now some people say 'hey just jailbreak' the phone, unfortuately accord to apple thats actually breaking the law, just so you can use an app that apple doesnt aprove of.

heres another beef i have with the locked iphone, music transfering. so my last machine got killed in that ice storm that ripped through the country, forcing me to purchase a new computer. I downloaded itunes and was unable to transfer my MP3s (not itunes music) from my iphone to the new computer, and when i wanted to add new movies or tv shows to my phone I had to completely erase the phone, losing about 3 gigs of mp3s. heres what i want from the iphone: i want to use it like a hard drive, I want to beable to change browsers, add newly downloaded itune movies without formatting the drive, use flash, download porn apps (lulz), and teather the phone to my computer. these are all things that apple can do, and should have done with the iphone before releasing it to the public (it would also be nice if itunes didnt load with 40 differnt little programs with windows), unfortuately apple is the perfect example of a monopoly with its hardware/software (iphone or OSX [ see Polystar ]) that goes off the idea that people should use their stuff ONLY how they see fit.

Benefit of the doubt??? They're getting a FREE PASS. Apple zealots are actually defending their behavior.

They have treated them with the same level contempt or worse.

I completely disagree… Microsoft has ALWAYS been very open to developers and ISVs… they never strongarmed them in this way. Again, if they did – everyone would scream bloody murder… why is Apple getting a pass?

Microsoft would LOVE to have this level of control on their platforms. In many cases they do have product lockin. Consider Exchange, Outlook, Office and Windows itself. For over a decade it has been extrememly difficult for consumers (individuals and companies) to work without them.

I actually write software for Microsoft products for a living – and never, ever had to pay a dime to Microsoft in royalties… nor did I ever have to go to Microsoft to request their "permission" to sell my application.

Have you ever written an application or directly worked with Microsoft? Your misinformation tells me that you haven't.

In addition, consider Windows Genuine Advantage, Microsoft Passport, Windows Live, the Zune Store. They are all means to control distribution of apps and services to consumers from developers

Here's the difference: THEY'RE ALL OPTIONAL. Microsoft doesn't require ISVs or software developers to use any of those mechanisms… Microsoft gives developers CHOICE about how they want to distribute their own products. Apple does not – why do you give them a pass?

Microsoft routinely hides APIs that are in Windows for their own use providing speed benefits for their own apps that 3rd party devs are unable to utilize. Not nice.

This is complete misinformation, and again proof that you never developed solutions for Windows.

Do you think Apple has every API completely documented and visible? Even those that have not been tested for non-OS/external use?

Then there are the massive PC manufacturers who had to sue Microsoft due to Windows license terms where they had to pay royalties to M$ for each PC sold even it it did not have a copy of Windows installed

Again – typical Apple-fan hogwash. OEM concerns were all allayed back in the late 1990s… please move into the 21st century.

Apple is not blameless.

No kidding… however, people like you use misinformation about Microsoft to justify Apple's bad behavior.

The fact is: Apple is muscling its developers and consumers is a way that NO ONE should accept.

For some reason, the Apple fanbase is so intent on protecting their baby, they've forgotten about protecting the independent developer and consumer. What's the matter with you people?

-Dan

I agree and disagree. Yes, Apple is getting the benefit of the doubt in regard to their distribution of apps to the iPhone (expect numerous AppStore knockoffs from a variety of companies in the near term). No, Microsoft has not treated their consumers and developers very well historically. They have treated them with the same level contempt or worse.

The genius of Redmund is the muscle they have flexed for decades to retain and promote their monopoly power. They are shrewd, underhanded and extremely effective business men and woman.

Microsoft would LOVE to have this level of control on their platforms. In many cases they do have product lockin. Consider Exchange, Outlook, Office and Windows itself. For over a decade it has been extrememly difficult for consumers (individuals and companies) to work without them. Incompatibility is still built-in to each new iteration of file formats and applications to this day.

In addition, consider Windows Genuine Advantage, Microsoft Passport, Windows Live, the Zune Store. They are all means to control distribution of apps and services to consumers from developers. They may not be as successful as AppStore and iTunes but they are legitimate attempts. Microsoft routinely hides APIs that are in Windows for their own use providing speed benefits for their own apps that 3rd party devs are unable to utilize. Not nice.

Let's not forget OEMs. They are Microsoft customers too. Having being screwed by the ill-fated 'Play for Sure' campaign while Microsoft internally develops another propreity delivery system, I am sure that they would beg to differ. Then there are the massive PC manufacturers who had to sue Microsoft due to Windows license terms where they had to pay royalties to M$ for each PC sold even it it did not have a copy of Windows installed. Ouch!

Apple is not blameless. However, Microsoft has been tried and found guilty of anti-competitive behavior against consumers and other companies. They have been found in infraction of the rulings previously passed down by these findings. They have tampered with evidence and produced fraudulent evidence to mislead jurors and the government. All of this is well documented.

Their time for the free pass is long over and they brought this level of distrust and suspiscion upon themselves.

I have no problem with Apple offering an online store and simplified distribution mechansim that makes it easier for software developers to sell and deploy their applications.

My problem is that Apple provides NO CHOICE in the matter to developers.

It would have been much better if Apple allowed developers to sell their applications however they want (many already have elaborate commerce sites)… and let them choose whether or not to use Apple's mechanisms.

The problem isn't Apple making money… it's Apple strongarming developers and customers… and the fact that you Apple fans just give them a pass. You are all terrible hypocrites.

-Dan

Really? Developer time and effort is free?

and the 30% “cost” of developing on the iPhone covers all the other costs many small developers couldn’t afford to cover – e.g., hosting, distribution, credit card processing, marketing, etc.

Dude – any online retailer could do the exact same thing at a fraction of the margin.

Credit card processing runs abour 3%, and the margin most retailers charge is only slightly above that.

Apple is unfairly strongarming developers into using APPLE's distribution methods, because APPLE wants complete control of all of the transactions and the permission to run the application.

Apple has become the 1984 Big Brother they once claimed to fight against. Heck, IBM never even went this far.

Are you KIDDING? You can download/purchase mobile software from many places, and it's very inexpensive. You must never have set up a commerce site… you make it seem like black magic.

Any developer can do it… any developer except an iPhone developer, that is… becaus Apple won't let them. They can't sell their own products using the channels they want.. they have to do it APPLE's way.

How funny is it that Microsoft has enabled a true marketplace that gives freedom to developers and consumers… and Apple has created a dictatorship system under which they control everything.

And you Apple fans still think it's okay.

When are you going to get off the kool aid and start looking at things objectively?

-Dan

Whatever. It costs nothing to develop for Mac OS X on desktop platforms, and the 30% "cost" of developing on the iPhone covers all the other costs many small developers couldn't afford to cover – e.g., hosting, distribution, credit card processing, marketing, etc. More than fair since no small developer would otherwise be able to sell an app for $.99 after the above-mentioned costs of doing business were subtracted.

And besides, this method Apple has devised reflects Apple's view that everything about computing should be easy to do. Why not the business end of development, too? Let the developer focus their talents and time on creating and not business crap. Personally, I'd rather just pay Apple 30% to handle all those transactions to get me up and going as a small developer.

But hey, if you want to be a business manager instead of a creator, be my guest. As an M$ developer you'll just end up paying that 30% or more to someone else besides M$.

Oh and dare I say this but the iPhone is not superior. What was and has been superior has been their marketing machine, that's it. How many phones have been doing the same things for years now? Browsing, REAL GPS, touch screen, music (which doesn't require your computer from having to d/l a stupid app whether you want to or not]

If someone marketed a widget correctly..betya that would sell well too..Hmm pet rocks anyone?

p.l.u.r

-Over heating Ipods and Iphones

-Bug fixes in MacOs

-security Holes in the browser.

-Their sh1tty QC dept. [well not a bug persay, but they need to fix that anyhoo]

I used a mac back in the day for animation, I'm not even going to count for you how many crashes the sets had due to memory problems.

p.l.u.r