3 ms·

Gruber is wrong about OpenAppMkt the fight for open is about distribution

6 points by voidfiles 16y ago

tptacek 16y ago
This is a semantic argument that boils down to the question of whether Apple is happy to have a vibrant marketplace of HTML5 applications or whether it sees those applications as a threat to its tightly-controlled app store. If HTML apps are a threat, they are indeed "routing around" an obstacle set up by Apple. But there's no evidence at all that Apple sees HTML applications as a threat; Jobs himself has repeatedly promoted them as a means of delivering cross-platform apps, or apps that aren't appropriate for his app store. Apple as a company promotes its adoption of HTML5 and showcases features in HTML that provide app-like experiences. I just don't see a lot of controversy here.
- voidfiles 16y ago
  That is because you see it as semantic, when it is clearly more then semantic. Apple owns the means of distribution, and get's to determine the rules. Past just owning the means of distribution, they have an almost absolute lock on "mind share". This isn't all Apple's doing, clearly there are market forces at work. HTML5 Apps, all by them selves, aren't what is so awesome about OpenAppMkt. It's that they are trying to circumnavigate the distribution channel. Think, what if every day consumers could grasp the idea of two app stores. Then Apple would perk up, because the other App store could market its self on being more open. I am not saying that this is how it will go down, or even if it's possible, but the only way to figure it out is to try, and OpenAppMkt is doing that.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    Apple explicitly promotes HTML applications. Applications that cost money to use. Jobs promotes them, Apple promotes them, and Apple takes explicit steps to make those applications easier to build. I see what you're saying: that if someone builds an application that provides a market-style umbrella over these applications, Apple might freak out. I concede that it is possible that Apple might freak out. I object strongly to the idea that they probably will freak out. I think it's very improbable that they will freak out, and that there's no evidence other than tea leaves of how they manage their own app store to suggest that they will.
    - voidfiles 16y ago
      I too would be conservative about what they will do, I think it's hard to guess how a company might react. I do think that history provide a guide, when control over the means of anything communication, distribution, or production is threatened the controller usually put's up a fight.
- semanticist 16y ago
  If you want any more evidence to show that Apple are heavily in favour or HTML applications, just look at Dashcode. It's essentially an iPhone webapp IDE, providing a framework to make 'native' feeling apps. People set their level of expectations according to the distribution channel. If you go to some web page, you're not surprised if it doesn't work well or has obnoxious adverts, and everyone knows that the web is full of porn. An App Store experience is expected to be better. People hold Apple responsible for curating the App Store, so it can't be as open as the web. People demanded that curated experience because closed/curated is simpler and easier to work with. Ultimately, I don't see Apple caring how your app is distributed - through their closed platform or the open HTML platform - as long as people keep buying their phones. It's easy to apply FSF-style ideology to Apple's decisions, but ultimately, they're really only interested in selling stuff. (Which means making stuff people want to buy.)
  - voidfiles 16y ago
    My point was that if someone created a distribution channel to rival how good the App Store is, not what we have now. There is not App Store "killer" out there right now, but they only way to get an app store killer is to start making an alternative. If it because a good competitor, then it could put developers in a position where they would need to make a decision. This one, or that one. At that point if you had a store that was more open, then the App Store, I think you could break the control of the App Store. Again, I don't think we have that right now, but you have to start somewhere.

6 points by voidfiles 16y ago

This is a semantic argument that boils down to the question of whether Apple is happy to have a vibrant marketplace of HTML5 applications or whether it sees those applications as a threat to its tightly-controlled app store. If HTML apps are a threat, they are indeed "routing around" an obstacle set up by Apple. But there's no evidence at all that Apple sees HTML applications as a threat; Jobs himself has repeatedly promoted them as a means of delivering cross-platform apps, or apps that aren't appropriate for his app store. Apple as a company promotes its adoption of HTML5 and showcases features in HTML that provide app-like experiences. I just don't see a lot of controversy here.

voidfiles 16y ago
That is because you see it as semantic, when it is clearly more then semantic. Apple owns the means of distribution, and get's to determine the rules. Past just owning the means of distribution, they have an almost absolute lock on "mind share". This isn't all Apple's doing, clearly there are market forces at work. HTML5 Apps, all by them selves, aren't what is so awesome about OpenAppMkt. It's that they are trying to circumnavigate the distribution channel. Think, what if every day consumers could grasp the idea of two app stores. Then Apple would perk up, because the other App store could market its self on being more open. I am not saying that this is how it will go down, or even if it's possible, but the only way to figure it out is to try, and OpenAppMkt is doing that.
- tptacek 16y ago
  Apple explicitly promotes HTML applications. Applications that cost money to use. Jobs promotes them, Apple promotes them, and Apple takes explicit steps to make those applications easier to build. I see what you're saying: that if someone builds an application that provides a market-style umbrella over these applications, Apple might freak out. I concede that it is possible that Apple might freak out. I object strongly to the idea that they probably will freak out. I think it's very improbable that they will freak out, and that there's no evidence other than tea leaves of how they manage their own app store to suggest that they will.
  - voidfiles 16y ago
    I too would be conservative about what they will do, I think it's hard to guess how a company might react. I do think that history provide a guide, when control over the means of anything communication, distribution, or production is threatened the controller usually put's up a fight.
semanticist 16y ago
If you want any more evidence to show that Apple are heavily in favour or HTML applications, just look at Dashcode. It's essentially an iPhone webapp IDE, providing a framework to make 'native' feeling apps. People set their level of expectations according to the distribution channel. If you go to some web page, you're not surprised if it doesn't work well or has obnoxious adverts, and everyone knows that the web is full of porn. An App Store experience is expected to be better. People hold Apple responsible for curating the App Store, so it can't be as open as the web. People demanded that curated experience because closed/curated is simpler and easier to work with. Ultimately, I don't see Apple caring how your app is distributed - through their closed platform or the open HTML platform - as long as people keep buying their phones. It's easy to apply FSF-style ideology to Apple's decisions, but ultimately, they're really only interested in selling stuff. (Which means making stuff people want to buy.)
- voidfiles 16y ago
  My point was that if someone created a distribution channel to rival how good the App Store is, not what we have now. There is not App Store "killer" out there right now, but they only way to get an app store killer is to start making an alternative. If it because a good competitor, then it could put developers in a position where they would need to make a decision. This one, or that one. At that point if you had a store that was more open, then the App Store, I think you could break the control of the App Store. Again, I don't think we have that right now, but you have to start somewhere.