The Candy Apple Conundrum
Friday, October 23, 2009 at 02:44AM I have an IPhone. This is arguably the best phone and mobile device I have ever had my grubby little hands on. Period. No competition. I also have a Macbook Pro. Very nice, expensive, and easy to figure out after a day or two. Nothing special, I’m still more comfortable with the Windows environment.
To be honest, I can’t stand Apple. I hate those self-important narcissistic condescending Mac ads. Really. I want to destroy entire apple orchards because of it.
I do appreciate Apple’s brilliance and unending innovation in terms of user interface and experience, as well as packaging, marketing, and building a rabidly loyal fanbase (don’t bother flaming me again guys, you are wasting your time).
At first glance, the IPhone seems like a super shiny object that does all sorts of wonderful things, and there are loads and loads of interesting applications and content. Yay. The market itself is rapidly growing, the users are the “sweet spot” of users and early adopters, and the app store is a perfectly executed distribution method. Love it. You could even argue that the IPhone has been instrumental (without realizing it) in helping spur interest and momentum in the augmented reality sector.
But I am continually perplexed by Apple’s refusal to open up the undocumented APIs in their SDK to allow augmented reality researchers and developers access to the video stream from the camera. This is a critical element for any type of visual tracking (markers, feature tracking, and markerless tracking). Some people figured some work arounds to make it work with the 2.x version of the SDK which is nice, except that this automatically disqualifies any applications from distribution in the app store. What really kills me though, is that on one hand, Apple made a play for welcoming AR applications with the 3.x version of the SDK, but only provided access to the overlay, while at the same time completely changing where the undocumented API calls were located, further obfuscating things and handicapping all R&D.
Making things worse, and I’ve blogged about this before, is that there is a perception that the IPhone is the only platform worth pursuing for AR. If you aren’t developing for the IPhone, investors, venture capitalists, and the media don’t care and start slamming doors. The reality of the world market is that the IPhone is only a fraction of the entire market share. From a business perspective, development for the IPhone should be a secondary or tertiary effort, with focus on others like Android, Symbian, and WinMobile. Even the IPhone hardware is lacking in features like video in (necessary for external cameras, likely mounted to the frame of glasses or wearable displays), and others.
Nearly everyone I spoke to at ISMAR echoed my sentiments here. We all *want* to develop for the IPhone, and need to if we want to build a business, but we are being forced to consider alternatives. This is unacceptable. Next-generation mobile augmented reality has the potential to DRIVE SALES OF IPHONES, but as long as Apple is blocking work here, there is a huge opportunity for competitors to jump into the fray and court the developer community. If this keeps up, the IPhone will remain as the coolest phone on the block, but someone else will have the ultimate mobile AR platform.
Think about it Apple! Let’s work something out, and soon, so we can get back to the task of advancing the technology and creating some mind-blowing applications.
Call me, mmmkay? I want my candied apple.
Robert
Reader Comments (5)
The only guess I can take is that Apple just wants to hold it until iPhone is ready for their own AR business.
I'm just wondering... Did any of the leading AR company that would be relaying on the undocumented APIs for marker or marker less live video feed analysis (Total Immersion, Metaio, ...) did ever bother to form a kind of consortium to go and talk with one single voice to Apple ? I don't count anymore the number of blogs that are saying Apple should free up its SDK, but other than this did someone actually went and met with Apple, physically ?
Another of my concern is : why doesn't any of these AR company simply develop a full concept on WinMobile or Android or Nokia, make it visible, and then use this increase of visibility + some sales numbers to go and meet with Apple ?
I have the feeling we are hearing to impatient geeks, not to business men who talk sales numbers to their partners. But I may be mistaken...
All of the AR apps you see in the app store or that companies are showing off aren't actually using the video feed, they are drawing graphics on the screen overlay based on other data like GPS, compass, and accelerometer. The video is turned on in the background, but not being accessed or analyzed, which is required for any kind of visual tracking and mapping (marker based or otherwise). This is why you can see Layar, Wikitude, Accelair, and others. Even the ones that are showing 3D objects, aren't using live scene info for tracking, but more like keyframes (effectively a screenshot) and some other approaches that are limited in functionality.
A number of companies did join the AR Consortium that I formed earlier this summer, and we sent an open letter to Apple at the time with mixed results (they released access to the screen overlay, but at the same time they further hid the video calls).
The reason we arent all jumping on winmobile, android, symbian, or whatever, is because the market (at least in north america) is enamored with the iphone and aren't all aware of the global market.
There are a lot of impatient geeks (and I am one of them) but I am also a businessman and this is why I am being very vocal about this. I'm trying to build a company here, and collaborate with other companies, universities, institutes, and agencies to cultivate an entirely new industry. Apple's lockdown is handicapping innovation and the flow of venture capital, which results in a delay in the cool tech coming out. As an industry, we would be four to six months ahead of where we are now if Apple had released the APIs.
So, we are being forced into a touch decision...abandon Apple and focus on other platforms that are much better with a higher potential for profits in the long term, or keep focusing on *trying* to do something with the iphone to attract media and funding, but miss out on the larger market.
If Apple opened up the SDK in regard to the video feed and let us do our thing, it would hit the industry like spinach for Popeye, and you would see a rapid flow of new and tremendously exciting stuff within a matter of months (if not weeks).
"Even the IPhone hardware is lacking in features like video in (necessary for external cameras, likely mounted to the frame of glasses or wearable displays), and others."
Who needs a physical video-in port when there's the Bluetooth Video Distribution Profile (VDP)? Google it sometime. Dare to Think Different, maybe?
You obviously haven't bothered to read the rest of the blog, have you? It usually helps to know what you are talking about and who you are talking to before you open your mouth.
Your comment about bluetooth video is good, but the snarkyness after it is annoying. Of course I'd much prefer wireless wearable displays, but that introduces other issues to be solved as well...power, weight, bulk, and... BANDWIDTH. Especially if you are trying to use two camera sources for stereographic methods.
Google it sometime. Dare to be different and read my whole blog.