Open vs. Gated Software Development

Palm and Apple have different views on third-party application developers; which approach is best for consumers?  With the approaching release of Apple’s next generation iPhone and the launch of App Store, I have started to think about how the company will govern and make applications available to customers.

Later this year, Apple will introduce their iPhone 2.0 software and with it, the App Store.  The App Store will be the vehicle by which customers can purchase and install third-party applications on the iPhone and iPod Touch.  Look for new Apple hardware, software, and the App Store to be unveiled during Apple’s Worldwide Developer’s Conference, being held the week of June 9.

When Apple opens App Store, developers will need to buy into the program for $99.  After paying the buy in cost, developers should expect that a flat rate fee of 30% will be taken from each sale.  Apple’s Steve Jobs has stated that the company will not be using App Store as a profit center and that the money collected from the program will be used to sustain the operation of  the online store.  If the plan isn’t to make money from the service, why is Apple controlling the gateway to iPhones and iPods?  Despite what you may think about Apple or it’s CEO, I believe that Apple is going to control access to the iPhone and iPod as a means to control the public’s opinion of the over all quality of the product.

With a “gated garden” system that is being proposed for Apple’s products, the company will review each application that will be sold directly to Apple’s customers.  This application review provides the software purchaser with the benefit of knowing that Apple has checked the application for compatibility and stability.  In short, customers can have a reasonable level of certainty that a third-party application purchased from Apple’s App Store won’t crash the iPhone or iPod it is running on.

By contrast, software development for other mobile computing platforms, including Palm OS, Windows Mobile, and BlackBerry, is open to anyone.  To develop and distribute a native application all one needs to do is obtain the software development tools and the learn the programming language.  Anyone can develop applications for these platforms and there is no governance over how an application is written.  These platforms allow for any application to be installed to the device as each has their own system for customers to load new applications on to the devices.  These open environments come with a cost, however.  When you install software there is no guarantee that the programmer followed the vendor’s prescribed development guidelines.  There are no assurances that there won’t be software conflicts between applications running on the device.  And there is still the risk that the hardware vendor will be blamed for frequent device crashes.  Third-party application software can be both a blessing and a curse for hardware vendors like Palm.

As Palm develops their next generation operating system, “Palm OS II”, how should they structure their third-party software development program?  Initially I thought that the current open garden model should be used.  As the saying goes, if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.  After talking this strategy over with a fellow Palm OS wingnut, Mark, I’m now learning toward the gated garden approach.

Yes, by charging $99 to become a software developer, some of the folks who write applications as a hobby may be locked out of the program if they can’t pay the start up fee, especially if they plan on giving their software away as freeware.  The start up fee may be a problem for some, but I anticipate that for the majority of folks who want to develop applications for Palm’s devices, it won’t be.  I really like the idea that developers big and small will all have to play by the same rules.  (There will always be exceptions, and I expect that some developers might be permitted to bend the rules; both in the Apple system, and in the Palm system should a similar program be set up.)  It would be a refreshing experience if a mobile gadget worked correctly every time you used it.  If forcing all third-party developers to follow a single set of rules for software development, and enforcing those rules, it stands to reason that over all quality will go up.  Lastly, if Palm where to implement a developer’s program like Apple, I can see the MyPalm.com portal being converted into a single source for Palm’s customers to come to purchase software applications.   I believe that by having a single outlet for certified third-party application software it will be easier for customers to browse, purchase, download, and install software on devices.

In conclusion it is still a little bit too early to know exactly what terms Apple will be requiring the developer community to follow to participate in the iPhone/iPod software App Store.  While I think that Palm and their customers could benefit from a similar styled program, I suspect that Palm, with some 1,000 employees, might be a little bit short staffed to review each and every new Palm OS, Palm OS II, or Windows Mobile application that is released for their hardware products.  What might better serve Palm is to work closely with their developer community to ensure that they have easy access to the published standards for good application design.  Developers who wish to adhere to the highest level of design standards can submit their applications for review by Palm to obtain the Designed for Palm product certification.  The Designed for Palm product logo tells customers that a developer’s Palm OS or Windows Mobile application will run reliably on their handset.  And better running applications mean happier customers.

Which software development program should Palm use when they roll out Palm OS II?  Let us know your thoughts in the 1SRC discussion forums.