Flash developers stand to benefit as app review guidelines are also published – but Apple will do well as more apps can be developed for iPhone and iPad

Apple is opening up its iTunes App Store – from which people can download apps for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch – so that developers can write programs for it without using Apple's own software.

It also says that it is publishing the guidelines used to review apps before they are approved for the store, which should ease a bone of contention with developers who have been frustrated by the opaque nature of the reviewing system.

The move to open the store to software written using non-Apple products will forestall the threat of an anti-trust investigation which had looked possible after Apple blocked apps written using Adobe software tools. The two companies have been engaged in a tussle for months over Apple's refusal to incorporate Adobe's Flash software, used on many desktop computers, on the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch – collectively known as "iOS devices".

In a statement, Apple said: "We have listened to our developers and taken much of their feedback to heart. Based on their input, today we are making some important changes to our iOS Developer Program license in sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 3.3.9 to relax some restrictions we put in place earlier this year."

Those clauses, altered in April, had effectively banned any app that was not written with Apple's own iOS development tools, even if they produced computer code which would run on iOS devices. The effect was most marked on Adobe, which had made a significant investment to the latest release of its Creative Suite applications so that they could generate iOS-compatible apps from Flash apps built with the suite.

Now, Apple is stepping back from that ban: "In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need."

In April, Steve Jobs published an open letter to Adobe entitled "Thoughts on Flash", which was critical of Flash's performance, security, reliability and usability on a touchscreen device.

While Jobs has not retreated on Flash, Apple has clearly decided that the threat of antitrust suit – and the similtaneous threat from Google's Android platform, which powers a growing number of phones that can run Flash – makes it more attractive to allow such "cross-compiled" apps than to try to ban them.

The newly-published guidelines - theoretically only available to iOS developers – begins with a number of general points, such as that "if you want to criticize a religion, [don't write an app,] write a book. If you want to describe sex, write a book or a song, or create a medical app. It can get complicated, but we have decided to not allow certain kinds of content in the App Store."

It also points out that "we don't need any more Fart apps. If your app doesn't do something useful or provide some form of lasting entertainment, it may not be accepted." Other reasons for rejection would include amateurish efforts and "content or behaviour that we believe is over the line. What line, you ask? Well, as a Supreme Court Justice once said, "I'll know it when I see it." And we think that you will also know it when you cross it."

There is also a warning: "If your app is rejected, we have a Review Board that you can appeal to. If you run to the press and trash us, it never helps."

The warning on "pornography" – which Jobs has said before he does not want on the store – is explicit: "Apps containing pornographic material, defined by Webster's Dictionary as 'explicit descriptions or displays of sexual organs or activities intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings', will be rejected." And it notes that "Apps that contain user-generated content that is frequently pornographic (example 'Chat Roulette' apps) will be rejected".

Yet some developers have found in the past that press embarrassment has seemed like the only way to put pressure on Apple. The document does not promise any timeline for reviews – which has been another bugbear for developers, who have sometimes seen apps sidelined for weeks without any timescale for review.

The move will probably strengthen Apple's position in the App Store market, where it is battling against Google Marketplace, as well as BlackBerry maker RIM and Nokia, which has its own Ovi store. The most significant threat there is Google, but today's move is a plus for developers who will now be able to develop for the App Store without concern about their development methods.

Apple noted: "With over 250,000 apps and 6.5 billion downloads, the App Store has become the world's largest mobile application platform and App Store developers have earned over one billion dollars from the sales of their apps."

'Search engine optimisation' experts are scrambling to figure out what Google's new system will do to their work - but the effect on advertisers might not be trivial either

Superfast! Photo by ehatch10s on Flickr. Some rights reserved

Is SEO - the dark art of "search engine optimisation", which usually means "Google search optimisation" - doomed following the introduction and continuing rollout of Google Instant on the planet's most-used search engine?

But also of interest is the question of what happens to all those people buying AdWords - the little text ads that come up by search results, on the top and the right-hand side.

SEO, if you don't know, is all about pushing your site further up the search results when people look for some collection of words or letters. There's a lot of "black hat" SEO (which involves things like stuffing the comments of blogs with links to your site, in the hope Google will think lots of bloggers love the pointed-to site) and there's "white-hat" stuff like many others do, which is simply trying to get yourself noticed by using the words that people are searching for prominently on your page.

Reasons why you might think SEO is cooked are: Google Instant begins offering search results as soon as you start typing; the results are different for each individual (because it depends on your web history; you only get it if you're signed in to a Google account); and the results change as your query changes, whether longer or shorter (using AJAX, the same technology that preloads Google Maps and lets you slide them around).

SEO experts have been pondering this themselves. Even with the introduction being just a few hours old, some reckon that the sky is falling. A key reason why: with Google Instant, if you pause for just three seconds while the search results are being displayed, this will count as an "impression". - which could have an effect on some pay-per-click advertisers. (Impressions are not the same as visits or clicks; see below.)

At econsultancy, a number of SEO folk have offered their thoughts. Malcolm Coles of Digital Sparkle has an insightful version: "Some people are going to end up paying a lot more for PPC. If you start searching for Premier Inns, then when you get to premier you get lots of natural "premier" results (e.g. premier league) plus one PPC ad for Premier Inns. I guess lots of people will just click that rather than carry on typing. So some brands might want to be careful that they aren't bidding on terms that get triggered too soon in the process."

Steve Rubel, who works in PR but has "digital insights", says that "what is really does is kill SEO": "Here's what this means: no two people will see the same web. Once a single search would do the trick - and everyone saw the same results. That's what made search engine optimization work. Now, with this, everyone is going to start tweaking their searches in real-time. The reason this is a game changer is feedback. When you get feedback, you change your behaviors."

However at ReadWriteWeb, there's rather less gloom and doom.

"It seems to me that the top three rankings will get even more value," says Ian Lurie, President of Portent Interactive and blogger at Conversation Marketing. "Also, long-tail search is going to be more important, since folks can just keep typing until they see what they want."

This slightly misses the point, I suspect. The top three results will be different for everyone, and certainly in different localities. And what you can't influence, via SEO, is what Google offers you for autocomplete.

Matt Cutts of Google notes in a post on his own blog that the effect on the "long tail" of results

"The search results will remain the same for a query, but it's possible that people will learn to search differently over time. For example, I was recently researching a congressperson. With Google Instant, it was more visible to me that this congressperson had proposed an energy plan, so I refined my search to learn more, and quickly found myself reading a post on the congressperson's blog that had been on page 2 of the search results."

But what about AdWords? After all, that's part of the advertising engine that keeps Google running.

Indeed Google itself is warning, on its Analytics blog, that "With this change, you might notice some fluctuations in AdWords impression volume and in the distribution of organic keywords. For example, you may find that certain keywords receive significantly more or fewer impressions moving forward." Plus, webmasters will see more "impressions" - because Google Analytics will count it as an "impression" if a site simply appears in the search results for 3 seconds. ; there's no need for someone to actually click on the result. That is obviously going to mean some disagreement between logfiles and Google Analytics over how many people have actually gone to a site. Google defines an "impression" as an occasion when a site appears in the displayed search results - not a visit to the site.

Over on the Google Inside AdWords blog, it explains that "Although Google Instant doesn't change the way ads are served, ads and search results will now be shown based on the "predicted search." For example, if someone types "flow" into Google.com, our algorithms predict that the user is searching for "flowers" (the predicted search) and therefore display both search results and ads for "flowers". However, if that user then adds the letter "c" to the query, our algorithms may predict that the user is searching for "flowchart" and show the corresponding natural and paid results for flowchart."

But note the rather cautious words here for the advertisers: "It's possible that this feature may increase or decrease your overall impression levels." In other words, even Google isn't sure how its latest invention is going to affect AdWords exactly. Not surprising, though, because it's a huge change.

But, they add: "However, Google Instant may ultimately improve the quality of your clicks since it helps users type queries that more directly connect them with the answers they need." That's a fair amount of maybes in there.

Indeed Andrew Girdwood of BigMouthMedia tells econsultancy: "Search marketers should now understand the importance of the three second delay, the return key press and the implied impression and how this will affect CTR [click through rates]. They'll have to check target keywords to see whether there is an interstitial search on the way that has a particularly compelling Universal Search result, at least compelling enough to cause the searcher to delay three or so seconds to study it."

The proof of the pudding won't be in the searching - it will be in the effect on AdWords buyers, and what they have to do. There's going to be a hell of a scramble in the next few months; Google has thrown a huge rock into the never-too-calm pool of search engine optimisation (it's often overlooked that it tweaks the algorithms for the Google search results all the time, on average once or twice a day).

There is one get-out clause though: Google Instant only works if you're signed in to an account. And if only works if you're accessing Google through the search box on its home page. That means that a sizeable percentage - it's impossible to know how much - of its billion-odd queries a day won't need it and won't get it. For SEO folk, that news must be reassuring. Now they need to know what proportion of people do and don't get it. How they find that out... will be interesting to watch.

Of this you can be sure though: if Google Instant screws up AdWords revenue, it will be out in the cold faster than you can say Google Buzz.

Plus real-time searching Twitter and Facebook, Adobe exploits and more

It looks like you're giving a presentation. Photo by medigirol on Flickr. Some rights reserved

A quick burst of 6 links for you to chew over, as picked by the Technology team

Strategic Content Management >> A List Apart
An exhaustive explanation about how and why to choose various CMSs. (Thanks @wtfcuk.)

How I Made Clippy Lovable >> Gizmodo
Professor Clifford Nass: "To stop Clippy's annoying habits or to have him learn about his users would have required advanced artificial-intelligence technology, resulting in a great deal of design and development time. To show Microsoft how a small change could make him popular, I needed an easier solution. I searched through the social science literature to find simple tactics that unpopular people use to make friends."

Hackers exploit new PDF zero-day bug, warns Adobe >> Computerworld
OH HAI ADOBE READER AND ACROBAT EXPLOIT

Tablets killed Smartbooks says Qualcomm CEO >> SlashGear
Seems a bit premature to declare netbooks dead, though. But: tablets have the battery life, says Paul Jacobs of Qualcomm.

CHART OF THE DAY: What If Microsoft Had Invented The iPhone >> Business Insider
Add the market value Apple gained from the iPhone to that of Microsoft. Simples. And big.

Kurrently - A real-time search engine for Facebook and Twitter
Interesting: real-time, auto-updating search only of Facebook and Twitter.

You can follow Guardian Technology's linkbucket on delicious

'Streaming results' will save two to five seconds on every 25-second query, says search executive Marissa Mayer – but SEO people may be less happy

Google unveiled a new version of its search engine on Wednesday night: Google Instant, which produces results before you have finished typing and offers suggestions for what you wanted to look for.

Marissa Mayer, the company's vice president of search and user experience, said that until now, each search typically lasts 25 seconds - 9 seconds of typing, 1 second in which the query reaches Google, is processed and sent back, and 15 seconds during which the user considers which search result to click on.

But with Google Instant the average search will be shortened by two to five seconds per query - which, given the billions of people who use the service every week, would mean 11 hours of searching saved every second.

The service began being rolled out to users in the US, UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy and Russia on Wednesday evening.

However, like the playful logos shown off by the company over the past two days - on Tuesday a set of animated balls which evaded the cursor, and on Wednesday a grey logo which changed colour as you typed - the new system will only be available on modern browsers: Microsoft's Internet Explorer 8, Firefox 3, Google's own Chrome, and Apple's Safari. You will also have to be signed in to a Google account to get the results.

Older browsers, and users who are not signed in, will not see the auto-completing results.

Mayer acknowledged that the idea that the search engine might know what you're looking for before you finish asking it - in fact, which will begin offering results as soon as you type a letter - seems so bizarre that 10 years ago it was the subject of an April Fools' Joke by a large company. The company in question? Google.

"In 2000 we thought the idea of being able to search before you typed was so weird we made it our April Fools joke," Mayer, one of Google's longest-standing employees, noted. "Just 10 years later we're seeing that it's actually possible."

Users who begin typing will be able to get completed words from a single letter by hitting the tab key, or choosing from a list that will be presented as they type. The letter "w" begins a search which includes "weather" - one of the most common searches.

Mayer showed it off by typing "SFmoma wom" and was presented with a result for the painting "woman with a hat" at the museum - without hitting the return button. "The results are just streamed straight to you without you hitting the return key."

She added: "We're really excited about what Google Instant means for search - faster search, and providing results in real time before you've even had the opportunity to type your query."

But the impact could be dramatic on another group who have previously relied heavily on Google's old search results page. "Search engine optimisation" (SEO) experts have built a gigantic business from analysing what results appear for a particular set query, especially to Google.

However the new system, with its live updates of queries, means that it will be more difficult for SEO analysts to work out which results will do well from which query, because the results will keep changing as the user types. It will also be harder to examine the results mechanically.

The update also poses a challenge to Microsoft's Bing search engine, which has been very gradually growing its proportion of total search engine traffic - though it has now taken over providing the search results for Yahoo, meaning that it can claim 25% of US search traffic. Bing is struggling to generate profits for Microsoft: analysis of its results suggest it is spending roughly as much money as it is generating.

Danny Sullivan of Searchengineland, who monitors developments at Google and other search engines, commented that the requirement to be signed in "is sending up my alarms, because is this also just part of monitoring more?"

Google's chief executive Eric Schmidt suggested in an interview in August that "As you go from the search box [to the next phase of Google], you really want to go from syntax to semantics, from what you typed to what you meant."

In a blogpost, Mayer said that the capability will be rolled out to more countries and other platforms in the coming months.

Plus TfL's API pains, Faking web use, analyst's RIM cut, Kim Jong Il in games and much more

Here's Google's Doodle for tomorrow. Photo by dullhunk on Flickr. Some rights reserved

A quick burst of 11 links for you to chew over, as picked by the Technology team

O2 Android update bricks HTC Desire >> PC Pro
"O2 has pulled an update to the latest version of Android after users reported it crashed their phones. The update to Android 2.2, dubbed Froyo, was rolled out yesterday to HTC Desires on the network, but almost immediately users reported problems." Argh.

Visualizing How a Link Spreads Through the Twitterverse >> Hubspot
"Using a combination of the Twitter API, the TweetMeme API and the Processing visualization library, I was able to graph the spread of a handful of popular links. In the TweetMaps below the circles represent each user who ReTweeted the link, they're bigger or smaller based on the number of followers they have. People who are following accounts that Tweeted the link before they did have lines drawn to the accounts they're following (and could have "caught" the link from)."
We've linked to Processing previously. The pics are intriguing, though they mostly look like creatures from deep undersea.

Google Bouncy Balls in SVG >> Robin Berjon
This time, in SVG. You getting it yet?

Fake.app makes powerful Web automation easy >> TUAW.com
"Fake, like [Apple's] Automator, offers an Actions library and allows you to create drag-and-drop workflows with Web-specific capabilities. Fill a form, click a button, follow links ... basically, you can automate anything that deals with HTML and DOM elements. You can even inject CSS and JavaScript into pages, which opens doors to extensive security testing, among other things..." Mac-only, but remarkable.

How To Choose The Right Content Management System (CMS) >> Webdesigner Depot
Includes guides to choosing, threee to watch, the best five out there, and one to hate and avoid at all costs. See if you can guess which the one to avoid is.

Nokia's fifth last chance >> Asymco
"The less sensational but more accurate description of Nokia's predicament is that their strength in distribution prevents them from reforming their business model in order to benefit from the disruption that mobile broadband is bringing to mobile telecommunications."

Update on Trackernet Feed >> London DataStore
Trackernet is what enabled the marvellous live Tube trains map by Matthew Somerville; it may take up to 8 weeks for the issues (principally about cost) to be sorted out, it seems.

BlackBerry-Maker RIM's Stock Will Plummet To $36 >> Analyst
"Another Wall Street analyst has given up on BlackBerry-maker Research In Motion (RIMM).
"Adnaan Ahmad of Berenberg already rates RIM a SELL. And today he has slashed his price target from $55 to $36.."

Kim Jong Il Bowls for Murdoch Dollars With Korea Video Games >> Bloomberg
Surreal barely begins to describe it.

Google's Bouncing Balls in HTML5 Canvas >> Rob Hawkes
An HTML5 version (using the -canvas- tag) of the bouncing Google logo. Only works in HTML5/CSS3-capable browsers. Tell us your browser and whether it works...

"Ultimate" Arduino Doorbell – part 1 (Hardware) >> Psychic Origami
Is your doorbell on Twitter?

You can follow Guardian Technology's linkbucket on delicious