4 ms·

Why can't system apps go in the app store? They could be installed by default, but able to be uninstalled and then reinstalled from the app store. Think Apple

by caryme 16y ago

Why can't system apps go in the app store? They could be installed by default, but able to be uninstalled and then reinstalled from the app store. Think Apple's Remote app. What Gruber says makes sense for apps like Mail and Safari, but Stocks and Weather feel so grandfathered in.

jay_kyburz 16y ago
No, I agree, even Mail and Safari could go into the app store.
- alanh 16y ago
  Safari really couldn't exist in the app store, considering that many third-party apps have links that open a page in Safari and thus it needs to be always installed. I take it this is sarcasm?
  - notauser 16y ago
    They don't have links that open a page in Safari. They have http:// http:// URIs, which happens to invoke Safari as the registered handler on every iPhone. There's no reason (other than Apple policy) why that URI handler couldn't be registered as Opera or Firefox. That's how it works on other platforms. Even on the iPhone developers can register most URIs (e.g. myuri://) to start up their own apps as long as it isn't a protected one, unless they changed that recently.
  - jonknee 16y ago
    I have third party apps on my laptop that have links which open a page in a browser. Doesn't mean I can't delete Safari or get updates to it outside of system updates. If I delete my browser and then can't get links to open it sounds like I'd need to install a browser. There are reasons why you wouldn't want a browser though, which at the moment you can't do.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
megablast 16y ago
I guess they are different to normal sandboxed apps downloaded from the app store, since they have higher access to the iPhone (reading emails, controlling settings), and can multitask (email, ipod). They may in fact not be apps at all, but just part of the system, with access via the icons. They are just made to look like apps. They may have hooks that mean they can never be deleted (like new mail), but only hidden, since there code is needed.
brown9-2 16y ago
Seems like the obvious solution. Along with being able to distribute updates to these apps independent of complete OS updates.
- mikecarlucci 16y ago
  We may be able to draw some insight from the Apple Store app as well. Like iBooks it was shipped separately. Like the App Store and iTunes apps the Apple Store app lets you make purchases from Apple. Is it simpler to have all the "purchasing apps" together, bundled with the iPhone/iPad or to strip away more system apps? The iPad didn't ship with calculator, stocks etc. The answer might go right back to Gruber's point: the iPad itself shipped out of the OS release cycle while the Apple Store app shipped just before the new OS in part to aid with the purchasing of iPhone4. Maybe both of these will be included in iOS5 next year.
Timothee 16y ago
The thing is that some SDK functions are dependent on those apps and thus need to exist somehow. Because a third-party app can use the SDK to send an email from inside the app, Mail needs to be around. Same thing with Maps, Safari, Photos… (and of course, the App Store) On the other hand, you're correct, Stocks, Weather, Calculator, etc. are completely independent, thus could be deleted without causing trouble, but I wouldn't be surprised if the decision went down to the simplest one (at least for now): no default app gets deleted, period. If you don't like having the extra system apps, (I don't for some of them), to quote Steve Jobs on an unrelated topic: "not that big of a deal".
- kenjackson 16y ago
  You can have the API's without having the apps. This is what MS had to do with IE, for example.
  - Timothee 16y ago
    Of course they could be separated. What I'm saying is that considering that some of the apps are not completely sandboxed, the simplest decision to make is to just keep all of them. Plus, it helps Apple's branding: as long as they're not forced into separating the apps and the APIs, like Microsoft was, they won't.
- commandar 16y ago
  This demonstrates exactly why Gruber completely misses the point every time he tries to nitpick the Android team's statements about not using private APIs. While Gruber wants to make it about hollow point scoring, what the Android guys are getting at is that they've made a conscious design decision to have a clear distinction between what is system level and what is application level specifically to avoid getting stuck in this sort of situation. Yes, your Android phone has apps you probably can't uninstall, but that's a distribution decision rather than something that was forced on them by technical limitation.
  - sandGorgon 16y ago
tjogin 16y ago
I think apps from the app store need to be individually signed for each user, which wouldn't be possible on a generic install. At least, not presently.

by caryme 16y ago

jay_kyburz 16y ago

No, I agree, even Mail and Safari could go into the app store.

alanh 16y ago
Safari really couldn't exist in the app store, considering that many third-party apps have links that open a page in Safari and thus it needs to be always installed. I take it this is sarcasm?
- notauser 16y ago
  They don't have links that open a page in Safari. They have http:// http:// URIs, which happens to invoke Safari as the registered handler on every iPhone. There's no reason (other than Apple policy) why that URI handler couldn't be registered as Opera or Firefox. That's how it works on other platforms. Even on the iPhone developers can register most URIs (e.g. myuri://) to start up their own apps as long as it isn't a protected one, unless they changed that recently.
- jonknee 16y ago
  I have third party apps on my laptop that have links which open a page in a browser. Doesn't mean I can't delete Safari or get updates to it outside of system updates. If I delete my browser and then can't get links to open it sounds like I'd need to install a browser. There are reasons why you wouldn't want a browser though, which at the moment you can't do.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

megablast 16y ago

I guess they are different to normal sandboxed apps downloaded from the app store, since they have higher access to the iPhone (reading emails, controlling settings), and can multitask (email, ipod). They may in fact not be apps at all, but just part of the system, with access via the icons. They are just made to look like apps. They may have hooks that mean they can never be deleted (like new mail), but only hidden, since there code is needed.

brown9-2 16y ago

Seems like the obvious solution. Along with being able to distribute updates to these apps independent of complete OS updates.

mikecarlucci 16y ago
We may be able to draw some insight from the Apple Store app as well. Like iBooks it was shipped separately. Like the App Store and iTunes apps the Apple Store app lets you make purchases from Apple. Is it simpler to have all the "purchasing apps" together, bundled with the iPhone/iPad or to strip away more system apps? The iPad didn't ship with calculator, stocks etc. The answer might go right back to Gruber's point: the iPad itself shipped out of the OS release cycle while the Apple Store app shipped just before the new OS in part to aid with the purchasing of iPhone4. Maybe both of these will be included in iOS5 next year.

Timothee 16y ago

The thing is that some SDK functions are dependent on those apps and thus need to exist somehow. Because a third-party app can use the SDK to send an email from inside the app, Mail needs to be around. Same thing with Maps, Safari, Photos… (and of course, the App Store) On the other hand, you're correct, Stocks, Weather, Calculator, etc. are completely independent, thus could be deleted without causing trouble, but I wouldn't be surprised if the decision went down to the simplest one (at least for now): no default app gets deleted, period. If you don't like having the extra system apps, (I don't for some of them), to quote Steve Jobs on an unrelated topic: "not that big of a deal".

kenjackson 16y ago
You can have the API's without having the apps. This is what MS had to do with IE, for example.
- Timothee 16y ago
  Of course they could be separated. What I'm saying is that considering that some of the apps are not completely sandboxed, the simplest decision to make is to just keep all of them. Plus, it helps Apple's branding: as long as they're not forced into separating the apps and the APIs, like Microsoft was, they won't.
commandar 16y ago
This demonstrates exactly why Gruber completely misses the point every time he tries to nitpick the Android team's statements about not using private APIs. While Gruber wants to make it about hollow point scoring, what the Android guys are getting at is that they've made a conscious design decision to have a clear distinction between what is system level and what is application level specifically to avoid getting stuck in this sort of situation. Yes, your Android phone has apps you probably can't uninstall, but that's a distribution decision rather than something that was forced on them by technical limitation.
- sandGorgon 16y ago

tjogin 16y ago

I think apps from the app store need to be individually signed for each user, which wouldn't be possible on a generic install. At least, not presently.