From the Rogue Amoeba Blog post Code Signing and You:

However, the environment is different in one important way. Apple is the gatekeeper:

“Phones will only run apps signed by Apple. It also applies FairPlay to the package.”
Twitter message from Deric Horn on March 6, 2008

Let me repeat that: if Apple doesn’t sign your iPhone app, it does not run.

This makes more sense than what I was thinking. It means an iPhone OS device doesn’t need to know thousands of valid certificates.

In addition to upgrading applications will the App Store be capable of removing applications?

iPhone SDK and More Questions

John Gruber has posted More Questions on his Daring Fireball blog about the iPhone SDK. I can answer one of his questions.

• So it seems like the answer to my question yesterday about how users will be prevented from running apps downloaded directly from developers (rather than through the App Store) is that unsigned apps will only work on your iPhone if you pay (and get approved) for a $99 iPhone developer account. But does that mean that approved developers will be able to freely exchange unsigned apps with each other?

An unsigned app will not run on an iPhone at all.¹ The only place an unsigned iPhone OS application will run is on the simulator.

I doubt that the barrier for the $99 iPhone developer program is higher than for other types of code signing certificates. The iPhone code signing certs are issued to either individuals or organizations. Apple’s approval for the App Store will be on a application by application basis.

If you as a developer get an application or two approved for the App Store and it later turns that you’re breaking Apple’s rules, it seems safe to presume that one of Apple’s possible recourses is to revoke your certificate and all your (as in signed with your cert) iPhone OS applications will stop working.

¹ iPhone OS Programming Guide: Working with a Device

iPhone SDK and App Code Signing

In iPhone Enterprise and SDK: First Impressions and Questions John Gruber notes “there is no option to circumvent the App Store” and asks:

My question, though, is how will this be enforced technically? If developers can install on their iPhones the apps they’re working on, what will stop users from doing the same? I’m guessing it’s tied to digital certificates, but that’s just a guess. There must be something, though.

From the Macworld Apple iPhone Event live update page I think that question is answered.

11:10 PT: “We think a lot of people are going to want to become an iPhone developer.” It’s really easy. Go to our web site and download our SDK for free. Run the Simulator on your Mac. You can join the iPhone Developer Program if you want to run the app on an iPhone or iPod Touch, and distribute your app. To join the developer program costs $99.

…

11:24 PT: What are you doing to make these applications secure? “This is a big concern. It is a dangerous world out there. We’ve tried to strike a good path here. On one side, you’ve got a closed device like the iPod, which always works. You don’t have to worry about third-party apps mucking it up. And on the other side, you’ve got a Windows PC. We want to take the best of both, the reliability of that iPod and we want to take the ability to run third-party apps from the PC world, but without malicious applications.

“The developers have to register with us, and for $99 they get an electronic certificate, and that tells us who they are. If they write a malicious app, we can track them down, we can tell their parents, and we will know who they are. And we can turn off the spigot if we need to.”

I added emphasis on two sentences above.

Here’s my interpretation and, I think, the answer to John’s question. For free anyone can run a Cocoa Touch iPhone OS application on the simulator but the SDK and the Xcode tools alone don’t allow an application to be installed on an iPhone or iPod Touch. To get an app onto an actual iPhone requires paying the $99 for the iPhone Developer Program. The Developer Program is essentially a certification program.

John assumes the $99 is for getting listed on the App Store. I think he’s off. I think the $99 is for the code signing certificate. Getting listed is a separate (but no-charge) hurdle.

But I haven’t watched the video (via TUAW) for myself yet.

Update: I wonder if for a developer with a cert if there is any limit to the number of iPhones that Xcode will drop the app onto.

The Apple iPhone will be a Raging Success

I think the Apple iPhone will be a Raging Success. Not because of Apple's hype. Not because of the Jobs RDF. But because it is advertised by its interface. Because the interface is straight out of science fiction. (That would be the happy shiny world of tomorrow type of science fiction, not the dark dystopian type.)

Most importantly I think the iPhone will be a success because my six year old son is excited about a phone.

"Daddy, it comes with pirates."

"Daddy, to make the picture big, you pinch out -- like this."

"Daddy, can we get one?"

(No. I'm not buying a $500 phone for myself let alone a six year old. But there will be enough people buying version 1.0 that Apple will be able to build an iPhone platform.)