« Made the honeymoon reservations | Main | I hate computers »
If it's so great, then why am I gradually removing every third party application from my PPC-6601 Pocket PC phone in an attempt to find out which one is causing my phone to lose its mind when a call drops. When this happens, (and it's pretty damned regular), the ONLY way to make another call is to reset the phone, or bounce the radio stack. Doing the latter actually results in the call going through just long enough for the person to answer and then the stack shuts down.
Then there's my ex's Razr that likes to reset if she uses the AIM client that comes with the phone.
If Razrs, Treos, and Windows Mobile devices are examples of how cool and great unlimited third party development is, then my message to Steve regarding his stance of being extremely restrictive towards allowing third party applications on the iPhone is:
Stay strong brother, I got your back
Technorati Tags: Apple, Apple Hardware, iPhone
Posted by John C. Welch at 10:44 | Permalink
Comments
Warning for Notes users: The commenting system uses HTML.I know this will be scary for some of you, especially Notes fans. However, open standards, rah-rah.
If you want to use less-than or greater-than signs, or other similar charachters that HTML reserves,
you'll simply have to learn to do it the HTML way. Luckily, HTML is kind of popular, no matter what
your re-educators have told you, and you can easily find help on the intertubes.
I think it has more to do with the platform the 3rd party apps are targeted. In my experience Pocket PC phones would bomb even without 3rd party apps and the UIQ and S60 platform phones I used were rock solid and could be loaded to the hilt with apps.
IIRC most 3rd party apps on the Razor are Java based and developing apps for windows mobile (up until the most recent versions) required arcane windows coding knowledge (COM.. shudder). That may have something to do with the low quality of 3rd party apps on those platforms. I've used the windows mobile sdk and the Symbian (UIQ, S60) sdk and found developing software on the Symbian platform was a much easier and more properly "Sandboxed" experience.
Just my 2 cents.
Posted by: NitroPye | May 23, 2007 11:06 AM
Think progressive disclosure - it doesn't affect those who don't need it, but it's there for advanced users who DO. Nothing is making you use such apps. However, if you need functionality they give, then it can be a dealbreaker.
Somehow, I doubt I'll be able to make an SSH-tunneled VNC connection from the iPhone's built-in applications, or play a Divx movie. No GPS integration for Google Maps. No games. No instant messaging systems beyond AIM (and even that's a maybe). No Pocket Quicken. These are just things I do daily on my phone.
Oh, but we don't need third parties - you'll do what Apple wants you to do, and if you think you need more, well, you're WRONG.
Posted by: Joshua Ochs | May 23, 2007 11:35 AM
Not all products are for all markets, Joshua.
If you need things the iPhone can't do, you're not "WRONG"... you're just not someone who should buy an iPhone.
(I don't do any of those things on my phone; even the ones it's capable of (IM, lame little games).
I don't do any of them on my non-phone PocketPC, either, except games, and even there, it's just Sudoku.
This, of course, doesn't make me RIGHT, either - but it does suggest that an iPhone suits me better than it suits you.
The whole progressive disclosure thing is fine, at one level - but Apple's interest is presumably in user experience, and they'd evidently rather have it never be unreliable due to third-party apps than have it be able to run ssh-tunneled VNC to suit a tiny, tiny proportion of their market. (People doing ssh are likely to want something with a keyboard, methinks.)
The underlying idea, right or wrong, is probably that 1. People, if able to, will install any stupid crap they find on a computer or phone [spam-distributed backdoored softcore-porn screensavers, I think, prove this point] and 2. When that crap they install causes a subtle or not-so-subtle problem later, they'll blame Apple even if it's not Apple's fault.)
Posted by: Sigivald | May 23, 2007 1:12 PM
Joshua, you do realize that Apple has not said "no third party development", but rather, "it's going to have to be carefully managed, because the phone must always work."
I can tell you, reproducibly mind you, that thus fare, on three platforms, third party applications are not carefully managed, and they in fact do cause the phone to not work as a phone.
When a third party application turns a phone into a brick, even temporarily, that is a major failure in the platform.
Posted by: John C. Welch | May 23, 2007 1:25 PM
"'it's going to have to be carefully managed, because the phone must always work.'"
Ummm... if it's a good operating system, the phone WILL always work, surely? What is OS X doing on the iPhone, suddenly becoming more flaky? Allowing applications to write over the OS?
I've never had a problem with an application crashing on an S60 phone. I've had problems with S60 itself crashing, but that's another matter :)
Posted by: Ian Betteridge | May 23, 2007 1:55 PM
If the OS itself is crashing, then I'd say your phone was not properly designed for its primary purpose. As well, embedded systems have a bit more stringent reliability requirement than a personal computer of any stripe.
Posted by: John C. Welch | May 23, 2007 3:01 PM
Ummm... if it's a good operating system, the phone WILL always work, surely?
ever tried a symbian s60 phone? :)
don't get me wrong, i like s60 and all, but the more applications installed, the slower the phone gets. oh, and it also seems like 90% of s60 app developers have never heard of ui design. same goes for j2me apps.
Posted by: johan | May 24, 2007 4:07 AM
Agreed, the iPhone in its current incarnation is not for me. My point is that I want it to be, and the only thing really stopping that is the lack of third party development.
Your concerns about reliability really are unfounded if this is truly based on OS X. Most "brickings" are caused by a lack of protected memory, lack of pre-emptive multitasking, or device drivers. Thd iPhone should not have to deal with any of these, making if anything a BETTER platform for third party development.
Posted by: Joshua Ochs | May 24, 2007 6:35 PM
Remember, it only takes one issue like this to be a dealbreaker. Third party software alleviates that problem.
Posted by: Joshua Ochs | May 24, 2007 6:38 PM
Your concerns about reliability really are unfounded if this is truly based on OS X. Most "brickings" are caused by a lack of protected memory, lack of pre-emptive multitasking, or device drivers. Thd iPhone should not have to deal with any of these, making if anything a BETTER platform for third party development.
Um, I've seen processes and applications wedge OS X until the only way to do anything was via SSH, and even then, that could take twenty minutes. A modern OS is not magically proof against things going wrong.
Remember, it only takes one issue like this to be a dealbreaker. Third party software alleviates that problem.
Considering it appears that most of my support issues on phones are *caused* by third party applications, I fail to see how your assertion has any logic behind it.
Posted by: John C. Welch | May 25, 2007 7:01 AM
the ones touting how great unlimited 3rd party apps are on mobiles are the same ones criticizing (sight unseen of course) the iPhone's touch screen keyboard, "esp. compared to my Blackberry/Treo/ yadda keyboard"..as if the current crop of smart phone keyboards suddenly became the ultimate UI entry device, and not the crappy, cramped, small, and non-ergonomic (but admittedly necessary) compromises they actually are and always will be.
Posted by: totoro | May 25, 2007 5:28 PM
