think about it like this sdk won't allow unlocking programs so people in unsupported countries. They would be locked out unless someone jailbreaks/unlocks them. Hopefully this and the fact that some devs want to there apps to be used freely and not have apple tell them what to do will be enough to keep our little community alive. I like jailbreaking and custom tunning my iPhone even if I am not unlocked

Originally Posted by gobias101

DO you get the beta 2.0 when you sign up for the $99 developer thing? if so how possible do you think it is that the firmware will be leaked months before the actual release?
also for the apps that cost money do you guys think there will be others who will reverse engineer it and re-build the same thing (only a little different of course) to release for free?

The only problem is that would be considered warez

Yo chronic you going to put your apps an things up on iTunes ?

no cause u're not buying the firmware, your buying access to the dev network, the firmware is free its just not widely distrubuted... so not "technically" warez in my view

Originally Posted by cchance

does that mean that in installer.app we're gonna start seeing new SDK based apps flowing out??????? If so hell ya... hell im gonna go get the sdk and start programming myself!

You can't run SDK apps on 1.1.x iPhone. Of course, you could develop an app on the simulator and then back-port the code to 1.1.x using the dev-team SDK. Some APIs have changed considerably between 1.1.x and 2.0, however.

Originally Posted by n350ziphone

Isn't it a possibility that all the delevlopers making free stuff in installer will now stop, pay there $99 and sell there apps with apple instead?

Like swirlyMMS he'd make a killing if he sold that with apple instead of donations

The official SDK can certainly not do everything that the dev-team SDK can do on a jailbreaked iPhone. SDK applications are restricted to a security sand-box and do not have direct access to the file system, communcations APIs, etc like applications do now.

So it may not be possible, for example, to write an MMS application using the SDK.

Originally Posted by n350ziphone

So do all you guys think this is a good thing?

Isn't it a possibility that all the delevlopers making free stuff in installer will now stop, pay there $99 and sell there apps with apple instead?

Like swirlyMMS he'd make a killing if he sold that with apple instead of donations

I can't help finding it exciting and worrying all at the same time

So you are telling me that your only source of mp3 are Itunes store, you dont download music from other sites........ what does it matter if you have the apps on itunes. If they are good enough to be bought they will be good enough to go on torrent sites.....

Originally Posted by )law(

Yo chronic you going to put your apps an things up on iTunes ?

Yeah for Extended Prefs I'm making free and pro versions. I have found a potential loophole that will allow it to be installed on jail'd phones, although it will be quite a task to do, but it's still possible.

Originally Posted by zincozinco

So you are telling me that your only source of mp3 are Itunes store, you dont download music from other sites........ what does it matter if you have the apps on itunes. If they are good enough to be bought they will be good enough to go on torrent sites.....

actually i think he's saying that the people who frequent itunes generally dont mind spending a buck here and there, and if developers can pay $99 and put their apps in a high-traffic highly advertised area with those "free-spending souls" why wouldnt they? they could sell 150 at $1 and make their money back. dont get me wrong, "free-ware" is great and all, but it can also be a gamble. if people could choose between "freeware" or just pay $1 for a similar app from itunes (which pretty much assures it will be tried and true and crap free) how many people do you think wont just pay that $1? (and keep in mind the amount of people who "shop for music on itunes while drinking at starbucks" that make up the iphone fanbase.)

'Relivent'??