Deja vu. It reminds me of Visual Basic and Access, but with a bigger market. Back then, there was this same idea that "anyone can be a programmer", but the pool of interested amateurs was smaller and it was a bit harder to reach the market.
Nevertheless, I think it's essentially the same phenomenon all over again. Sooner or later, people will run out of fresh, attractive ideas that can be done easily, without becoming a decent programmer.
On the whole, I think we'll see some good stuff and lots of mediocre stuff; we might see more people becoming interested in programming. But ultimately, I believe we're looking at something ephemeral.
"Sooner or later, people will run out of fresh, attractive ideas that can be done easily, without becoming a decent programmer."
And some people, who never would have considered programming had it not been for iPhone, will turn out to be damn good programmers that continue learning and making good, useful software long after the iPhone glow has faded.
It is harder to be a programmer now than in the old days because now you have to be an artist. 20 years ago every app looks horrible and so your horrible-looking app blended right in. Today, the designer that can barely code has a serious advantage over the programmer that can't design. It's a lot easier to learn how to program than it is to learn how to design beautiful things. With open source we can all copy each other's code but everybody will hate you if you copy another person's design.
Nowhere is this more evident than Android vs the iPhone. Android's design philosophy is all about utilitarianism. Accordingly, the G1 and most Android apps are incredibly ugly. If you install an ugly app on your G1 then nothing really changes. The iPhone is about design first, utility second. If you install an ugly app on your iPhone you've made it worse than it was without the app. Now, look at who is making money: iPhone developers creating eye candy, not Android developers building unique useful apps.
I disagree that the iPhone is about design first, utility second. I think it is more the case that the iPhone has been well designed for utility. I think part of its success is that its design is amazingly utilitarian. You can really use it.
I agree that, right now, silly eye-candy is winning in the app store. I think that is a function of the immaturity of the entire market. However, one thing that will come as a result when it finally changes, is that the useful apps will, much like the iPhone itself, have useful design that enhances the utility.
Apple has made it signficantly easy for a programmer to throw together something nice w/ the default GUI widget set. It might limit him from the game segment, but there is still lots to do.
It kind of reminds me of how HyperCard was first touted with the Mac. If only that system was network aware, things may have turned out different for the platform...
On one hand I'm happy that people are more enthusiastic about programming. On the other, I'm angry that I never jumped on this bandwagon - what a great way to make some income. Then again, I would probably have to own an iPhone first :)
Easy. You already had that knowledge and just didn't apply it, for one reason or another.
You know when something is cool in your chosen field(s). If you're a geek, that means when you first encountered a modem, IP, Linux or Google, depending on your age. As Pirsig - or rather, his muse - says in 'Zen & the art of motorcycle maintenance': Quality is what you like. Everyone has in-depth knowledge of something, even stupid people; so when the 'woah, cool' reaction takes place it's just a matter of relating it back to your area of knowledge and the significance thereof (obviously, if your specialty is knitting, carbon-fiber knitting needles probably won't make the front page...but then, there are a lot of knitters out there....what do I know?).
You can, and do, sense the potential easily. It's the 10% inspiration. The reason most people, myself included, don't capitalize on things like this is because they are unable or unwilling to commit the money or time. Kinda like romance, you know pretty fast whether you'd like to sleep with someone, but committing to seeing them daily requires a decision, and many of us are nervous of risking the money or time involved; indeed, nervous in proportion to our ability to be carried away on a wave on enthusiasm. In this case, I recommend setting a limit of time and/or money to invest, and a cutoff date by which you'll give up if it turns out to suck.
Yes, amateur programmers will soon run up against the limits of their knowledge; a few will go pro, others will give up. But the most important outcome will be from non-programmers and non-designers coming up with paradigm-busting ideas, which will look like crap at first but turn out to be important later.
Like being able to time the stock market, there are a few people who seem to be able to get in on an idea before it hits big but it's the rare person who can do it consistently. And like trying to time the stock market, for most people, trying to determine the next bandwagon to jump on is just a waste of time and money. This is why VC's need the breadth of investments they do, because they are mainly playing a numbers game - if they really knew which ideas will take off they would only have to invest in probably one tenth of the companies they do now. Can the skill be learned? Perhaps, but do you want to spend the time, energy and money trying to find out?
This isn't exactly the best place to ask this question, but I got frustrated trying to google for the answer: do you need a mac to program for the iPhone? Apple.com only offers the SDK in a .dmg file.
As far as I know, yes. Few reasons, XCode is not available for any other platform other than Mac. You'll still be able to write code without XCode but wont be able to test it in a real environment.
Nevertheless, I think it's essentially the same phenomenon all over again. Sooner or later, people will run out of fresh, attractive ideas that can be done easily, without becoming a decent programmer.
On the whole, I think we'll see some good stuff and lots of mediocre stuff; we might see more people becoming interested in programming. But ultimately, I believe we're looking at something ephemeral.