iPhone web apps aren't that bad

I have a Treo 650 with Cingular, and I use the $19.99 all you eat data plan. Why on earth would you spend $175 on network access instead of getting this?

@ CHRIS

Thanks for those comments, I totally agree. People are hating just to hate, but people like us give it some time to be broken in and then see where Apple is going with it, we realize how things are done. It is when this method is not followed by Apple, that we get a little upset and ditch their products.

Found out some great info from an AT&T rep, about the iPhone, and their service in general, i like the honesty of NYers.

Downloading the interface with every load? I assumed the iphone would have something like google gears so you could keep web apps client side.

The current crop of Web 2.0 billionaires really haven't made an economically sustainable product that I can tell. What they seem to be doing is build a "company" providing a service for free and flip them to the first sucker company that buys them, even when there was no revenue and crushing expenses. That's not a sustainable business model. I don't think any of the products themselves have actually made a net profit, it's actually sounding like dot bomb 2.0.

I think the people who are complaining about the lack of an API on the iPhone have never done any development using BREW, Symbian, or J2ME.

Those APIs are PITA's to deal with. J2ME being the best.

Yes, you can make apps for those platforms, but try, just try, to get one launched on the carrier's network. The carriers will jerk you around to no end, and if there is a process you will pay for certification testing, and pay through the nose. BREW app certifcation is $1500 per app, per handset, per test. If you fail, you will pay AGAIN.

Apple doesn't have to let you play with their toy. Sorry, but they just don't. Don't like it, go play with your J2ME apps and BREW SDKs.

I think people are missing the forest for the trees. Apple has opened up development for iPhone to anyone who can code a web app. Low-level developers (and that's what you have to be to eke an app out of the aforementioned APIs) don't like these icky webheads moving in their turf, it seems.

As for monetization...I'm sure the Web 2.0 billionaires in the valley are chuckling about how hard it is to make money off the New Web.

I'm also sure that there are people out there who WILL figure it out, and that the lack of a traditional API will be a good thing for Apple and the iPhone. You're forgetting that there are a LOT of crappy apps out there for mobiles. I've written a couple of them myself. I think iPhone will do just fine without a horde of schlocky, poorly written games.

"... crowding the home screen with small little tools that do little things..."

Er...an Extras button. Just like other phones have? See http://curmi.com/blog/2007/06/17/iphone-development-not-so-sweet/

I'm afraid this article really sounds like Apple-fan-boy-ism. As someone else stated, if MS did this, we'd all be saying how crap it was that there was no SDK. Apple may not have had time to give us an SDK, but they held the developer community in contempt by suggesting what they were offering was "modern" and "sweet", rather than just saying "Hey, we're working on an SDK - for now though, you can use web apps until we're ready".

@Dan: App size solves any bandwidth issues that should arise, but equally important and usually forgotten, is latency. Because EDGE does not have very good latency, it'll take a while for a web server to react to your request for a page (or Web App as the case may be). So even though you think your a great developer because you made your app only 2k for the user to download, it'll still take a while thanks to latency.

Dan...

We are talking *consumers here*...ASPs (i think, heheh, 2 out of a 1000) were able to make a bit of coin on vertical apps...but you really aren't taking into account the case for DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS!

(Sorry. I could not resist.)

You know, if Apple was even gonna pay for the network traffic then it would be *something*...

Right now, its about as "Sweet!" a solution as (very foul non-family friendly body region's collected perspiration).

You don't see any MacOS X developers touting this much ballyhooed "Sweet" solution for a reason...and believe me, they are getting sick of being lumped in with the RIAA with respect to (ha!) "outdated business models".

They are pointing out that there IS NO Business model....but they are being dishonest about it it by saying they "can't" write "good" apps.

You certainly can write some not-too-shabby Web 2.0 apps...without sound.

Making money on them, is a whole other discussion, and the only people invited to that party are Apple/ATT/Google at this point; Delicious Generation...or anyone else for that matter need not apply.

Sure Google Gears only works with Firefox, but I wouldn't at all be surprised that the cozy relationship Apple has with Google would result in a Google gears port to Safari. Especially considering the recent release of Safari for Windows.

I still like phonelauncher.com better than iphoneapplication list. Better reviews, better interface, better everything. iphoneapplicationlist is just ugly.