6 ms·

An iPhone App Market That Doesn't Require Jailbreaking... Which Apple Can't Stop

42 points by peter123 16y ago

kingofspain 16y ago
Wasn't this originally going to be the only way to release apps for iPhones? Later they caved in & allowed native. I didn't get an iPhone until a couple of years after all this though so my history may be off somewhat. Point being, if true, this was no 'secret' - it was originally plan A.
- JunkDNA 16y ago
  No, you're exactly right. In fact, when the iPhone was first released, all the pundits and bloggers were practically screaming that it was so unfair that Apple didn't allow developers to write native apps and that HTML web apps were a poor substitute for what you could do natively. They pointed to how Google got to write a custom app for maps, and how it was unfair to competitors who would be locked out. It was like that for the entire first year of the iPhone. Then, once the app store was announced, it's like all the bloggers and pundits suffered coordinated, selective amnesia. The irritating thing about this article is that the tone suggests this is somehow something Apple would be upset about, when in fact, Apple promotes HTML apps as an alternative to the restrictions of the app store. The success of the App Store is 80% linked to the fact that it's a frictionless purchasing environment. I can buy an app from some random person for 99 cents and not have to worry that he/she has my credit card number. Furthermore, you're likely to think twice as you go to purchase a 99 cent fart joke app and you're entering your credit card number into a web form. That feels like you're spending money. But punching your password into iTunes rarely (if ever) feels like spending money. Apple is excellent at separating consumers from their money. Developers of App Store apps get to use "the hand of Jobs" to ply your cash from your wallet. I suspect that if Apple allowed web apps to bill against itunes accounts, you'd see a huge explosion of pay iPhone-optimized web apps that would otherwise go into the App Store. With a little bit of Safari integration, you could allow developers to put little "buy now" buttons on their web apps and it would feel just like an app store purchase. I doubt Apple would ever roll out such a feature, since it sounds like it would be minimal benefit but have a fair number of headaches.
bradleyland 16y ago
It's not exactly like this is a secret. Steve Jobs talked about the "openness" of the web as a platform explicitly at WWDC.
napierzaza 16y ago
People hate the App store regardless of the iPhones HTML app capacity because they want what the App store offers without the compromise that Apple makes them take. They want centralized marketing, distribution, security and payment handling which the HTML option doesn't have. They could build a website selling these apps if they wanted, but that would be work outside of developing, which they don't want to do. Everyone wants to be on the App Store because that's where you go for apps. You don't Google for "html iPad App RSS reader". So no one is going to install your app. With the recent security issues with Android phones (this will happen with Apple apps too, but maybe to a smaller degree) Apple's controls are looking nicer and nicer. Sour grapes. Also, what's with the title "which Apple can't stop". You're thumbing your nose at Apple with a feature they developed and encouraged?
- chc 16y ago
  I was with you until the end, where you start pretending that Apple's guidelines are capable of preventing malware. Take a look at the kind of stuff they reject apps for and tell me this is a process that has anything to do with security. I mean, remember just a few days ago, when a 15-year-old released a tethering app right under Apple's nose? Remember a year ago when everyone was outraged because an iPhone app covertly uploaded your whole address book to the developer's server? This Android app is arguably less of a violation than that one. They only check the visible behavior of your program and whether you're using private API. As long as you don't throw up a dialog that says "DURRR, I'M STEALIN UR INFO NOW MAN," Apple isn't really looking for you.
  - redrobot5050 16y ago
    It wasn't a true "teathering" app. It was just a flashlight app that also opened up a SOCKS proxy within the app. Its very possibly that if the App also had network code for loading ads, say through iAds or AdMob, that an API scanner wouldn't notice anything unusual for a reviewer to feel concerned about. Apple did find an app that exploited an App Store feature that you only need to type in your iTunes password once for a period of 5 minutes -- allowing you to DL multiple apps with minimum hassle. An app used its in-app content purchase to bill buyers for $200 worth on content it purchases without the user's explicit consent. Apple may not be looking out for you in general, but they looking out for their brand, which is tied to consumer experience.
quizbiz 16y ago
Is there a good tutorial to be found about making an HTML5 app?
- peter123 16y ago
  http://html5rocks.com http://html5rocks.com
- hiteck 16y ago
  http://openappmkt.pbworks.com/ http://openappmkt.pbworks.com/
- hiteck 16y ago
  This free book is a good start: http://building-iphone-apps.labs.oreilly.com/ http://building-iphone-apps.labs.oreilly.com/
- statictype 16y ago
  http://sixrevisions.com/web-development/html5-iphone-app/ http://sixrevisions.com/web-development/html5-iphone-app/
WilliamLP 16y ago
> First, it's good to get more people realizing that HTML is already pretty damn good at creating app-style experiences, That would be good if it were true. It's not.
- donohoe 16y ago
  Actually it is. "app-style experience" is the easy part - but there's more examples of bad then good. The failing is when HTML/JS needs to do 'heavy lifting' that native code does better (such as large memory based tasks, 3d rendering for now, animations, heavy math, or hooking into hardware).
  - WilliamLP 16y ago
    If there are many more examples of bad than good, and for JS apps, this is a dramatic understatement, this is a great pragmatic definition of it not being good for apps. For example, I've never played a JS/Canvas game for the sake of it being a good game. Has anyone? I see a lot of frameworks, and a lot of demos to advocate for the platform, but no good games. Why is this? At this point, the novelty of the platform is no longer an excuse. It has been a forum darling for several years now.
    - joneath 16y ago
      Sadly this is true. Canvas is still very much in its infancy. I see two main issues with Canvas for games right now. First, canvas really needs to be hardware accelerated (someone already does this, Microsoft?). Having a few objects move around should barely take any CPU but with Canvas today it can be anywhere from 10%-20%. Second, their needs to be game engines/abstractions on top of Canvas. Most developers don't want to have to write there own render/clear loop with all the utility functions to do movement, render shapes, texture elements, and keep object state. I know their are a few out there now but they are no where near the quality needed. This second step will not happen until my first point (HW acceleration) is in place.
      - gizmomagico 16y ago
joe-mccann 16y ago
Apple could "stop" this very easily. Don't allow access to native hardware APIs through the browser via JavaScript; thus, making "webapps" inferior to "native apps" based on capabilities of interacting with the hardware. Phonegap, FTW.
voidfiles 16y ago
It's about control of distribution. Apple clearly is cool with HTML5, that isn't new. Everyone is also right that Apple clearly dominates distribution, but it's not an absolute lock. The only way you can ever wrestle control away from Apple is if someone creates an alternative, which is what OpenAppMkt has started. Just because it's not huge now, or it's not dominate now, doesn't mean that it can't become a player in the future.
timmorgan 16y ago
The OpenAppMkt app has a nice interface for being HTML only -- wonder how they got the fixed position buttons on the bottom while allowing scrolling in the body of the page? As far as I knew, that was impossible due to Safari Mobile on the iPhone not supporting fixed position elements.
- voidfiles 16y ago
  Most likely they are using JS to secure the position, and yes you are right Mobile Safari doesn't support position:fixed;
lecha 16y ago
Good start, OpenAppMkt. Keep it up. Without going into flamewar about native vs. HTML5, HTML5 apps have their pros and cons. But they still need a commercial distribution channel. People should be able to buy HTML5 apps as simply as they buy native apps.
blocke 16y ago
So we're showing off the power of HTML5 by locking it to iPhone only... Nice.
powrtoch 16y ago
I've often wondered just how many people have ever used the "add to home screen" button, or even really noticed it. I assumed for a long time that the "+" icon just added a bookmark to mobile Safari. Note that HN is clearly not a good sample group to poll this.

42 points by peter123 16y ago

Wasn't this originally going to be the only way to release apps for iPhones? Later they caved in & allowed native. I didn't get an iPhone until a couple of years after all this though so my history may be off somewhat. Point being, if true, this was no 'secret' - it was originally plan A.

JunkDNA 16y ago
No, you're exactly right. In fact, when the iPhone was first released, all the pundits and bloggers were practically screaming that it was so unfair that Apple didn't allow developers to write native apps and that HTML web apps were a poor substitute for what you could do natively. They pointed to how Google got to write a custom app for maps, and how it was unfair to competitors who would be locked out. It was like that for the entire first year of the iPhone. Then, once the app store was announced, it's like all the bloggers and pundits suffered coordinated, selective amnesia. The irritating thing about this article is that the tone suggests this is somehow something Apple would be upset about, when in fact, Apple promotes HTML apps as an alternative to the restrictions of the app store. The success of the App Store is 80% linked to the fact that it's a frictionless purchasing environment. I can buy an app from some random person for 99 cents and not have to worry that he/she has my credit card number. Furthermore, you're likely to think twice as you go to purchase a 99 cent fart joke app and you're entering your credit card number into a web form. That feels like you're spending money. But punching your password into iTunes rarely (if ever) feels like spending money. Apple is excellent at separating consumers from their money. Developers of App Store apps get to use "the hand of Jobs" to ply your cash from your wallet. I suspect that if Apple allowed web apps to bill against itunes accounts, you'd see a huge explosion of pay iPhone-optimized web apps that would otherwise go into the App Store. With a little bit of Safari integration, you could allow developers to put little "buy now" buttons on their web apps and it would feel just like an app store purchase. I doubt Apple would ever roll out such a feature, since it sounds like it would be minimal benefit but have a fair number of headaches.

bradleyland 16y ago

It's not exactly like this is a secret. Steve Jobs talked about the "openness" of the web as a platform explicitly at WWDC.

napierzaza 16y ago

People hate the App store regardless of the iPhones HTML app capacity because they want what the App store offers without the compromise that Apple makes them take. They want centralized marketing, distribution, security and payment handling which the HTML option doesn't have. They could build a website selling these apps if they wanted, but that would be work outside of developing, which they don't want to do. Everyone wants to be on the App Store because that's where you go for apps. You don't Google for "html iPad App RSS reader". So no one is going to install your app. With the recent security issues with Android phones (this will happen with Apple apps too, but maybe to a smaller degree) Apple's controls are looking nicer and nicer. Sour grapes. Also, what's with the title "which Apple can't stop". You're thumbing your nose at Apple with a feature they developed and encouraged?

chc 16y ago
I was with you until the end, where you start pretending that Apple's guidelines are capable of preventing malware. Take a look at the kind of stuff they reject apps for and tell me this is a process that has anything to do with security. I mean, remember just a few days ago, when a 15-year-old released a tethering app right under Apple's nose? Remember a year ago when everyone was outraged because an iPhone app covertly uploaded your whole address book to the developer's server? This Android app is arguably less of a violation than that one. They only check the visible behavior of your program and whether you're using private API. As long as you don't throw up a dialog that says "DURRR, I'M STEALIN UR INFO NOW MAN," Apple isn't really looking for you.
- redrobot5050 16y ago
  It wasn't a true "teathering" app. It was just a flashlight app that also opened up a SOCKS proxy within the app. Its very possibly that if the App also had network code for loading ads, say through iAds or AdMob, that an API scanner wouldn't notice anything unusual for a reviewer to feel concerned about. Apple did find an app that exploited an App Store feature that you only need to type in your iTunes password once for a period of 5 minutes -- allowing you to DL multiple apps with minimum hassle. An app used its in-app content purchase to bill buyers for $200 worth on content it purchases without the user's explicit consent. Apple may not be looking out for you in general, but they looking out for their brand, which is tied to consumer experience.

quizbiz 16y ago

Is there a good tutorial to be found about making an HTML5 app?

peter123 16y ago
http://html5rocks.com http://html5rocks.com
hiteck 16y ago
http://openappmkt.pbworks.com/ http://openappmkt.pbworks.com/
hiteck 16y ago
This free book is a good start: http://building-iphone-apps.labs.oreilly.com/ http://building-iphone-apps.labs.oreilly.com/
statictype 16y ago
http://sixrevisions.com/web-development/html5-iphone-app/ http://sixrevisions.com/web-development/html5-iphone-app/

WilliamLP 16y ago

> First, it's good to get more people realizing that HTML is already pretty damn good at creating app-style experiences, That would be good if it were true. It's not.

donohoe 16y ago
Actually it is. "app-style experience" is the easy part - but there's more examples of bad then good. The failing is when HTML/JS needs to do 'heavy lifting' that native code does better (such as large memory based tasks, 3d rendering for now, animations, heavy math, or hooking into hardware).
- WilliamLP 16y ago
  If there are many more examples of bad than good, and for JS apps, this is a dramatic understatement, this is a great pragmatic definition of it not being good for apps. For example, I've never played a JS/Canvas game for the sake of it being a good game. Has anyone? I see a lot of frameworks, and a lot of demos to advocate for the platform, but no good games. Why is this? At this point, the novelty of the platform is no longer an excuse. It has been a forum darling for several years now.
  - joneath 16y ago
    Sadly this is true. Canvas is still very much in its infancy. I see two main issues with Canvas for games right now. First, canvas really needs to be hardware accelerated (someone already does this, Microsoft?). Having a few objects move around should barely take any CPU but with Canvas today it can be anywhere from 10%-20%. Second, their needs to be game engines/abstractions on top of Canvas. Most developers don't want to have to write there own render/clear loop with all the utility functions to do movement, render shapes, texture elements, and keep object state. I know their are a few out there now but they are no where near the quality needed. This second step will not happen until my first point (HW acceleration) is in place.
    - gizmomagico 16y ago

joe-mccann 16y ago

Apple could "stop" this very easily. Don't allow access to native hardware APIs through the browser via JavaScript; thus, making "webapps" inferior to "native apps" based on capabilities of interacting with the hardware. Phonegap, FTW.

voidfiles 16y ago

It's about control of distribution. Apple clearly is cool with HTML5, that isn't new. Everyone is also right that Apple clearly dominates distribution, but it's not an absolute lock. The only way you can ever wrestle control away from Apple is if someone creates an alternative, which is what OpenAppMkt has started. Just because it's not huge now, or it's not dominate now, doesn't mean that it can't become a player in the future.

timmorgan 16y ago

The OpenAppMkt app has a nice interface for being HTML only -- wonder how they got the fixed position buttons on the bottom while allowing scrolling in the body of the page? As far as I knew, that was impossible due to Safari Mobile on the iPhone not supporting fixed position elements.

voidfiles 16y ago
Most likely they are using JS to secure the position, and yes you are right Mobile Safari doesn't support position:fixed;

lecha 16y ago

Good start, OpenAppMkt. Keep it up. Without going into flamewar about native vs. HTML5, HTML5 apps have their pros and cons. But they still need a commercial distribution channel. People should be able to buy HTML5 apps as simply as they buy native apps.

blocke 16y ago

So we're showing off the power of HTML5 by locking it to iPhone only... Nice.

powrtoch 16y ago

I've often wondered just how many people have ever used the "add to home screen" button, or even really noticed it. I assumed for a long time that the "+" icon just added a bookmark to mobile Safari. Note that HN is clearly not a good sample group to poll this.