2 ms·
I'd place less emphasis on "apps". Remember, the original iPhone was released with a total of zero third-party apps; all third-party content and functionality w
by tadfisher 14y ago
I'd place less emphasis on "apps". Remember, the original iPhone was released with a total of zero third-party apps; all third-party content and functionality was delivered via the Web.
The disruptive event was the sudden confluence of always-available data, a decent web browser, and an interface friendly enough to make use of it. "Apps" had been around for years on the "smartphones" of yesteryear, be it J2ME, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, etc. They were a clunky mess, however, and you had to pull out a stylus or fuddle around with a tiny joystick to use them. Their browsers just plain sucked.
Webkit on a device that could render full-screen Web pages like candy is what Apple contributed to the cellular arena, and that is what changed the game. Coincidentally, the browser is the main point of what reviewers of the era missed; most of them were lamenting the lack of apps.
- alttab 14y agoI'd agree. Connectivity was the game changer. Functional Internet everywhere? Sign me the fuck up. Native mobile apps in my mind simply bridge the user experience gap that HTML5 is having a hard time filling. It does some crunching too, but most apps that are worth their salt are either games or apps that do some processing before or after connecting to the Internet.
- randomdata 14y agoall third-party content and functionality was delivered via the Web. Or apps installed via jailbreak methods. My recollection of the time was that while the iPhone was certainly an interesting device, it was the third-party apps that made it a "must have" device.