Rogue Amoeba Puts SDK Under Microscope

Posted by Eric March on March 11, 2008 at 6:21 pm

Mac developers Rogue Amoeba have the SDK, and they’ve taken the time to scrutinize the heck out of it for the benefit of all. While they are optimistic overall, they do fear that it sets some bad precedents in the development world and does a a fair bit to stifle creativity and development. Quentin kicks it off with an analysis of code signing, its past, present, and possible future in his Code Signing and You blog entry:

The answer to this might be found in the iPhone SDK. Just released, it offers a development environment very similar to the desktop edition of Mac OS X. All the standard UNIX stuff is there, many APIs are the same, and many (such as the GUI parts) are similar but adapted for the mobile environment.

However, the environment is different in one important way. Apple is the gatekeeper:

Phones will only run apps signed by Apple. It also applies FairPlay to the package.

Twitter message from Deric Horn on March 6, 2008

Let me repeat that: if Apple doesn’t sign your iPhone app, it does not run.

Even for local development, you need to get the code signed. The iPhone SDK is free, but by itself it won’t let you load apps onto an iPhone. When you pay Apple the $99 to enroll in the program, they send you a certificate which can be used to sign your applications. However, they will only work on iPhones which have been provisioned with this certificate.

To distribute your application to other people, you must go through Apple, and Apple has explicitly stated that they are going to be vetting the apps before they give their blessing. Steve Jobs identified six types of bad behavior which would cause them not to sign an app:

• Illegal
• Malicious
• Unforeseen
• Privacy
• Porn
• Bandwidth hog

Some of these make good sense. Malicious apps and apps that violate your privacy are bad. But then again, Apple’s definitions of these may not agree with yours.

(Read the full post here)

Quentin follows up with an brief examination of the consequences of the restrictive development environment the SDK enforces:

As Mike noted in his post on code signing, Apple has stated that there will be restrictions on what Apple allows on the iPhone. They list the following application types as being excluded:

• Illegal
• Malicious
• Unforeseen
• Privacy
• Porn
• Bandwidth hog

However, this list is incomplete. Section 3.3 of the iPhone SDK aggreement includes a whole litany of restrictions for which your key to the iPhone can be revoked should you violate them. I would list them all here myself, but the license agreement itself forbids that. You can download this file from the iPhone DevCenter, but you’ll need at least a free ADC account to access it. Unfortunately, if these restrictions remain in place, opportunities for developers to be truly innovative on the platform will be stifled from the start.

(Read the full post here)

Paul wraps it up with a list of bug reports and feature requests they have submitted to Apple in the hopes that perhaps they will loosen the reigns a little bit and let developers do what they do best:

In an effort to remedy this and remove some of the limitations, we’ve submitted a number of bug reports to Apple. Some of these are useful specifically for us, while others are beneficial to anyone, but our goal here is the same with all of them - we want to make the iPhone platform as robust and powerful as possible.

A list of our requests for enhancement is below - developers are invited to submit duplicates and Apple engineers can view the full submissions with the links provided.

Allow applications to be installed at the user’s discretion, not Apple’s

This request basically asks for Apple to not be the exclusive provider of applications for the iPhone. Having an App Store is certainly a great new venue for sales, but it should not be the only way to get software on the iPhone. Just as Apple sells music, but also lets you load MP3s ripped from CDs onto your iPod, you should be able to install software from other sources.

This is perhaps the most important issue - if this restriction is lifted, many others become far less important.

Bug ID #5788773

(Read the rest of this post here)

It’s a fascinating and well-considered read to say the least. Rogue Amoeba are experienced Mac developers and know their way around OS X. They would love nothing more than to be able to explore this new mobile platform, but, undoubtedly like others, are frustrated at the numerous restrictions and regulations Apple is foisting upon the very companies they hope will make the iPhone the raging, unstoppable success that Steve Jobs wants it to be. On their own it is unlikely that they will be successful in changing Apple’s mind, but if concerted effort is put forth by a good many developers all clamouring for the same thing — much as what caused Apple to do a 180 on the SDK itself — then maybe future versions of the SDK will allow much more open application development without all the stifling restrictions. Who knows? Stranger things have happened.

(Source: Rogue Amoeba, via TUAW)

Posted in SDK