OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/20347/Apple_Removes_NDA_on_iPhone_Software Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:34:22 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com bye bye NDA http://osnews.com/thread?332061 http://osnews.com/thread?332061 Fast as a shark! Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (turrini) Comments Not a moment too soon http://osnews.com/thread?332062 http://osnews.com/thread?332062 This should have been the case from day 1.

What still troubles me is that Apple actually thought that they could maintain the iphone sdk under NDA indefinitely and expect people to work with them (and people have so far). The fact that they work this way indicates that every time they release a product they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the open. Hopefully they will be better next time (I'm not that hopeful).

On the bright side now:
Expect a brickload of iphone sdk related articles at your local internets soon! Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (_txf_) Comments Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332063 http://osnews.com/thread?332063 Stop charging developers just so they can distribute their stuff via the iStore. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jayson.knight) Comments protection ? http://osnews.com/thread?332066 http://osnews.com/thread?332066 Just as if they invented everything of it...
They merely copied many existing technologies into a coherent design.
Just citing multitouch which existed before they did it.
Besides, software patents sux. Software is speech! Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mmu_man) Comments RE: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332067 http://osnews.com/thread?332067 And then remove all the stupid limitations on their SDK so they can use all the non-official apps ;) Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mmu_man) Comments Rip off ? http://osnews.com/thread?332068 http://osnews.com/thread?332068 "the iPhone OS includes many Apple inventions and innovations that we would like to protect, so that others don't steal our work"

Franckly, what if Xerox had put an NDA on their own "inventions and innovations that [they] would like[d] to protect", I bet there would be no iPhone... sorry, no Apple at all ;)

Kochise

EDIT : typoEdited 2008-10-01 18:06 UTC Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kochise) Comments RE: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332069 http://osnews.com/thread?332069 Apple doesn't charge as much as other providers (handango) plus they have to cover the overheads of distributing software.

Im pleased apple responded quickly and removed the NDA. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (REM2000) Comments RE[2]: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332071 http://osnews.com/thread?332071 And it seems non-developers are especially eager to rejoice. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Buck) Comments _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332073 http://osnews.com/thread?332073 Whatever that means ..

So I guess you still have to sign the NDA.

Which means it still exists and has not been removed completely. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (kragil) Comments Cycle of abuse http://osnews.com/thread?332074 http://osnews.com/thread?332074 Watching this whole iPhone affair as a mostly disinterested third party... I can't help but feel like Apple just promised to stop beating his wife, and she's decided to stay. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) Comments RE: _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332075 http://osnews.com/thread?332075 And it only took 6 root comments for someone to finally mention that. Thanks go to you but Good grief in general.

By removing the NDA for released software only Apple have essentially given the developers another slap. Now the only way to share iPhone development information _is to give away the secrets to your released product_ so that some chump can make a cheap clone and usurp you.

Development is exactly that - it's done before release. Not being able to talk about products under development so that - you know, they don't completely suck when you launch them - is fundamental.

Apple is expecting people to ship crap, and polish thereafter.

This news solves absolutely nothing, but rather sends a number of noisy developers away gleefully skipping, unaware that they've been shafted, yet again. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments Only dousing the flame http://osnews.com/thread?332077 http://osnews.com/thread?332077 They simply don't want negative press to affect the iPhone. The NDA was supposed to do that, but it backfired, so they got rid of it.

The core issue is still there, they can kill your app for whatever reason they want. They just didn't want developers to talk about it.

Now they think smoothing over the hurt feelings will make the issue go away, or at least keep people who were paying attention from abandoning the platform. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mvpittman) Comments RE: _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332079 http://osnews.com/thread?332079 Which, shockingly, has been the case with all unreleased software, APIs, etc. form Apple (and just about any other software vendor).

From now on presumably you would not have to accept the NDA when signing for a free ADC membership or when downloading the SDK. If you want access to unreleased versions of the OS/SDK (e.g. version 2.2) you have to agree to follow the NDA. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lurch_mojoff) Comments RE[2]: _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332082 http://osnews.com/thread?332082 I don't think the "released software" part means what you think it does. It surely refers to released versions of Apple's software (i.e. developer tools, SDK, iPhone OS, etc.). Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:55:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lurch_mojoff) Comments RE[3]: _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332084 http://osnews.com/thread?332084 If I'm wrong, then that's a good thing at least. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 18:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc) Comments RE: protection ? http://osnews.com/thread?332085 http://osnews.com/thread?332085
Just citing multitouch which existed before they did it.

Of course it did. The company that developed the multitouch technology used in iPhones and which Apple acquired in 2005, Fingerworks, have been releasing multitouch products, mainly keyboards, since at least the early 2000s. Multi-input display tracking itself goes back to at least the 1970s. I personally haven't seen Apple claim they have invented the concept of mutitouch. They've always claimed, and certainly still do, that they have very ingeniously incorporated it into a mobile phone - which is completely true; it is quite an ingenious solution. Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (lurch_mojoff) Comments RE[4]: _ONLY_ for released software http://osnews.com/thread?332093 http://osnews.com/thread?332093
If I'm wrong, then that's a good thing at least.


They are talking about Apple software for sure. They're basically saying, "alpha/beta testers and people that we seed to still STFU about new stuff, m'kay?" if you read between the lines.

This might actually mean that SDL gets released for iPhone - which can only be a good thing (TM) as it looks awesome from the YouTube videos I've seen! Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (memson) Comments RE[2]: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332106 http://osnews.com/thread?332106 Their distribution overhead is covered by their cut of the sale price.Edited 2008-10-01 21:20 UTC Wed, 01 Oct 2008 21:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (eggs) Comments Paraphrasing Winston Churchill.... http://osnews.com/thread?332111 http://osnews.com/thread?332111 "Apple always does the right thing... after they've tried everything else." Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (StephenBeDoper) Comments Finally... http://osnews.com/thread?332125 http://osnews.com/thread?332125 I love most of Apple's products, and the iPhone is no exception, but the NDA on this was wrong on so many levels.

I totally support Apple about being secret on new products or technologies (it doesn't really matter if they invented them or not, it's more a case of how they use them). If Apple had told the world 2 years before the iPhone came out that they were going to build one and given away how that was going to be done, then they wouldn't have the "lead" they currently have to help them gain valuable market share. For a company that is alive due to profits, this makes sense, for a company like Google or in the Open Source world, it doesn't. Microsoft can be more open about its OS because of OEM and so on...

Having said all that, I couldn't quite see how the NDA on the released iPhone helped Apple. The product was already out and anyone could download the SDK and see how to build these things anyway. I am glad they got rid of this... Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (thavith_osn) Comments RE[3]: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332160 http://osnews.com/thread?332160
Their distribution overhead is covered by their cut of the sale price.


Nice none quantitative observation. If you think the cost of the Developer Program iPhone SDK of $99 and $299, respectively then I presume you expect your application to produce roughly nothing in revenue for you.

Best of luck with that business model for mobile phone applications. I imagine you could offer a service support model by making sure the application needs support enough to justify the loss in sales, but then again if you don't expect anyone to really dload it you don't expect anything else but living in a sea of RED. Thu, 02 Oct 2008 04:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (tyrione) Comments RE: Cycle of abuse http://osnews.com/thread?332164 http://osnews.com/thread?332164
Watching this whole iPhone affair as a mostly disinterested third party... I can't help but feel like Apple just promised to stop beating his wife, and she's decided to stay.


Wow. I'm sure battered Women across the globe are applauding you for the analogy of a legal document to their body as a co-dependent punching bag. Thu, 02 Oct 2008 04:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (tyrione) Comments RE: Finally... http://osnews.com/thread?332172 http://osnews.com/thread?332172 "then they wouldn't have the ''lead'' they currently have to help them gain valuable market share"

Have I heard... "monopoly" instead of "lead" ?

Kochise Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Kochise) Comments RE: Next Up http://osnews.com/thread?332176 http://osnews.com/thread?332176 They carry the distribution costs alone if you release your App for free. They are supposed to pay your distribution costs even when you sell your app?
How dare they not also to pay my phone bill, webhosting and rent. Thu, 02 Oct 2008 07:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Alleister) Comments Battered wife syndrome http://osnews.com/thread?332189 http://osnews.com/thread?332189 I am strapped in and ready to be voted down here but it strikes me that those who now rejoice at Apple's move are a bit like wives and partners who rejoice that they are receiving temporary respite from regular abuse.

The real cause of fundamental rejoicing would be to leave the abusive partner.

From what little I know or have experienced of the Apple 'community', it has very often been like this.

As long as you keep coming back, slap-attacks behind closed doors will continue to be administered. Thu, 02 Oct 2008 08:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (orfanum) Comments glasnost! http://osnews.com/thread?332247 http://osnews.com/thread?332247 a small step for mankind, a giant step for apple! Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (puenktchen) Comments