Why I Won't Buy an iPhone

[aryayush]

Why I Won't Buy an iPhone
Apple has abandoned its founding ethos of creativity and innovation by hanging up on third-party software developers

by Arik Hesseldahl

I don't own an iPhone, and I don't think I ever will. That may come as a surprise to anyone acquainted with my long history of owning and liking Apple (AAPL) products.

It's not that I don't think it's an extraordinary device (BusinessWeek.com, 7/3/07). Having tried it, I think it represents a fundamental step forward in what a mobile phone can be. And it sure looks like it's going to be imitated six ways to Sunday.

But what I can't take is how Apple is keeping the iPhone from evolving in a manner consistent with its corporate heritage. Over the years I've owned many wireless devices, including a Treo (PALM), three or four BlackBerrys (RIMM), and tested my share of phones running Microsoft's (MSFT) Windows Mobile and the Symbian OS, majority owned by Nokia (NOK).

WEB APPS ONLY
In almost every case, I've had an important option I wouldn't get on the iPhone: installing third-party software. What's so big about that? Sometimes the package of software installed on the phone simply isn't very good. My BlackBerry, for instance, comes with an instant messaging program I found lacking, so I installed an excellent alternative called JiveTalk. On the BlackBerry, it's a dedicated application, installed directly on the device via a cellular download.

A version works on the iPhone, but only through the phone's Web browser—rather than the phone itself. Good luck using JiveTalk when its Web site is hammered by thousands of users at once. In fact, the only way to use an outside application of any kind on the iPhone is via the Web browser. If you're a software developer and want to create some software that runs after being installed directly on the iPhone itself, you're officially out of luck. Unofficially, you can only install your application after jumping through some technical hoops that Apple says run the risk of voiding your warranty, damaging the phone, and generally wreaking untold havoc.

IS THE IPHONE THAT FRAGILE?
Why all the sturm und drang? Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs will tell you opening the device could leave the network vulnerable. Carriers such as AT&T (T), Apple's U.S. iPhone provider, "don't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up."

Hogwash, I say. Like many BlackBerry users, I've installed and removed scores of applications from my BlackBerry over the years, and never once heard a peep from T-Mobile (DT) about bringing down its network. No one has yet been able to explain to me how even the most ill-designed software could conceivably do such harm to the wireless network.

And really, is the iPhone so delicate that one nasty application damages its software permanently? I thought the device runs Mac OS X. If you believe Apple's marketing, the operating system is rock solid, hard to break, easy as pie to use, and so on. One bad application can do all that damage? The iPhone itself isn't just a phone or an iPod. It's really a mobile computer. Apparently one so powerful that software developers are forbidden to do anything for it, short of cute little Web-based applications, yet so sensitive that it's easy to screw up. That's one way to inspire confidence in a product. Read more...

[Via BusinessWeek]


Why, oh why, are you screwing your own product, Apple? Just open up the damn thing and you can conquer the world.

 

[anispace]

Why all the sturm und drang? Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs will tell you opening the device could leave the network vulnerable. Carriers such as AT&T (T), Apple's U.S. iPhone provider, "don't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up."

how is the cellular network vulnerable if an application malfunctions? if this was the case half the worlds GSM networks would be down becoz of malfunctioning Symbian apps on Nokia phones

and aryayush dont u ever sleep.. posting at 4.30 in d morning

 

[alsiladka]

That is seriously lame of Apple and At&T to carry that kind of a attitude. An Application will take down there network, unlocking damage your phone!! Take a break man!

 

[azzu]

^^^ i agree

 

[mehulved]

Wasn't it that the Mac users quite happy not to use third party softwares on their PC?

 

[iMav]

jab hum bol rahe the toh humme ... fanboy yeh woh patta nahi kya kya bola ... ab khud post kar rahe hain ... ki open karo ye karo .... even b4 the bloody device released we hav beenm sayin this but ...

 

[gxsaurav]

That is seriously lame of Apple and At&T to carry that kind of a attitude. An Application will take down there network, unlocking damage your phone!! Take a break man!

El Jobso said "3rd party apps will break AT&T network", that means 3rd party apps will break AT&T network. Period. - Macboy & Mac Salesman

 

[aryayush]

Wasn't it that the Mac users quite happy not to use third party softwares on their PC?

No, it wasn't. I have a lot of quality third party software on my Mac. It is one of the best thing about Mac OS X - quality (notice the stress) third party applications.

 

[ssdivisiongermany1933]

Iphone is lame cell ..over hyped phone .I will go for PDA phone always

 

[krazyfrog]

^^ iPhone is not a lame phone. It is an extremely capable phone with excellent hardware and software which is only limited by the Apple's philosophy of not giving what the customer needs/wants but give them what Apple wants. The day Apple decides to loosen their tight fist, iPhone will be one of the best gadgets in the world. Unfortunately i don't see it happening anytime soon. Its like making a good looking car with a powerful V10 engine and then providing only 2 speed gearbox with it.

 

[rockthegod]

Its like making a good looking car with a powerful V10 engine and then providing only 2 speed gearbox with it.

Tht almost describes it perfectly !!!!!!!!!

 

[Yamaraj]

...extremely capable phone...

What's next - multiple utility broomstick?

 

[superczar]

most lay users are happy with the default functionality their phone gives them, be it the default apps on the iphone, or the default apps on a WM PDA phone

the 1% of the remaining will find one way or the other to do what they want as long as the hardware supports it

thanks to the efforts of the iphone dev team, i have tonnes of native 3rd party apps (most downloaded Over the air) on my iphone including an IM client, a file browser, bunch of command line tools and some games including a NES emulator..

having said that, I absolutely do not condone the idea of keeping the iphone a closed platform

it does make sense from Apple's perspective as they do not have to spend resources on providing support for phones that broke due to untested/unverified 3rd party apps
but then Nokia does it for their Symbian phones all the time

 

[aryayush]

But those applications would have been a lot better had Apple officially supported them. There would have been tons more and you'd have a lot more variety.

Plus, you could have updated your iPhone immediately every time a new software upgrade came out and not lost any of the installed applications.

Seriously, I don't see any reason for not allowing third party applications that is actually beneficial for the customer.

 

[DigitalDude]

lol everyone see this

*preview.tinyurl.com/3bmr9z

 

[gxsaurav]

But those applications would have been a lot better had Apple officially supported them. There would have been tons more and you'd have a lot more variety.

Plus, you could have updated your iPhone immediately every time a new software upgrade came out and not lost any of the installed applications.

Seriously, I don't see any reason for not allowing third party applications that is actually beneficial for the customer.

OMFG...arya u r saying this who opposed JAVA, MMS, Video recording & what not in iPhone just cos El Jobso said so....

I must be dreaming....u r now saying something me & imav have been saying since day 1 of iPhone demonstration

 

[infra_red_dude]

But those applications would have been a lot better had Apple officially supported them.

If this happens then I'm sure Apple will charge for installing the apps.

 

[aryayush]

Be that as it may. It will still be better than the situation we are in now.

Most Mac applications are paid. At least, most of the really good ones are (though there are exceptions like QuickSilver and Transmission). But you still get all of them for free (except, maybe, David Watanabe's). I'm sure it'll be the same with the iPhone.

Plus, I'm sure that once they open third party development officially, there will be a lot of free applications too.


And BTW, JAVA still sucks, MMS is still useless, I am still glad the iPhone does not do video recording and I still think that the decision not to have third party applications is a very stupid one - none of my opinions have changed. I still don't want JAVA (heck, I won't buy the phone if they decide to include JAVA) or MMS or video recording and I still want third party applications, like I always did.

 

[DigitalDude]

If this happens then I'm sure Apple will charge for installing the apps.

of course.. they even charge for the ringtone.. even if you have purchased the same song through iTunes...

 

[aryayush]

You know what - every single company in America does that. And they charge more than twice Apple for just a thirty second ringtone of their choosing.

Apple charges you half of that for the whole song and a thirty second ringtone of your choosing.

Apple is also a music retailer so the have to maintain a good relationship with the labels. I know that it sounds like a very rough deal in India, where everything is free. But in the USA, Apple sells the cheapest ringtones.

I'm not defending them. I hate it that you have to pay for ringtones and I'll certainly not pay them for it. But it is something that they can do little about. Universal and Sony BMG want to make money from the ringtones and Apple can do nothing to stop them doing so.