Apple

Carriers will be able to add their own branded MMS applications using MobiSpine's software.

(Credit: MobiSpine)

Wednesday's report that a Swedish wireless company was planning to add an MMS application to the iPhone now makes a little more sense.

That's because MobiSpine, another Swedish company, announced the availability of a "white label" MMS service for carriers to use on the iPhone. Telia, the iPhone's wireless carrier in Sweden, has said it plans to bring MMS capability to the iPhone in short order, but it wasn't clear how it was going to make that happen. Now they'll be able to use MobiSpine's application under their own brand, sort of like how "white box" PC makers put together bare-bones systems for local distributors to sell under their own brand name.

One hurdle might be the approval process: MobiSpine's MMS application isn't available on the App Store as of this writing. However, individual carriers might have to submit their own versions on a case by case basis. So far, Apple has resisted the temptation to add MMS, which lets you send photos and videos in the body of a text message, to the iPhone.

Google Mobile lets you search the Web using your voice in a way that is technically off-limits to iPhone developers, according to a report.

(Credit: Apple (App Store))

If Google wasn't Google, there's a fair chance that its new mobile application for the iPhone wouldn't be allowed in the App Store.

That's because Google Mobile is tapping into iPhone technology that is supposed to be off-limits to third-party developers, according to research done by Daring Fireball's John Gruber and Ars Technica's Erica Sadun.

The latest version of the search giant's mobile iPhone application has been well received, but it might be impossible to duplicate or improve upon the application, unless developers are willing to break Apple's rules for iPhone applications.

When you make a phone call on the iPhone, a proximity sensor detects when the phone is right next to your head, and it turns the screen off to prevent you from inadvertently hanging up the phone with your face.

Google's application also uses the proximity sensor to detect when the phone approaches your head. That is is kosher under the iPhone application guidelines given to developers, as long as it is used solely for that on-off functionality. But Google uses it to let you search the Web with your voice, just as if you were making a phone call.

Google's application both activates the proximity sensor and delivers an audible prompt to voice your search terms, and the only way it can do this is by using an API that isn't part of the public list Apple has put together for developers, according to Gruber. Think of an API as helpful code that an operating system shares with an application to make it easier for that application to get things done.

Apple lets developers create applications that access some parts of the iPhone--such as the accelerometer for spacial controls and GPS for navigation--but it considers other parts of the phone's technology off-limits to anyone but Apple. Nonetheless, Sadun observes that there are tons of applications within the App Store that do what Google has done with its mobile application: take advantage of technology that is accessible, such as the proximity sensor, but go beyond the basic things you're allowed to do with that technology by using "unpublished" APIs that exist but are not publicized by Apple.

Sadun compares this to jaywalking: Sure, you might get hit by a bus, but you probably won't, if you're careful. And the cops aren't exactly going to launch a three-state manhunt for you, if you make it across the street.

But further research done by Sadun shows that Google is actually going beyond its use of unpublished APIs in the Google Mobile application to call on so-called "private" frameworks that are supposed to be strictly off-limits to anyone but Apple, an offense that can result in banishment from the App Store. A framework is a more general set of building blocks for an application that requires more custom development work than an API.

Of course, Google Mobile can still be found on the App Store. A Google representative said the company had no immediate comment on the reports, and an Apple representative did not return a call seeking comment.

So what can we conclude?

One, as we already knew, the App Store approval process doesn't make sense: applications that don't violate any public guidelines are rejected for nebulous reasons, while applications that violate the rules sail through.

Last week, Apple rejected an update to an application called CastCatcher that had already been approved three times, and then this week, it approved the update without requiring any substantial changes, according to the developer.

Two, if you play by the rules of the developer program, your application won't be able to compete against those created by developers who violate the rules and get away with it because either Apple missed the violation or because they are politically connected industry titans.

"If regular developers are forced to play by the rules, but Google is allowed to use private APIs, just because they're Google, the system is rigged," Gruber wrote.

Three, since Apple is under no obligation to support applications that make use of unpublished APIs or private frameworks, future firmware updates or operating-system releases could break those applications.

iPhone applications are streaming into Apple; CEO Steve Jobs told financial analysts last month that he's never seen anything like it in his career. So it's not hard to believe that Apple is simply overwhelmed and does not have the manpower to comb through each application to make sure that it is toeing the line. However, that was the main selling point for Apple's strategy to completely control iPhone application distribution; that it would be able to prevent poorly written or insecure applications from poisoning the iPhone by vetting every single application.

Google, of course, is a little different than your average iPhone developer. CEO Eric Schmidt sits on Apple's board of directors, and the company has received favorable treatment before from Apple with regards to the iPhone, such as Apple's decision to grant YouTube and Google Maps prominent placement on the home screen of the iPhone before the device was officially open to third-party developers.

Based on most accounts, Google Mobile is an excellent iPhone application. But would a similar application created by an average developer have been allowed to make it onto the App Store?

It seems that Apple has been rejecting applications that compete with its future plans. Might the company also be extending that courtesy to favored partners?

Want to watch a high-definition show from iTunes on an older external display? Good luck!

Some Mac users are teed off that they are getting error messages saying the iTunes movie they rented or bought can't be played on their display because it is not HDCP (High Digital Content Protection) authorized.

And some people are complaining they are only able to play certain standard definition iTunes content on their laptop or via an HDMI connection.

As a result, some Apple forum participants have threatened to boycott iTunes.

"And here we are now with Apple users who have spent thousands of dollars on Apple hardware (30" Cinema displays are not cheap!), buying films legitimately through Apple's store only to find themselves screwed when they just want to watch the film!" wrote "non-troppo" on the Apple Discussions Forum.

Forum participant Jim Beggans complained that Apple expanded the usage limitations of iTunes without updating the published usage terms.

"It is imperative that Apple address this customer concern with NEW terms of service (which will require them to offer some remedy for existing purchases) and clarify that HDCP is a now a standard part of their products regardless of which mode of the DisplayPort is in use," Beggans wrote.

ArsTechnica, which first covered the issue, reports that Apple's new MacBook is using DPCP, or DisplayPort Content Protection, which was developed by Philips.

The Mini DisplayPort connector used on Apple's new MacBooks and MacBook Pros uses DPCP to prevent iTunes files from being played on devices that are not compliant with either DPCP or HDCP, a copy-protection technology used with the HDMI standard. DPCP supports the HDCP technology, but is considered a stronger level of encryption according to the Video Electronics Standard Association (click for PDF) .

"While Apple's own Apple TV has used HDCP to protect video files playing from its HDMI port, this is the first time we've heard of Apple bringing HDCP DPCP to its hardware," David Chartier writes on ArsTechnica.

Basically, Apple is moving forward with a new standard that is not compatible with older displays. In the past, Apple has shown a willingness to forge ahead with new technology that doesn't always play nice with the older stuff, and the decision to use the Mini DisplayPort connector on the new MacBooks and MacBook Pros ensured that DPCP and HDCP would come along for the ride.

"Apple's compliance with HDCP--a necessary but appalling condition of the content companies that deliver the HD movies and TV shows--is beginning to close out the 'analog hole' and cause real aggravation for laptop owners with legitimate use cases, writes Michael Rose on The Unofficial Apple Weblog site.

Andy Foster sums the situation up on his Computer Blog: "In other words, the only way any of us can guarantee we can play the stuff we buy that is HD is to ensure we have the newest in hardware."

What does Apple have to say for itself? We don't know and likely won't. Apple representatives did not return repeated phone calls and e-mails seeking comment over two days.

(CNET News' Tom Krazit contributed to this report.)

Swedish iPhone carrier Telia has apparently convinced Apple to let it offer its own MMS application.

(Credit: Telia)

Swedish iPhone users may soon have a way to send each other pictures and video via text messaging.

Telia, Apple's carrier partner in Sweden, is going to develop its own MMS (multimedia messaging service) application for the iPhone, according to a report from MacWorld Sweden. The lack of MMS is perhaps one of the most common gripes about the missing features of the iPhone, second only to cut and paste.

But instead of adding that function itself, or allowing a third-party developer to build it for the App Store, Apple is apparently going to let Telia enable MMS on its own. And it doesn't sound like the rest of the world is going to get a crack at that application, based on the translation, which was verified as legit by a few Daring Fireball readers conversant in Sweden.

Telia will have the application up and running in two months, it told MacWorld Sweden. There were MMS options available to those who wished to jailbreak their iPhones, but this is apparently an officially sanctioned way to text pictures to your friends.

A year after iTunes began offering music without copy protection software from EMI, Apple is in discussions with the other three top recording companies about acquiring DRM-free songs, according to two music industry sources.

The talks are still preliminary and no deals have been finalized, but one source said one of the major labels is close to a final agreement. Rumors have been swirling on the Internet for a week that Sony would soon be offering music without the controversial digital rights management software. My sources could not confirm this.

Spokespeople for Apple and the major labels declined to comment.

Should the deals get done, the songs offered by Apple's iTunes would no longer be restricted to playing on Apple devices, such as the iPhone or iPod. This has been one of the main criticisms of iTunes music for a long time. Apple says the music labels are the ones that force Apple to adopt DRM. Music insiders say Apple has long dragged its feet about getting unprotected music. Right now, Apple uses the proprietary DRM scheme, FairPlay, to lock down its music.

Talks with at least two of the labels have taken place on and off for several months, said the sources. They cautioned that there's no guarantee Apple and the labels can close the deals. But if iTunes is successful in acquiring the rights to sell unprotected music from Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, and Sony BMG, the deal could help bolster iTunes' dominant position in digital music, as well as send competitors scrambling to find something new to differentiate themselves.

In the past year, the four top recording companies have been moving away from DRM--at least with other music services. In that time, companies such as Amazon, MySpace Music, and Napster have all begun selling open MP3s. MP3s are the format used to compress music files. Universal Music is expected to soon announce that the label is licensing MP3s to Microsoft for Zune. EMI and Warner already have DRM-free deals with Microsoft.

The marketing efforts of these Apple rivals have played up the idea that their music is unencumbered with DRM.

Also in the past year, technological shortcomings of copy-protection software have generated a lot of public scrutiny. As some iTunes competitors have exited the market, they have taken their DRM music with them.

This year, MSN, Yahoo, and Wal-Mart outraged some customers and consumer groups by announcing they would stop issuing keys for their DRM-protected songs. This meant the music would be prevented from being transferred to an owner's other devices.

Eventually, all three music services reversed their decisions, but it convinced DRM critics that DRM software never truly surrenders control of music to a buyer. While it's inconceivable to think that Apple would ever stop issuing DRM keys, it's absolutely possible.

CNET News reporter Ina Fried contributed to this report.

See also:
• Wal-Mart to carry iPhone after holidays?

Apple could soon have another distribution channel for the iPhone: Wal-Mart.

(Credit: CNET)

The largest retailer in the world could be getting the iPhone.

Wal-Mart won't have the iPhone at every location come the end of December, if a report from the Boy Genius Report is accurate. But Apple will have iPhones in 2,500 stores in the U.S. and an additional 69 Sam's Club warehouse stores on December 28, according to the report.

It's not clear what price will be charged for the iPhone inside Wal-Mart, but it would be hard to imagine Apple embracing the idea of significant discounts even though CEO Steve Jobs has talked of needing to stay aware of lower-priced competitors. Wal-Mart also offers T-Mobile's Android G1 phone, and though CNNMoney.com had reported that the famously low-price retailer would be offering the G1 for a $30 discount, a Wal-Mart store in San Leandro, Calif., was selling the G1 for the standard $179 on Wednesday morning.

Apple has shown a willingness to embrace the big-box types over the past few years. iPods can be found at retail stores across the country, and electronics behemoth Best Buy devotes significant space for all of Apple's major products inside many of its stores.

But what's surprising about this report is the timing, however: three days after Christmas? Perhaps Wal-Mart wouldn't have been able to get ready or train their staff in time for the holiday season, but with iPhone sales expected to decline slightly off last quarter's totals, you'd think Apple would have wanted a major distribution channel on line during the holiday rush.

See also:
• Sources: Apple, music labels talk DRM-free songs

Apple's iPhone jumped to the top spot on the AdMob Network for the month of October, with 4.1 percent of the mobile ads requested from the network, according to the AdMob Mobile Metrics Report released Wednesday.

Requests from advertisers for mobile ads targeted to iPhone users rose to 236 million in October, more than doubling from the 103 million requests recorded in the previous month. Worldwide, AdMob's mobile-ad requests for all device makers grew 13.8 percent in October, to 5.8 billion.

AdMob delivers banner and text ads to mobile devices, and these figures were analyzed and aggregated as part of its monthly Mobile Metrics report. AdMob-served ads are seen by people visiting clients' Web sites with their mobile phone. Advertisers can choose to have their ads appear on a certain type of device, or region of the world, and then AdMob places the ads on partner publishers' mobile sites.

Mobile advertising is on a fast track, with research firms projecting market revenue to reach $19 billion per year by 2011, up from the approximately $3 billion seen for last year.

Fueling the iPhone's October performance was particularly strong traffic outside the United States, which accounted for 37 percent of its ad requests, according to the AdMob report. Western Europe represented 17 percent of the iPhone ad requests, and Asia represented 8 percent.

Other handset players following close behind included the Motorola Razr V3, which received 3.4 percent of the requests; Nokia's N70, with 3.2 percent; and the Motorola Krzr K1c, with 1.8 percent.

But in the U.S. market alone, the iPhone ranked No. 2, with 6.9 percent of the requests, while Motorola's Razr V3 led the market, with 7.7 percent. The U.S. market accounted for 62.8 percent of the iPhone's ad requests in October.

Requests from advertisers for mobile ads targeted to iPhone users more than doubled from September to October.

(Credit: AdMob)

Apple's OS X Snow Leopard may be on tap for the start of the new year, slightly earlier than expected.

The update appears to be slated for debut in the first quarter of 2009, according to a slide presented by Jordan Hubbard, Apple's director of engineering for Unix technologies, at a conference last week.

Snow Leopard, or version 10.6 of the operating system, is expected to be optimized for multicore processors, include QuickTime X, and offer built-in support for Microsoft's Exchange 2007 software.

A slide presented on Friday by an Apple executive.

Apple previewed Snow Leopard in June. At that time, Apple said that Snow Leopard was "scheduled to ship in about a year."

Hubbard, presenting at LISA 08, or the Large Installation System Administration Conference, in San Diego on Friday showed a slide (PDF) that indicated Snow Leopard's debut would come in the first quarter of 2009, MacRumors.com reported late Tuesday.

Hubbard's presentation raises speculation that Snow Leopard's debut could be pegged to the next MacWorld conference in San Francisco, which begins on January 5.

Psystar's Open Computer might be an endangered species after its antitrust claim against Apple was dismissed Tuesday.

(Credit: Psystar)

A federal judge has tossed out Psystar's antitrust lawsuit against Apple, one of its most important avenues to remaining in business.

Judge William Alsup of the U.S. Federal Court for the Northern District of California rejected Psystar's argument that Apple uses anticompetitive practices to prevent companies from selling computers that run Mac OS X, according to court documents spotted by AppleInsider. Psystar can amend its complaint in order to try to convince the judge that it has a better argument, but it has only 20 days to decide whether or not it can overcome the judge's decision.

Psystar has been selling Mac OS-based computers since April, but is under attack in the court system from Apple, which filed a suit against the company in July. Psystar in turn filed its own antitrust complaint against Apple, which some legal observers thought was the company's best chance of winning the dispute and staying in business.

But Alsup was not convinced. He rejected Psystar's argument that the relevant market in this case consisted of a single product: Mac OS. "The pleadings...fail to allege facts plausibly supporting the counterintuitive claim that Apple's operating system is so unique that it suffers no actual or potential competitors," he wrote in his opinion (click here for a PDF copy).

If Psystar fails to come up with a better argument, its counterclaim will be formally dismissed and it will have to get ready to defend itself against Apple's claims that it is infringing on Apple's copyright material and trademarks.

Apple may have a real fight on its hands if it believes Mark Papermaster is the right man to nurture the iPhone.

In an age where employees move between companies as often as relief pitchers change teams, noncompete agreements seem an outdated concept. But lawyers say the noncompete agreement that Papermaster signed with IBM is serious business that demonstrates how companies are increasingly looking to enforce restrictions on their most important employees, and that could force Apple and IBM to share valuable information to make their argument stick.

Getting out of a noncompete
clause isn't easy--unless you live
in California.

IBM is suing Papermaster for violating the terms of a noncompete agreement, which he signed in 2006, when he accepted an offer to run Apple's iPhone group in October. He claims that since he'll be working on a product that does not compete with anything IBM offers, that agreement should not apply. But it may not matter: the agreement he signed contains broad provisions regarding where and how Papermaster could seek employment for a year following his departure from the company, and it's very enforceable in New York, where IBM is based.

The two parties are scheduled to have a status conference later Tuesday, and we could learn as early as then just how determined IBM is to send a message to the rest of the tech industry and its own employees. One sign IBM is taking this case very seriously: It's using longtime legal partner Cravath Swaine & Moore, who represented IBM in the SCO trial, to fight the Papermaster battle.

"These cases are prosecuted as a deterrent to others," said John Siegal, a partner with Baker Hostetler in New York. "In case people are going to be following a high-level executive, (a company) is going to impose limitations to get the rest of the staff to think twice or three times (about leaving)."

Don't fence me in
Covenants not to compete (generally known as noncompete agreements) are perfectly valid everywhere but California, where they have been outlawed. They are generally regulated, however, to make sure they are "reasonably limited to time and space," said Robert Scott, a professor at Columbia Law School and director of the Center on Contract and Economic Organization. That means employers can't keep you on the sidelines for 10 years or allow you to work only on the moon.

The central question surrounding Papermaster's noncompete--and really any noncompete--is whether his activities at Apple would harm IBM. "The court has to find that the noncompete is necessary to protect the interests of the employer," Scott said.

Papermaster signed the noncompete (click here for a PDF copy) in 2006 when after a 15-year career at Big Blue, he joined an "elite" team of IBM managers called the Integration and Values Team (I&VT). He claims the information discussed at the three meetings he attended was "high-level" and didn't involve IBM trade secrets. According to IBM's complaint, however, that group is a collection of 300 senior managers at IBM who are responsible for "addressing the most difficult and important issues facing IBM, such as developing corporate strategy and driving innovation and growth, and I&VT members work with the most sensitive strategic information the company possesses."

But according to an interview that IBM human resources executive Randy McDonald gave just before the company filed suit against Papermaster, I&VT seems more focused on solving the "thorniest" problems that IBM's customers are having integrating technology into their businesses, rather than developing any specific technology. "I&VT is about talking business first," McDonald said during the interview.

Nonetheless, IBM will point out that the agreement covers "any entity that engages in, or owns and controls a significant interest in any entity that engages in, competition with the business units or divisions of the company in which you worked at any time during the two (2) year period prior to the termination of your employment."

So, then do Apple and IBM compete because they both make servers, even though no rational observer of the server market would consider Apple a true competitor to IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, and even beleaguered Sun Microsystems? Do they compete because they both design chips, even though IBM's go into servers and game consoles and Apple's will one day go into iPhones?

It all depends on what the judge considers to be the most relevant issues at hand. "What always happens in these cases is that every company in the world thinks that everything it does is a trade secret," Siegal said. "Under the scrutiny of a judge, that gets winnowed down to real specifics, such as whether the guy was engaged in activities and had knowledge of things that would give Apple an advantage in unfair competition."

And that's where this case could get juicy.

Laying down the cards
"It may also be that this litigation serves some ancillary purpose, that in discovery, one or both of these companies is seeking to find out more about the plans and activities of the other," Siegal said.

IBM and Apple may not want to
share their road maps for the next
year in a courtroom.

IBM will likely have to explain to the judge exactly how Papermaster's specific knowledge harms Big Blue's short-term interests by laying out just where those interests lie. Apple could have to do the same thing to prove that it doesn't plan to use that knowledge to start a new business or improve an existing one, even though it had Papermaster sign an agreement that he would not disclose any confidential IBM information to Apple upon joining the company. "Sometimes in these cases, competitors find out a lot about each other," Siegal said.

As a result, these cases rarely proceed to trial, since the preliminary stages tend to drag on and often the "secrets" at issue aren't worth the prolonged involvement by upper management. Papermaster's hope is that the judge agrees with his claim that nothing in his proposed role at Apple overlaps his role with IBM.

"The court (could then) put restrictions on his conduct for Apple that falls short of an outright prohibition on his working for Apple," Siegal said, satisfying the letter of the noncompete by prohibiting him, for example, from running the XServe group or the P.A. Semi chip team for a year but allowing him to run the iPhone group.

Noncompete clauses don't appear to be going anywhere, despite California's decision to ban them earlier this year. If anything, companies are getting bolder about their use of restrictions like noncompete clauses, Siegal said, which could start to affect more and more of those executives looking to move on from deteriorating situations. And if you refuse to take that next great job because the company requires a noncompete, the employer will likely find somebody who won't hesitate.

"While most states' laws say they are disfavored as a matter of law and policy, the fact is they are very often enforced," Siegal said. "I'm not certain there is a (growing) trend toward enforcement, but there is a trend toward using these agreements and seeking to enforce them."