Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Hardware, WWDC, Developer, iPhone
The line between web and "real" apps on the iPhone
Rogue Amoeba apparently wanted to jump in today and be the first devs to thank His Steveness for presenting developers with a complete and terrific iPhone SDK this afternoon. Or-- in their sarcastic case-- the lack thereof.Yes, as you can see in the resulting comments, Mac developers aren't real thrilled that so far, the only way to develop for the iPhone will be to brush up on their AJAX, Javascript, and Ruby on Rails. By saying at the keynote that developers would be able to run web-based applications on the iPhone, Jobs opened a rift that's been widening: OS X developers say that they don't want to create web apps-- they'd rather work on "real apps."
Later on in the RA thread, a commenter named Joe gets to the point: web apps are quickly becoming real apps. Even Apple's release of Safari for Windows points to the idea that the ultimate way to be compatible across all systems is to put programs (Gmail, Google Reader, even Twitter) in the browser. Web developers must be thrilled-- they all just became official iPhone programmers today.
There's a big drawback, however, and it's not just that Mac devs who want to write for iPhone will have to blow the dust off of their old Javascript books. It's that the trade-off for compatibility is usually quality. If Apple had released an SDK for iPhone today (or when they do-- just because we didn't see it today doesn't mean it won't come next year), Mac devs say they'd be able to make even better applications-- because that's what they do for "real" hardware.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
joe said 10:10AM on 6-12-2007
The point is that Steve's "iPhone Apps" announcement really was nothing new. We have always known all along that it had a browser and that you could develop a web app for the phone. Did Steve think that the public thought we could only go to approved websites? And the reports are that the phone doesn't even have flash. This was really a slap in the face to the developers. I would read Gruber's writeup on it.
Using Steve's non-SDK, you can't even get out of the Safari UI, and you can't get an icon on the main screen. Everyone thinks this is new or that this is widgets but it's not.
Reply
jh said 10:15AM on 6-12-2007
Will you all please stop pretending like it's a feature?
It's a limitation. Nothing more.
Reply
Wojtek said 10:21AM on 6-12-2007
Oooh, that's really funny. iGoogle doesn't even render properly on Safari for Windows Beta 3 (!!!), while Docs&Spreadsheets doesn't work at all (trying to get into my docs ends up with a cute "Safari is missing important resources and needs to be reinstalled" message.
Now that's a way to encourage developers from both Mac & Windows worlds to "brush up on their AJAX, Javascript, and Ruby on Rails." Way to go, Apple Windows Software Department!!!
Reply
Vincent said 10:42AM on 6-12-2007
I think the point is that the iPhone is marketed at Apple and Windows, and the latter will make up the majority. So why offer an SDK to OSX-developers only, as that is what the iPhone runs? Instead, developers from both sides can develop applications that hopefully also integrate well with their existing desktop-applications. The iPhone will not so much be a money-machine for developers as a marketing-machines to attract more users to their desktop-apps.
Reply
andy said 10:43AM on 6-12-2007
osx is a real OS, not like symbian or windows mobile, apple want to test the water, they don't want to learn about vulnerabilities from 3rd party software bugs / flaws, i think its quite within apples right to take things one step at a time
Reply
Jon said 10:46AM on 6-12-2007
I'm not going to be in the country for the launch of the iPhone. At first I was disappointed but now I realise it was a godsend because it gives me an opportunity to hear people's reactions to it before buying. If I was in the country on the launch day, I would probably fall to the hype and order one on the day of release ;)
I'm not too worried about the lack of an SDK. There's a definite need for one so I'm sure there will be one in the future. It gives Apple a chance to figure out how it's going to work.
Reply
joe said 10:48AM on 6-12-2007
@Vincent:
THESE ARE NOT APPS! This is just Steve saying "load your apps in the browser" which has been known all along. This is like Apple shipping a computer and saying you can only use web applications. If they want it to be closed, let it be closed, but don't BS me and say that I can "develop rich web 2.0" apps when it's just webpages.
Reply
Jacob Varghese said 11:06AM on 6-12-2007
As fun as it is to bitch about how crazy this, the vast majority of iphone users will not care. Think about how you use your current phone. Other than an IM app, I don't think anything else is missing.
Reply
Doctor Hugs said 11:10AM on 6-12-2007
I'm not a developer, so my view of this might be different, but aren't Web apps sort of how things are going these days? I mean, Facebook now has a word processor. Facebook! I understand that developers want to create really cool stuff straight for the iPhone and have their little icon on the main UI but, well, for me at least, I see nothing wrong with limiting it to web-only.
I totally understand that this means there are strong restrictions on the type of app that the iPhone can run. I understand that this undermines developers and I know why many are upset. But the iPhone ALREADY ships with most of the features people want anyway. Would it be cool to add your own customizable stuff? Sure, but I don't know how that would really affect most iPhone users.
With Google Docs sort of leading things, web apps are slowly taking over. Why would I want to download an application to my iPhone when I can just access it online, if service is available? (Inherent irony here is understood, does not need to be pointed out, heh).
Don't get me wrong, I totally understand the outrage at this. But I also think that maybe 80% of the buying community has little to no problem with this "feature." I also think the iPhone will eventually open up, and I'm sure on June 30th it will already be hacked. But I'm also of the mindset that sometimes Apple does things to cover its own self, in order to prevent harmful apps or anything that could mess with the UI. I know that most of the apps developers wanted to make weren't going to do that, but it is possible.
I think everybody needs to remember that the iPhone is a new, ground-up product. It's not going to be perfect right away, for any number of reasons. I'm not getting one at launch until they iron everything out. I'd like to see developers create some really kickass web software that maybe shows the 'Inc the necessity and power that independent developers have. But until then it would be nice if everybody could cool their jets, if just for a little.
Reply
Thomas said 11:15AM on 6-12-2007
I develop AJAX/Web 2.0 sites as a huge hobby (almost job), so this doesn't scare me for being the "iPhone SDK".
What I am afraid of is the lack of options to save data. Will it be possible to store data on the phone? Or will our "applications" only be able to use remote storage on servers, hence requiring data transfer (WiFi or GPRS)?
I certainly do hope we can have some safe area on the iPhone internal memory to save docs, which might then even be transferred to the Mac/PC through iTunes. Then a companion desktop application could work with that synced data.
Maybe have folders like the preferences files now (ext.domain.application), with a separate folder for each "signed" app somehow. Only have to make sure a troyan web-app cannot read/write data of some other app...
Could also be in the same way as widgets can save data now. Widgets are also some kind of Web2.0 code, and even with an icon - so maybe that's the way we will be able to write "real apps" with icons for the iPhone.
Well, guess we can only wait and see... 2.5 more weeks from now and we should know more.
Reply
ap said 12:13PM on 6-12-2007
The google map on iphone is nothing but a webapp.
Reply
roz said 12:14PM on 6-12-2007
on my treo i have a few tiny apps that are critical. one is bart, it lets me look up schedules for bart trains with a lot of detail. its extremely useful and I can use it on a train or in a station if needed, places that at least today often don't have wifi or mobile phone signal.
web apps aside, there is also a place for the persistent offline capable app. I am sure apple will get there at some point. lets hope its soon.
Reply
superjeff said 12:42PM on 6-12-2007
Correct me if I'm wrong, but just because the "applications" will open in Safari, they don't necessarily have to be from the internet, correct? I can open web pages saved to my local computer with Safari. Won't these "applications" in essence be web pages saved on the iPhone. This would give access to the applications when offline.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply
PSM said 12:43PM on 6-12-2007
I commute underground for 3-4 hours a day. If I can't use the apps on my phone without being connected to the internet, it's useless.
Reply
Geniver said 1:09PM on 6-12-2007
The part Steve didn't mention in his Keynote is Leopard SERVER. Apple is hoping that businesses that want to deploy mobile apps on iPhones will use Leopard Server, too.
Reply
silas said 1:31PM on 6-12-2007
Everyone, EVERYONE is missing the point of this. It's not about the developers. You want to make $$ developing apps for a new platform? Do you think Apple owes that to you? Do what you have to do given the markets you're in, but don't claim anyone owes you a windfall.
This is about what a consumer can and can't do with an iPhone. It's got Safari, i.e. 'the real internet,' i.e. the best web support of any mobile phone out there. Any thing that can be done on Safari can be done on an iPhone. What other mobile phone can say that? Windows Mobile? Nokia? This is all about making the iPhone look good compared to other smartphones. (Remember the old refrain: Apple Is A Hardware Company.)
Reply
David said 1:28PM on 6-12-2007
Here's my test of an iPhone type interface in JavaScript:
http://davidcann.com/iphone/
Reply
Tom said 1:34PM on 6-12-2007
"@silas: The best web support of any mobile phone out there."
Ha! It can't even do Flash.
Reply
Mike Schramm said 1:33PM on 6-12-2007
David's little mockup is awesome. That's the thing-- Jobs did release an SDK for developers (a very powerful SDK that is compatible across platforms and can do almost anything), but it just wasn't the one that they wanted.
Reply
Tom said 1:59PM on 6-12-2007
I should clarify: I'm as much a fanboy as you all are. But nobody can seriously believe that a web app on a mobile data connection will compete with a local app for usability and speed, can they?
Take, for example, the app I use 10-15 times a day on my Treo: a notepad app.
Here's how I take a note on the Treo:
1) Press shortcut key on front of device. App loads in less than a second.
2) Use tiny keyboard (to type) or the stylus (to scribble) a note on the screen
3) Press ok.
Here's how the same thing will work as an iPhoneWebApp (TM):
1) Press Safari shortcut on home screen. Wait for Safari to load (should be quick)
2) Navigate to Safari's bookmarks, select the "Notepad" link
3) Wait for page to load. Could take 10 seconds on an average connection.
4) Enter notes via on-screen keyboard (jury's still out on this one)
5) Click save button. Wait a few more seconds for the data to be sent to the server and for confirmation to be sent back.
6) Close Safari.
7) The best part? If you're not using WiFi, throughout this whole process anyone who calls you will get sent to your voicemail since the iPhone can't handle data and voice at the same time.
And, of course, none of this is possible if you aren't connected to the internet. Want to review your notes while you're commuting? Tough. Want to make a note whilst on a flight? No chance.
This is a huge pain. I've come to realise that the iPhone isn't aimed at Mac users - it's aimed at the iPod market. Big difference.
Reply