“Perhaps it’s playing well in the mainstream press, but here at WWDC, Apple’s ‘you can write great apps for the iPhone: they’re called ‘web sites’’ – message went over like a lead balloon,” John Gruber writes for Daring Fireball.
Gruber writes, “It’s insulting, because it’s not a way to write iPhone apps, and you can’t bullshit developers. It’s a matter of spin. What Apple should have announced is something like this: “We know that you want to write your own apps for iPhone, and we’d like to see that too. We love the apps you write for the Mac, and we’d love to see what you might be able to come up with for iPhone. We’re thinking about it, and working on ways that we might make that happen, but we don’t have anything to announce today. The good news, though, is that because iPhone has a real Safari web browser, you can write web-based apps that work great on iPhone.”
Gruber writes, “That wasn’t what the developers here at WWDC wanted to hear, but at least it wouldn’t have been insulting.”
Another reason why Apple developed and released Safari for Windows, according to Gruber, “is simply money. Safari is a free download, but it’s already one of Apple’s most profitable software products.”
It’s not widely publicized, but those integrated search bars in web browser toolbars are revenue generators. When you do a Google search from Safari’s toolbar, Google pays Apple a portion of the ad revenue from the resulting page,” Gruber explains. “My somewhat-informed understanding is that Apple is currently generating about $2 million per month from Safari’s Google integration. That’s $25 million per year. If Safari for Windows is even moderately successful, it’s easy to see how that might grow to $100 million per year or more.”
Full article, with more about Leopard, Jobs’ scant list of “top secrets,” that the new Dock that only works visually at the bottom of the screen, and more, here.
Apple went with the web 2.0 option because it does not want to compromise the quality of the iphone user experience.
This is totally understandable.
Imagine the iphone in 2 years time if Apple didnt, the user experience would be as crap as all the other phones out there.
This is the right way for Apple and developers to proceed imho for a co-hesive, sustainable and stable user experience.
re: he web will be the future of software development the day HTML is replaced by something a lot better.
it’s just too limited, there are completely categories of software that just can’t be made in HTML.
i was planning to write a game that uses the iPhone’s accelerometer to move a ball through a labyrinth, that is not be possible with the Web API.
—-
Solution… write the game in flash!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />)
To anybody defending this announcement:
Please tell what it is was really good about the announcement for you! They already announced that a full version of safari was running on the phone, so you already knew you could write web-applications back at their original announcement. They already showed full websites before. People are not bad about that, they are mad that apple tried to pawn web-applications off as real applications.
Stop defending this announcement! It was pure spin intended for the press, and it shouldn’t be tolerated by technology literate people of any form, web-developer or app-developer.
If Google are writing all their apps on Web 2, it can’t be all bad, and arguably it’s the future.
That’s Google’s bread and butter. Some of us live on a different diet. And web apps aren’t the future. And the internet won’t end the paper industry.
You install your hacks in Mac OS X and it leaves a pathway to root through your shoddy coding practices.
You shouldn’t argue with your imagination. It’s too easy. Pick a real opponent and argue with them.
Anyone who sais that AJAX and web 2.0 technologies don’t allow full app development has no idea what he is talking about.
Developers are now only scratching at the surface, most are too lazy to try something really new.
Have a look at picnik.com or the Google apps!
Remember the promise of OpenDoc, write once play anywhere. Developers didn’t like that, sell small apps that do what you want rather than big apps that cost loads of money but most people only use 10% of the features.
Remember Java, write once play anywhere. That got shafted too, mostly because of a developer, ie Microsoft.
Maybe third time around.
This is a way to stop the bad guys getting in, the viruses etc, work to standards that are enforced. Bloated apps leave holes.
iPhone will be memory/storage limited too – imagine what would happen if the iPhone was truly ‘open’ and Microsoft ‘supported’ Apple by developing some software for it!
The point is not whether the phone should or shouldn’t allow applications. It’s that they shouldn’t say that they support applications when they don’t.
Don’t defend Apple treating people like idiots. We know the difference, we know what a browser is and what an app is.
I’m excited about the idea of being able to use the same web apps on Windows, Mac and iPhone. I think people are generally resistant to change. I remember when I first moved to the Mac, OSX was just coming out and you would have thought it was the end of the world reading sites like this. Nothing but negative comments about NEXT and how it was ruining Apple.
Well, here we are again, resisting change whether or not it’s change for the better.
I think Apple will be first out of the gate with iLife and iWork that will work as Web 2.0 apps on all three platforms. Can’t wait.
John Q. Public or even CEO Joe Blow won’t really care about who writes what app in what language (or on what platform) for the iPhone. All that is going to matter is will the darn thing work as advertised. All this discontent is for naught. I’m sure that a majority of the buyers of the phone will more than likely stick with the default application set and not even worry about (or even care about) if he/she can download some pick-your-nose-widget made by developer X.
This is a nascent product, so let Apple have some time to perfect and tweak it before they let any old person with an iPhone SDK make crap that ruins the overall experience of owning an iPhone.
It’s not about being resistant to change, its about being resistant to being mislead.
WEB-APPLICATIONS ARE WONDERFUL. Nobody disagrees.
Being mislead and fed a bunch of BS is not wonderful. Stop changing the topic.
Developers, that title is a laugh these days, like software ‘engineer’. It’s more like technical drawing than engineering. Like technical drawing most of the job is in error checking, not doing the drawing and checking it all afterwards like releasing betas but doing the checking on the job, as the work progresses. And then checking it all afterwards. Some software engineers/developers these days that I know don’t know real coding, it’s all object-oriented. I’d call it writing (as do many others), that’s what it is, a set of instructions within certain parameters.
Most of the basic stuff was done way back, now it’s user interface stuff aka design.
What’s the point of bluetooth and all the connectivity if you can’t use it. Imagine what you could do with a blue-tooth GPS. I can guarantee a website can’t access that!
I agree though, the issue here isn’t apps or no apps. It’s about SPIN
WTF?
Developers needs?!?!?! This is an Excellent Solution! No troublesome code tweaking needed. Just do what you want. Easy+Fast+No Ridiculous Testing Needed+Cheap! SWEET INDEED. Wait a little = 2 weeks and READY! I Love It! I do not have to wait for another 6 months to get the app I need. Study more WebObjects and do what you what ever you LIKE!
MDN Magic Word: Simple
Safari for Windows is not simply for money.
When window user use Safari,
(1) More Web pages will be compatible with SAFARI.
(2) Easy to sync with iPhone
(3) More windows people can taste and realize the superiority of Apple software
(4) Open opportunities for Windows people to create
softwares for iPHONE.
(5)Make easy to switch to Apple, definitely help switching.
WRONG ! The Dock works on either side or the bottom just like Tiger. Jobs even demoed it putting it on the left side at one point in his presentation.
As far as I’m concerned Leopard Rocks! And I for will be there when it is released in October to get my copy.
Petey wrote:
“Apple went with the web 2.0 option because it does not want to compromise the quality of the iphone user experience”
did developpers ruin the UI of the mac ? i don’t think so.
Apple did this for business reasons, because of AT&T, not for the users.
Petey wrote:
“Solution… write the game in flash”
1 the web 2 UI will not have access to the hardware, no accelerometer
2 the flash plugin (and probably any other web plugin are also banned from the iPhone.
Halix wrote:
“Anyone who sais that AJAX and web 2.0 technologies don’t allow full app development has no idea what he is talking about.”
i have been developing software for 30 years, including web 2 apps.
u can’t do photoshop with a web 2 app, or serious games, u don’t get access to the hardware, all u can do is what HTML allows u to do, no client side rotations, no 3D, no voice of video over IP, it’s slow (very very slow), the UI is limited.
google made some great web 2 apps, they reached the limit of what can be done.
none of the iPhone’s built in applications have been written with Web 2.
Can you save a web page onto the iPhone, to use it like an application when you are offline?? If you can do that, then their golden.
What are developers complaining about? Just what can you do with a native app that you can’t do on an AJAX type webpage?
Wow! I haven’t seen this many posts since the $50 iBook fiasco.
My take: Gruber is way off base with his statement: “It’s insulting, because it’s not a way to write iPhone apps, and you can’t bullshit developers. “ I could swear I saw an app demonstrated on stage that worked through the browser. WTF!
So because The Steve doesn’t want to have the iPhone turned into an unstable POS, with JoeBlowHack “developer” having access to the iPhone’s innards, “developers” are miffed? Fuck ’em. (that expletive was for Mr. Daring).
Rock on Steve!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
The safari thing and making money. Isn’t that why Apple is in business? You know, to make money. Hello? Stupid pointless gripe as far as I’m concerned. And I think jobs didn’t count out the fact that developers can’t develop apps on the iPhone. Just right now they want to make sure it’s secure and what does get on the iPhone won’t crash. To me that sounds reasonable that you want your product as reliable as possible.
Leopard is a HUGE step in the right direction with AMAZING capabilities. It’s just that many people are so farking stupid they don’t realize it.
“The new Dock that only works visually at the bottom of the screen.”
The operative word is “visually.”
Look it up.
@ JadisOne
Hey now.Can ya tell me where I can get me one of them there “nose pickin widgets”
MDN Magic Word = old As in…All this whining is getting old
Petey: Right on, bro. Very well-stated.
I agree with a post I read around here over the last few days that suspected that the reason they weren’t truly opening up the phone to developers was that AT&T is afraid that someone will build a VOIP app for it. Makes sense. You’d still need the 2 year agreement to get the phone, but what’s to stop someone from discarding their AT&T contact after that and only using VOIP?
@pr
“The dock only works at the bottom of the screen in Leopard? OUCH”
Gruber meant that it didn’t look good when you put it anywhere but the bottom, not that you can’t.
I usually agree with John Gruber. His blogs are usually very insightful. But in his latest missive, I think John has really missed the point. Writing for the Web is no longer what it used to be. With the advent of programming tools like AJAX, developers who understand how to use Web 2.0 tools have formidable power at their disposal. This isn’t your father’s Internet.
A case in point: the new apple.com update. Say what you will about some aspects of its look and feel, if you have not really delved into its underlying technology and function, as Gruber has apparently failed to do, you will miss the power available in Web 2.0. Play with the interactive scrolling, or the pull-down bars, or the Spotlight-like search. It’s interactive, and requires no screen refresh. That is a fundamental change from Web 1.0. And it is a showcase of what is possible to a programmer who understands the power of AJAX. Likewise, look at Google Maps. Or a host of other amazing new Web 2.0 sites.
As much as I enjoy reading the blogs of John Gruber, he is not a programmer. And that’s the failing of so many blogs. They’re opinions of bystanders like you and me. Gruber might be persuasive in many cases, but he does not have the expertise that a good programmer does, and here, he is speaking out of his posterior rather than his mouth.
I am appalled at the ready-fire-aim assessments in the past 24 hours by people who aren’t at the WWDC, who aren’t programming experts, and who have not seen the other 90+ developments and enhancements to 10.5. I suspect that many of the most significant advances in Leopard are not things that Steve Jobs showed off yesterday. Hardly any mention was given to Leopard being fully 64-bit compatible, to the code base in the Finder being completely rewritten, and many other things that I do not even know about yet.
My advice: blow off what Gruber has to say. Ignore many of the breathless blogs and hastily written, badly researched articles. Step back from your browser and wait a week, a month, even until October. We have yet to clearly understand the significance of what Apple is doing with Leopard and the capabilities available to developers to create fantastic third party applications for the iPhone. And remember too, that AT&T will have a say in all this too, as what needs to be developed for the iPhone has to appease the telco giant as well.
It’s not as simple as a mere blogger might make it seem.
Sorry, John. Love your work. But this time, you got it wrong.