<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Design vs. Develop &#187; iphone</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.designvsdevelop.com/tag/iphone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.designvsdevelop.com</link>
	<description>the department of planned spontaneity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:43:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is Apple making the same mistake all over again?</title>
		<link>http://www.designvsdevelop.com/is-apple-making-the-same-mistake-all-over-again/</link>
		<comments>http://www.designvsdevelop.com/is-apple-making-the-same-mistake-all-over-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 01:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Joe LeBlanc</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iphone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software business]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designvsdevelop.com/03/17/is-apple-making-the-same-mistake-all-over-again/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With Apple&#8217;s recent iPhone SDK release, the local tech scene is planning an event. However, as some of the comments have pointed out, Apple&#8217;s licensing arrangement is a tad restrictive. This all sounds vaguely familiar. As it has been told to me, when Apple originally released the Macintosh, the software kit was expensive and exclusive: [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With Apple&#8217;s recent iPhone SDK release, the local tech scene is <a href="http://drinkingoatmealstout.com/2008/03/12/iphone-sdk-devcamp/">planning an event</a>. However, as some of the comments have pointed out, Apple&#8217;s licensing arrangement is a tad restrictive. This all sounds vaguely familiar. As it has been told to me, when Apple originally released the Macintosh, the software kit was expensive and exclusive: you could only buy your tools from Apple. This limited the availability of 3rd party Mac software, which in turn limited the adoption of the computer itself.</p>
<p>Fast forward to today with the <a href="http://developer.apple.com/iphone/program/">iPhone kit</a>. While the $99 for a full development license (allowing you to test on your iPhone instead of an emulator) isn&#8217;t exorbitant, it&#8217;s certainly a hurdle. The biggest offense though is the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2008/03/15/dlclaud115.xml">distribution system</a>. You are required to distribute your application through Apple&#8217;s site, have your application blessed by Steve Jobs, and only then do you get to keep 70% of the sales revenue.</p>
<p>Apple is trying to double dip in the upper right hand corner of the <a href="http://www.designvsdevelop.com/a-map-of-business-models-in-the-software-industry/">software business model map</a>: first by selling the iPhone, then by selling other people&#8217;s software products. Perhaps the <a href="http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/index.html">iFund</a> they&#8217;ve arranged will soften the blow. My guess is that iPhone developers will move towards the upper left corner instead so that Apple will have less of a cut of their revenue. Why would an iPhone developer spend large resources on developing a rich iPhone app, only to hand 30% of their revenue to Apple?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.designvsdevelop.com/is-apple-making-the-same-mistake-all-over-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
