iPhone/iPod Touch Third-Party Apps: Another Revenue Stream for Apple

So why is it that Steve Jobs and the gang at Cupertino are so against users being able to install third-party apps onto their iPhones and iPod Touch devices? Why did the last firmware update for the iPhone nuke all the efforts that third-party development community had put into making the latest gadgets from Apple even better?

Is it that Apple is worried that unleashing unverified apps onto the new hardware will lead to all sorts of compatibility and reliability issues, or rather is it that Apple is no longer a hardware company but a content provider? Open source can go hang, after all, there’s a profit to be made.

Apple Mac Columns

How Apple is Counting on Microsoft to sell Leopard My Top 50 Mac Applications Linux is Hot, Vista is Not, But What About Leopard? Top 10 Mac Productivity Enhancements FREE Tech Newsletters Instant Messaging Planet HTML CIO Update CodeGuru Update Enterprise Networking Planet Practically Networked HTML Enterprise Storage Forum Text Enterprise Storage Forum HTML Optically Networked HTML Intranet Journal Update Datamation IT Management Careers Datamation IT Management Update Developer.com Update Gamelan Java Update Goodies to Go Javascript Weekly HTML JARS Java Update OpenSource Update SysOpt Tech Notes Grid Computing Planet HTML E-Security Planet Text E-Security Planet HTML Virtual Dr. Text

When Steve Jobs first let on that the iPhone ran a cut-down version of Mac OS X, gadget enthusiasts and developers were excited about what this could mean. For the first time we could have a truly useful and powerful mobile platform, one that would make existing mobile platforms seem utterly obsolete (if all technology moved at the same pace that platforms such as the iPAQ have, we’d all still be sitting around trying to figure out what to do with that wheel thing). The iPhone could have been the killer gadget that changed the way we looked at mobile devices.

So, what happened? Quite simply, Apple got greedy. Rather than just be content with selling the iPhone for an inflated price and taking a cut of the cash that AT&T managed to squeeze out of customers, Apple also wanted to ruthlessly control what was installed onto iPhones. The official line is that this is designed to protect users from rogue apps which could destabilize the platform, but I’ve had a hard time accepting this.

What’s easiest to believe? That Apple locked the platform and put elaborate measures in place to prevent users loading something onto the device that could make it unstable? Or that Apple put in all that effort so it could lock down the device and get a few bucks from selling applications that users desperately want?

It’s pretty obvious that Apple intends for the iPhone and the iPod touch to be able to run third-party apps. Both the iPhone and the iPod touch have enough horsepower crammed into them to run other applications (unofficial apps have already demonstrated this) and the main menu has room for plenty more icons. The technology is all ready, it’s just Apple that isn’t.

The iPhone and the iPod touch are examples of how arrogant Apple has become over the last few years. The iPod became a success by being a relatively open platform. You had a choice as to whether you wanted to source your music from iTunes, or rip your own CDs. The iPhone is a complete antithesis of the iPod. You can’t load third party apps, ringtones have to be authorized (and paid for), and Apple sends updates that totally nuke phones that have been tampered with. If the iPod had been released in such a restrictive form, it’s more than likely that the brand would have never have become as successful as it has.

Next page: A locked down, black-box system isn’t a good start.