Steve Jobs, presumably speaking from a hyperbaric chamber where he's being nourished with an infusion of liquefied developers-souls before his next public appearance, had a few interesting tidbits about the AppStore for the Wall Street Journal this morning. Namely, users have downloaded some 60 million programs for the iPhone representing sales of about $30 million since the launch last month -- a 30/70 revenue split between Apple and developers, respectively. "The thing's going to crest a half billion soon," Jobs added, "I've never seen anything like this in my career for software." He went on to say that phone differentiation is no longer about radios and antennas (or uh, battery life) but about software. Steve also confirmed the controversial iPhone
application kill switch in the event that Apple inadvertently approves a malicious program for distribution. Jobs said, "hopefully we never have to pull that lever, but we would be irresponsible not to have a lever like that to pull." As to the $999.99 I Am Rich application, the dubious download that displayed nothing but a glowing red gem, pulling that from the store was a "judgment" call. Sure, but that doesn't explain how it made it through the vetting process to begin with.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Magnificen7 @ Aug 11th 2008 1:24AM
First to get ranked really really low. We should disemvowel him ;)
Nicknin10do @ Aug 11th 2008 1:25AM
/sigh
CongratuF**kinglations
Anyways, I was wondering if anyone truley baught the "I am rich" Program. I would've, but I'm just to lazy to hit the button. I can afford it ... really, I can ... =(
LJKelley @ Aug 11th 2008 1:23AM
Phones have been about software for quite sometime... or what exactly does Windows Mobile, Symbian, Palm, and Blackberry do? I'm glad Jobs finally realized this several years after Bill Gates talked about how Windows Mobile could revolutionize our increasingly mobile world. I'm just sick of Jobs pretending that the world only realizes something when he does.
Just like MMS won't be important until its in the keynote for the 3rd Gen iPhone. I get sent videos and pictures all the time...
Patriks7 @ Aug 11th 2008 1:30AM
i thought that the 3rd gen iphone will be all about copy/paste?! :o
The Dude @ Aug 11th 2008 1:40AM
Just like Intel processors (or x86/x64 in general) weren't significant until 2006. Welcome to the party. 20 years late but, you know I guess it's better than never.
And I'm sure Zac mother-fuckin'-badass Morris could've told you phones were taking this direction even with his Motorola brick.
andrew @ Aug 11th 2008 2:15AM
I'm sure if Helio didn't die....and they didn't use the word phone in the name of the device.....never mind, I'm not gonna bother
but the idea is...EVERYBODY has email
you can send pics through EMAIL
unless you have Hotmail....you three are not invited to the party :-P
Blackstar @ Aug 11th 2008 2:32AM
Hmm, I was sort of hoping for an "I Am Poor" application with a glowing icon of a shopping cart full of soda cans or something to round out the choices.
h0mi @ Aug 11th 2008 3:03AM
@andrew
"you can send pics through EMAIL"
More people have access to MMS than to email on their phones. Telling me to use email instead of MMS for a picture I just took is stupid. My sister can't check her email till she gets home but I want to send a picture now.
mike @ Aug 11th 2008 3:12AM
@h0mi
You have no idea what MMS is, do you? If a phone can send an MMS message, it can send an email.
You fail. Try harder next time.
bigmudcake @ Aug 11th 2008 3:28AM
@mike
You definitely fail. All modern phones (except iphone) can support MMS, not all phones support email as that requires an email client on the phone. Then you need an email address somewhere to store the bloody picture and you hope that it is reliable (unlike gmail's outage recently). Where as with MMS you have picture, you send MMS, person gets MMS on phone, end of story. no fiddling with email settings, retrievals, or email clients, or spam.
bigmudcake @ Aug 11th 2008 3:38AM
@mike
Also, sending/receiving emails requires (in Australia anyway) having a separate data quota/charge to your phone plan, where as MMS messengers are included in the normal phone charges (like SMS messages are)
Mike, you obviously haven't used a "real" phone before, just the toy phone (iphone) you currently making excuses for.
Joppa @ Aug 11th 2008 5:37AM
What I find really funny about all of this is that the apps would be useless if the iphone really had full "real" internet as advertised. If internet on the iphone was "true" internet no one would need an app for facebook or games or shazam etc... probably about 90% of the apps do the "real" internet stuff the iphone can't. Well, not including all the flashlight apps.
Mark Anderson @ Aug 11th 2008 7:54AM
ITT: mike gets his shit pushed in two weeks past Thursday and then fails with a comeback.
fred @ Aug 11th 2008 8:07AM
"Phones have been about software for quite sometime... or what exactly does Windows Mobile, Symbian, Palm, and Blackberry do? I'm glad Jobs finally realized this several years after Bill Gates talked about how Windows Mobile could revolutionize our increasingly mobile world. I'm just sick of Jobs pretending that the world only realizes something when he does."
It's almost hilarious that he thinks he's never seen somthing like this before.
Well, if you took all of the various (thousands) freeware/shareware/software sites for WinMobile, combined them together, and made everyone get their softwre from that one source only, you would pretty much get the same thing, but in usual Apple fashion, it's all under their thumb, so when 60 million apps are sold, you can put out a self-fawning press release, and know that all of the tech sites will happily repost it, cause they want to be on the fawning too.
Dean @ Aug 11th 2008 10:28AM
Send MMS messages for free from email(read:iPhone or your home computer), just send them to:
Alltel = xxxxxxxxxx@message.alltel.com
Amp'd Mobile = xxxxxxxxxx@vtext.com
AT&T = xxxxxxxxxx@mms.att.net
Boost Mobile = xxxxxxxxxx@myboostmobile.com
Centennial Wireless = xxxxxxxxxx@myblue.com
Cingular (AT&T) = xxxxxxxxxx@mms.mycingular.com
Einstein PCS = xxxxxxxxxx@einsteinmms.com
Nextel = xxxxxxxxxx@messaging.nextel.com
Sprint = xxxxxxxxxx@messaging.sprintpcs.com or xxxxxxxxxx@pm.sprint.com
T-Mobile = xxxxxxxxxx@tmomail.net
US Cellular = xxxxxxxxxx@mms.uscc.net
Verizon Wireless = xxxxxxxxxx@vzwpix.com
Virgin Mobile = xxxxxxxxxx@vmobl.com
List stolen from modmyifone.com.
Jason @ Aug 11th 2008 1:05PM
@Joppa: um, yeah, it has the full "real" internet, just as advertised. The one [main] flaw is lack of flash support in Safari on the iPhone. All the apps you described are mainly just simplified interfaces optimized for the iPhone's screen that can be used outside of Safari.
But guess what, you CAN do pretty much all that stuff directly through the web on the iPhone. I can post to Blogger, use Gtalk to IM, post to my Wordpress site, browse and post to flickr, play Bejeweled, etc, all right from the "true" internet via the phone's web browser, without using any "apps".
Derek @ Aug 11th 2008 1:07PM
@Bigmudcake
You may want to check your "facts" there. I came from a modern phone that did not have MMS, at least not on Sprint's network. The PPC-6800. I guess they had it on AT&T, but not everywhere.
There is more to restrictions like that then just the phone manufacturer.
Regardless, MMS is a borderline worthless service I never used when I had it. It is not reason enough to not buy a superior phone, regardless of which phone that is. I was much happier having my Mogul than I was the phone before that had MMS, because it did so many other things that I actually used.
I can probably speak for your sister when I say, no picture you take on a poor quality camera phone is worth seeing right away on a small low resolution screen.
And no, this isn't me defending the iPhone, this is me sick of hearing about MMS, which I have never seen a use for, and know of no single person in my life who uses it more than once every couple months.
I do have an iPhone though, and the things it DOES do better than my old Mogul, far outweigh it not having MMS. I don't miss my crash-happy Windows Mobile stuff at all. The iPhone isn't perfect though, so I am still hoping, despite a lot of negative stuff I have heard, that the Google Android thing works out.
THJ @ Aug 11th 2008 4:28PM
Check out this post if you want some work-arounds for MMS on the i
iPhone:
http://www.appleiphoneschool.com/2008/08/04/picture-messaging-mms-workaround/
Of course, I'm guessing that >90% of the MMS complainers don't care, they just LOVE bitching about Apple.
Joppa @ Aug 11th 2008 4:38PM
iphone optimized sites don't count as real internet either, sorry.
Shadow08 @ Aug 12th 2008 12:23PM
You guys know what else I find funny about Jobs and all of this?
How a year ago when the first iPhone came out, third party apps weren't important or significant at all... after all, why compromise phone security when you can use web apps through Safari!
natalie j @ Aug 15th 2008 4:17AM
For those of you in the UK, there's a great MMS web app available that converts that frustrating "You have a picture message, please logon to the O2 website" into a nice shiny MMS message.
See here - http://o2mms.net
The guy who writes it is also in the process of adding the ability to send MMS too (although it looks like there will be a charge for each message).
KRingg @ Aug 11th 2008 1:27AM
Oh thank you big brother Jobs for protecting me with a remote detonation on everything I install!
OCEAN 12 @ Aug 11th 2008 1:42AM
im shaking, i cant wait to he hits 100 million downloads, i could just die with excitement when he dose, especialy when he anounces new products, soon everyone will have to switch to apple for a perfect world with no windows or other comapany spam
steve is a god
windows is the devil
only apple make good products
JohnPQ @ Aug 11th 2008 1:46AM
SteveJobs is worse that big brother and a total control freak.
Windows isn't that bad.
waiownsyou @ Aug 11th 2008 1:46AM
I kinda, sorta, not really, not at all, oh nevermind agree with you.
But you have to admit that without Windows, we'd never be where we are today.
HP laughed at the idea of a computer in every home. If it wasn't for cheap clone devices, expansion of the human race in terms of the digital influence wouldn't be as complex as it is today.
Also, penis.
andres @ Aug 11th 2008 1:57AM
linux
JR @ Aug 11th 2008 2:15AM
Forgive for asking, but are you being sarcastic?
JR @ Aug 11th 2008 2:16AM
My question is for ocean 12, sorry for not clarifying.
mike @ Aug 11th 2008 3:13AM
@JohnPQ
"Windows isn't that bad"
Sounds like a ringing endorsement to me!
Zorque @ Aug 11th 2008 3:35AM
ALLCAPS 12, can you stop making terrible comments? Thanks.
Steve Page @ Aug 11th 2008 5:56AM
I love those, without windows we would never be where we are today so keep using it comments.
Next time you hop into your car, remember that we would never be where we are today without shoes and start walking!
Things move on people, remember the past but dont live in it!
andy @ Aug 11th 2008 1:42AM
so they can remotely kill any app because it may contain malicious software? this says to me "we do not test any apps we sell".. and we wonder why the programs crash constantly.. but of course the app store isnt about greed.. i mean iphone users can install programs they find everywhere on the internet... oh hold on.. thats not the iphone.. thats every other smartphone on the planet.
Kelmon @ Aug 11th 2008 2:50AM
I think that what you have done here is put 2 and 2 together and come up with the answer of "banana". Let's be perfectly honest here, the App Store currently contains over 1,500 applications. What's the chances that each one can be analysed in detail to find code that may be considered malicious? I honestly have no idea whether code analysis is being performed manually or systematically but I think it is reasonable to conclude that unless the analysis is very detailed that there is the possibility of a rogue application making it through the vetting process. In this respect the Core Location kill-switch makes sense and much better than the alternative.
I don't understand your comment about the finding applications on the Internet? Are you honestly trying to say that customers prefer to have to search the Internet for applications rather than downloading them from a single source on their phone? Are you quite mad?
jkr @ Aug 11th 2008 4:47AM
@Kelmon
"I don't understand your comment about the finding applications on the Internet? Are you honestly trying to say that customers prefer to have to search the Internet for applications rather than downloading them from a single source on their phone? Are you quite mad?"
I want NetShare. Give me NetShare. I want, I want, I want. Apparently since I wish to install a well written iPhone app, that the app store arbitrarily removed w/o any proper justification, or even explanation, must mean I'm a loon. What we have here is freedom vs. control. Freedom, you can do what you want, but not everything is nicely integrated (maybe). Control, everything is nicely integrated (again, maybe) but you have no freedom and can't necessarily get what you want, even if it's out there. Additionally, everybody that jailbrakes their phone must be stark raving mad, because they primarily put non app store apps on (I don't own an iPhone, so if the app installer lets you use app store apps, forgive my ignorance).
Auras @ Aug 11th 2008 4:53AM
@Kelmon:
"Are you honestly trying to say that customers prefer to have to search the Internet for applications rather than downloading them from a single source on their phone?"
Yeah, that would really be insane. I mean common how could anybody ever do this? It's not like we do this in our real lifes with our PCs/MACs...
/sarcasm
Magnificen7 @ Aug 11th 2008 5:47AM
@Auras
Did you consider that searching for something on a cell phone is less convenient than searching for it on a full fledged computer? No? Bummer. Is that intelligence filter on?
Kelmon @ Aug 11th 2008 6:46AM
@Auras
OK, could we search the Internet for applications to install? Sure. As you say, we already do that today for existing applications. Is this the best method for installing applications? No. Just because something is "how we do it today" does not mean that it is good. Clearly a one-stop-shop (no pun intended) is the best solution for customers. I can appreciate developers not being 100% happy with it but for the end-user it makes the most sense. Besides, nothing prevents developers from hosting their own site to advertise and describe their application, just as long as the download link points to the application's page on iTunes. Again, the customer wins.
fred @ Aug 11th 2008 8:15AM
"I don't understand your comment about the finding applications on the Internet? Are you honestly trying to say that customers prefer to have to search the Internet for applications rather than downloading them from a single source on their phone? Are you quite mad?"
That's not mad at all.
You get variety. You get apps that range from polished and useless to rough and genius.
If site A goes down, then I can go to site B or C or D or E, and so on. No central authority controlles the distrubution of software under the guise of "protecting me from "bad" programs.
And what if I WANT program A, but central software site doesnt want me to, and the only way to put the software on the device is through that ONE method?
Thanks, but no thanks.
Mark Anderson @ Aug 11th 2008 8:25AM
@magnificen7
But... but... you have the full internet on your phone! How can it be more inconvenient?
maveric101 @ Aug 11th 2008 10:15AM
@kelmon
uh, i'd rather be able to put whatever the hell i want on my phone. the centralized app store may be better for people who can't even spell internet, but i'm perfectly fine with doing a little searching to find a great application to use.
THJ @ Aug 11th 2008 4:35PM
After using Blackberry, Palm, and WinMo 5 +6 over the past 8 years before switching to the iPhone, I've probably downloaded 10x as many iPhone apps than all of the others combined.
Is it revolutionary? Hell no. All the other mobile OSs have had 3rd party apps for ever.
What's revolutionary is the delivery system. That is where Apple has destroyed the competition.
Say what you want about closed systems, but the sheer volume of apps downloaded begs to differ.
Zorn @ Aug 11th 2008 1:47AM
I don't understand the big furor over the I Am Rich application. If some rich idiot wants to pay $1000 for a useless program that displays a red gem, more power to them. I don't think it should have been pulled from the store just for being expensive and not deemed useful.
John @ Aug 11th 2008 1:51AM
What's the point of being rich if you don't have a red gem that says you are?
lilo @ Aug 11th 2008 2:15AM
They had to remove this application because it kind of exposes all this iPhone hype. Bad publicity is starting to hurt Apple
Shaun @ Aug 11th 2008 2:20AM
A useless program that made them $300 from nothing everytime someone bought it.
Kelmon @ Aug 11th 2008 2:53AM
I have to agree with lilo on this one. There was nothing wrong with the application itself, or the pricing, as far as the App Store guidelines are concerned, but the negative PR was damaging the platform. Pulling the "NetShare" application is a far more important issue than the removal of "I Am Rich" given that it was reasonably priced, genuinely useful and, again, did not appear to be in contradiction to the App Store guidelines for acceptability.
Reader @ Aug 11th 2008 3:59AM
Usually I'd say the same thing, but allowing things like this sets a precedent. If one guy can have his I'm rich bullshit application, then why can't I? Hell I'll make it $2,000 and call it the I Am Richer Than Rich application. Stuff like that just leads to a bloated store full of useless crap.
Mark Anderson @ Aug 11th 2008 8:26AM
@Reader
*Looks at App store*
Bit late for that, eh?
fred @ Aug 11th 2008 8:30AM
"Usually I'd say the same thing, but allowing things like this sets a precedent. If one guy can have his I'm rich bullshit application, then why can't I? Hell I'll make it $2,000 and call it the I Am Richer Than Rich application. Stuff like that just leads to a bloated store full of useless crap."
So a guy came up with a clever way to make money off of this app, and you fully support the idea of denying him that ability because you are more worried about "a bloated store full of useless crap"?
What is this?!?
Is it the common way of thinking amoung Apple fans that limiting freedom is a good thing? Is having one central agency for software distribution and having that source censor out apps that just aren't considered "chic" enough by some small group of people really a good thing?
namtastic @ Aug 11th 2008 1:07PM
There's no way "I Am Rich" would have *ever* made it to one of the featured pages in the store. This app should have sat quietly in some sub-page query and died a silent death, but because Apple exerts control about what goes into the store, leaving it in the store makes Apple complicit in its creation, just like all the other worthless crap in the store does.
So when it was found, it highlighted what seemed to be huge flaw in the "Apple as quality control" explanation for its closed-platform model. If iTunes was just one of many ways to install, and you could freely download .ipas directly from anyone, then we wouldn't be having this discussion at all. Apple then gets to reject because rejecting isn't a complete lock-out, and jokesters get to make lame apps without cluttering up the store for others.
(And I'd point to Nokia Download! as a prime example of how it should work...if only they exerted some editorial control in there -- the Weather Channel app they had recently was a horrible, utterly laughable J2ME app that looked like a dumb terminal with an ad-banner over it.)