[miniphone]

I thought I'd try my luck with this thread on getting new informations regarding the SDK for the iPhone and the iPod Touch.

I know we are many to be waiting for this SDK to start programming lots of apps.

I know this thread is a bit like asking if anyone knows how the next iMac will look like, but maybe I'll get lucky.

We all know that it will be similar to Google social API but that's too little.

Are we going to get some sort of Cocoa and Core animation access or are we going to be pushed back to Javascript level ?

So if everyone has insider news about the SDK, like those lucky developers who have received the early version, please let us know.

Thanks

[imitchellg5]

You'll get Cocoa but I'm not sure about Core animation.

[miniphone]

Thanks a lot for your answer imitchellg5

This is very interesting because it means that we can basically start coding in cocoa, hoping that we won't have much stuff to change when they release more details on this SDK.

Does anyone have more details, like how advance is the beta version of this SDK ?

Is it running late ?

How about the certification process Steve was mentionning in his letter ?

Is it identical to Nokia's ?

Is Apple going to distribute our software through iTunes or are we going to be free to distribute it the way we want ?

Still lots of questions huh !

[imitchellg5]

It should be ready for MacWorld. As for distribution, it appears so far that it can be distributed through iTunes, but beyond that, details are sketchy. I am able to log onto the iPhone Dev Center, so all of this info is sort of reading between the lines of some stuff.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by miniphone 

Is it identical to Nokia's ?

Is Apple going to distribute our software through iTunes or are we going to be free to distribute it the way we want ?

It won't be identical to Nokias. It'll be Cocoa (i.e. the same development API for OS X) with some tweaks.

I think everyone can agree that iTunes will be a distribution option. We don't know if it will be the only one however. All Apple has said so far is they want to require code signing, which would not require iTunes.

[imitchellg5]

Oh, and you can use Javascript too

[goMac]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I am able to log onto the iPhone Dev Center, so all of this info is sort of reading between the lines of some stuff.

Isn't the iPhone Dev Center just the html/AJAX stuff?

[imitchellg5]

The free online one is.

[miniphone]

imitchellg5,

Thanks again for sharing this information with us.

First, a reminder for everyone.

I assumed everyone knew what we are talking about, but it may not be the case, so here is the exclusive article published in Electronista on November 26th that is the reason behind this thread:

"Some developers are gaining early access to Apple's iPhone and iPod touch software developer kit, according to reliable sources speaking to Electronista. A handful of companies are said to be getting rough versions of the tools to help code more advanced applications than would be possible with the current web-only solution. Exact details of what the kit allows are unknown, though it is confirmed that it produces native programs and somewhat resembles Google's OpenSocial in that it mediates between the programmer and the iPhone operating system.

Although treated as a welcome development, the SDK will not be the same as writing a Mac OS X application and has its clear limits, people familiar with the matter say. These details are unavailable, though the features are broad enough that at least one major social networking site is reportedly interested what the native platform can offer versus existing web code. The group of companies has only received its development tools within the past two weeks and is allegedly unable to provide a timetable for when finished software will be ready, though it should be well ahead of the community at large, which only receives the SDK in February.

The slip corroborates remarks made by Apple chief Steve Jobs in his open letter announcing the SDK, which emphasized the need for a unique solution to third-party software that balances features with a layer of protection against privacy invasion and security breaches."

Are you one of those lucky developers who have been able to get their hands on the SDK ?

Is there any API to access the accelerometer, the ambiance light sensor or the proximity sensor ?

By the way, I don't know what they mean by Google's OpenSocial API similarities if it is based on Cocoa. As far as I know, Google's API is Java based.

"the SDK will not be the same as writing a Mac OS X application"

.

What limits are they talking about, apart from the screen size, obviously ?

thanks

[goMac]

Originally Posted by miniphone 

By the way, I don't know what they mean by Google's OpenSocial API similarities if it is based on Cocoa. As far as I know, Google's API is Java based.

I'd assume they're giving us access to the same API's that their applications use, which is Cocoa. If they don't, I expect round 2 of developer bitching and moaning.

(That said, I would assume that, just like Mac OS X, they'd keep certain parts of the API's private.)

The Cocoa API on the iPhone is known, because that's what the unofficial 3rd party apps use. It has Cocoa, CoreAnimation, OpenGL, and all the other nice API's that OS X has. The big difference is the GUI library is different, which should be for obvious reasons.

[imitchellg5]

I don't have the SDK, but I know someone who does. He's let me log into his ADC before.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I don't have the SDK, but I know someone who does. He's let me log into his ADC before.

Well, if they go with JavaScript again, I expect that there will be an uproar all over again. The entire idea of an SDK was that developers would get the same sort of power available in the unofficial 3rd party apps.

I heard whispers of a JavaScript API with expanded iPhone specific functionality before the official iPhone SDK announcement, and I was really hoping Apple had dropped that idea.

[imitchellg5]

You can use JavaScript, but Apple isn't forcing anyone to. It's just an option if anyone wants to use it. IDK why they would.