4 ms·

> They're hurting themselves (...) but they're hurting other mobile platforms far more. That's true today because they're the main platform. This might change

by fab13n 17y ago

> They're hurting themselves (...) but they're hurting other mobile platforms far more. That's true today because they're the main platform. This might change if, say, Android becomes much more widespread than iPhoneOS. When this happens, they might concede on things like 3.3.1. Then again, Apple is quite comfortable with having minority share but huge profit margins in a market: I'd guess that 90% of laptops sold over $1000 are Apple, and that their margin is something like 5 times Dell's...

reitzensteinm 17y ago
That's true. I should clarify that I meant in the short term - definitely they'll change their position the minute it benefits them. But right now, it certainly doesn't. If multi platform engines take off, we are a few short years away from a situation where the choice of mobile platforms is like the choice between browsers is now - no lock in, low switching costs - and I think they want to avoid that at all costs.
- fab13n 17y ago
  Once 3G will be reliable and truly unlimited, what would cross-platform apps offer that web app don't anyway? There is already a cross-platform, 100% uncensored dev framework, with excellent distribution channels, and it's called HTML5. I'm not sure there is a niche for a 2nd one, especially if Apple is unhelpful.
  - RyanMcGreal 17y ago
    Native apps still enjoy a pretty hefty UI advantage over web apps. I don't see that changing in the next few years.
    - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
      And it appears Apple won't be the one pushing it forward, despite all their work on webkit. Which is enough for me to jump ship when the time to get a new phone arrives.
  - BerislavLopac 17y ago
    Actually, I would prefer to put it the other way around: Once 3G will be reliable and truly unlimited, what would web apps offer that cross-platform app don't anyway? Give it some thought before answering.
    - masterj 17y ago
      Apple doesn't have to take web apps into consideration when they're considering changing the platform or the API however they see fit. They're committed to upholding open web standards, but have no similar commitment to their own API. HTML standards are slow to evolve by design, and Apple is okay with that, however that is the last thing they want with their own software stack. Apple isn't focused on developing a smart phone operating system. They're focused on redefining what a computer IS, and how we interact with them. That's why they've been so careful about copy+paste, and later multi-tasking. They are taking this as a chance for a clean slate approach to computing and don't want to be hampered (or their customers to be hampered) by slow-moving third party compatibility layers. How much as Window's development hampered by the fear to break legacy apps compatibility moving forward? Apple isn't afraid to make their developers jump through hoops and make changes if they think it will benefit the platform in the end (a la the Intel switch). They'll provide tools to make that as painless as possible when the time comes (e.x. iPhone app compatibility on the iPad, Rosetta) but having another layer in between only slows this process down. Whether you view Apple's actions as that momentous and revolutionary is largely irrelevant. I think THEY do. Not that I'm not upset by this as well, but I'm trying to make sense of it.
      - BerislavLopac 17y ago
        Er, I wasn't talking about Apple, but software development in general. As I see it, there are two elements that define the modern software: end-user experience (not only GUI, but things like local storage, geolocation etc), and communication with the Internet. With low bandwidth, Web apps have all the advantage with the latter and are good enough with the former; with ubiquitous broadband, the latter advantage is meling away, and the former just being "good enough" might not be, well, good enough anymore.
    - 17y ago

by fab13n 17y ago

reitzensteinm 17y ago

That's true. I should clarify that I meant in the short term - definitely they'll change their position the minute it benefits them. But right now, it certainly doesn't. If multi platform engines take off, we are a few short years away from a situation where the choice of mobile platforms is like the choice between browsers is now - no lock in, low switching costs - and I think they want to avoid that at all costs.

fab13n 17y ago
Once 3G will be reliable and truly unlimited, what would cross-platform apps offer that web app don't anyway? There is already a cross-platform, 100% uncensored dev framework, with excellent distribution channels, and it's called HTML5. I'm not sure there is a niche for a 2nd one, especially if Apple is unhelpful.
- RyanMcGreal 17y ago
  Native apps still enjoy a pretty hefty UI advantage over web apps. I don't see that changing in the next few years.
  - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
    And it appears Apple won't be the one pushing it forward, despite all their work on webkit. Which is enough for me to jump ship when the time to get a new phone arrives.
- BerislavLopac 17y ago
  Actually, I would prefer to put it the other way around: Once 3G will be reliable and truly unlimited, what would web apps offer that cross-platform app don't anyway? Give it some thought before answering.
  - masterj 17y ago
    Apple doesn't have to take web apps into consideration when they're considering changing the platform or the API however they see fit. They're committed to upholding open web standards, but have no similar commitment to their own API. HTML standards are slow to evolve by design, and Apple is okay with that, however that is the last thing they want with their own software stack. Apple isn't focused on developing a smart phone operating system. They're focused on redefining what a computer IS, and how we interact with them. That's why they've been so careful about copy+paste, and later multi-tasking. They are taking this as a chance for a clean slate approach to computing and don't want to be hampered (or their customers to be hampered) by slow-moving third party compatibility layers. How much as Window's development hampered by the fear to break legacy apps compatibility moving forward? Apple isn't afraid to make their developers jump through hoops and make changes if they think it will benefit the platform in the end (a la the Intel switch). They'll provide tools to make that as painless as possible when the time comes (e.x. iPhone app compatibility on the iPad, Rosetta) but having another layer in between only slows this process down. Whether you view Apple's actions as that momentous and revolutionary is largely irrelevant. I think THEY do. Not that I'm not upset by this as well, but I'm trying to make sense of it.
    - BerislavLopac 17y ago
      Er, I wasn't talking about Apple, but software development in general. As I see it, there are two elements that define the modern software: end-user experience (not only GUI, but things like local storage, geolocation etc), and communication with the Internet. With low bandwidth, Web apps have all the advantage with the latter and are good enough with the former; with ubiquitous broadband, the latter advantage is meling away, and the former just being "good enough" might not be, well, good enough anymore.
  - 17y ago