The latest attempt to sacrifice Steve Jobs and Co. seems to be the "apparent" lack of a native SDK. What a crock of shit. Call me crazy, but I don't really want or need a native iPhone SDK. That's right, no stinking SDK.
Don't give in Steve Jobs, don't give in.
What I really want is a few more "web hooks" to local data and hardware via a sandbox - Javascript would do - and a real 3G data connection.
You see, I come from an old school systems design philosophy - build and design not for the world you're in, but for the world you will be in. And from where I'm standing the mobile world we'll all be in is inundated with bandwidth and data everywhere. You heard me right - death, taxes and an always-on data connection. In fact, I see so much connectivity that if I was designing a phone today it would just be a terminal - no native OS or apps. Everything, including the UI, would "stream" from the server. In such a world, the data pipe is the hardware bus and applications are never installed, they're all there.
It's this pre-conceived notion that makes be believe that a native iPhone SDK is a waste of time, a security risk or just plainly... as archaic of an idea as the floppy drive - which Apple removed with similar criticism. Don't give in Steve Jobs, don't give in.
Why don't you ask for the moon while you are at it. The only wide spread 3G network in America is Verizon's and Verizon turned Apple down. So, we have to wait for AT&T to install HSDPA. That means late 2008 or early '09 before that is practical. As for unlocking the iPhone, forget about it.
Posted by: Louis wheeler | November 03, 2007 at 05:46 PM
You moron, how do you make a Skype client or a call recorder as a web application. Only with native apps and SDK, retard.
Posted by: Sebhelyesfarku | November 03, 2007 at 07:34 PM
@Louis
I think you are forgetting one important factor from our capitalistic society: competition! AT&T can't afford to let Verizon and Sprint take all the commercial data customers in the US. I think it will be safe to say that by the first half of next year you'll see a much greater footprint for 3G from all carriers - T-Mobile included.
@Sebhelyesfarku
I think you need to read the post again - take a look at the sentence that references the sandbox. BTW, I always welcome and appreciate passionate users like yourself.
Thanks for your comments.
Posted by: Jose | November 04, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Jose, I'm forgetting nothing. I just know more than you.
I am remembering that it takes time to change things in the real world. AT&T spent over $200 million to upgrade its EDGE network for the iPhone. The next thing on the horizon for GSM 3G systems is HSDPA. Broadcomm just announced a chip that might fit in the iPhone, but it won't be shipping until first or second quarter of next year. So, we are talking about third or fourth quarter 2008 for a 3G iPhone. Not sooner.
So, I repeat, "The technology isn't ready yet."
Posted by: Louis wheeler | November 04, 2007 at 10:41 PM
@Louis
Since you know so much more than me and everyone else (does Rixstep ring a bell? ) you should also "remember" that AT&T has spent over $18 billion on its network over the last 3 years and that its current 3G network is already HSDPA compliant and converting as we speak to HSUPA - take a look at the recently released Motorola Q9. You also probably know that a lot of the components for the iPhone are custom made and that for a possible customer that has over 12% of the US smartphone market getting an OEM to make exactly what they need is not much of a problem. Hint: You'll be happily surprised in the first quarter of 2008 as far as the iPhone is concerned.
Posted by: Jose | November 05, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Two considerations that you are ignoring, Jose. First, A mobile HSDPA chip that doesn't suck a battery dry; we haven't had one, says Steve Jobs. That is why the Broadcom chip looks so promising. But it usually takes about six months to iron out production problems after a chip is announced.
Second is that AT&T has HSDPA service in the big cities. But, it is not wide spread yet. Apple is not likely to announce a 3G iPhone until it is. So, we have to wait.
There is a confluence of events which must mesh. These are practical problems, Jose. Wishes won't dent them.
Nor will you experience much difference when a 3G iPhone comes, because of latency problems.
You can have a very fast transmission of data; that is 3G. But if the servers don't feed the data to the transmission towers quickly, it avails you nothing. 3G service is just part of the problem. You have to look at the big picture and I was complaining that you are not.
Technology improvements are not magic, Jose. They are sweat and toil combined with capital expenditures and time.
AT&T had an incentive to improve its network before it issued the iPhone, But it had to make money while doing that. New subscribers because of the iPhone will provide that money.
But, it won't correct the problem that mobile service is balkanized and monopolistic world wide. We need to take away the local Bell Phone System's monopoly in the US and let there be free competition. Meanwhile, it is a mess.
Posted by: Louis wheeler | November 05, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Nevermind. What so important about it?
Posted by: Videos 3GP | January 19, 2008 at 01:43 PM
I'm dissapointed Verizon turned down the iPhone. Oh well, i still can be updated about the iPhone and stuff on http://www.iphonenewsvault.com. Check it out.
Posted by: Brian | June 29, 2008 at 10:49 PM