3 ms·

jobs was selling what he had available at the moment, which only makes sense. yes, a lot of people were disappointed that he didn't announce a true sdk at the

jobs was selling what he had available at the moment, which only makes sense. yes, a lot of people were disappointed that he didn't announce a true sdk at the time, but i'm pretty sure it was because it wasn't anywhere near ready yet. jobs didn't hint around that true sdk-style apps were coming, because apple never talks about unreleased products, unless absolutely forced to. the introduction of the iphone itself was one of only a very few times where this happened. if apple hadn't preannounced the iphone, the story would have gotten out anyway, due to fcc filings. the oft-repeated refrain that "jobs said web apps were good enough" is mean-spirited and wrong. i suppose it's so often repeated because people felt he was being deceitful or patronizing at wwdc 2007, when web apps were introduced. that's one way to interpret it. i choose a different one: apple is secretive. you can claim it's not the best tactic, but it's what apple does. i for one thing the positives of that policy outweigh the negatives.

jacobolus 18y ago
> jobs was selling what he had available at the moment, which only makes sense.< What's your point? No one in this thread ever suggested otherwise. > the oft-repeated refrain that "jobs said web apps were good enough" is mean-spirited and wrong. i suppose it's so often repeated because people felt he was being deceitful or patronizing at wwdc 2007, < He did say that, and he was being patronizing. Many (most?) informed observers were able to figure out that Apple would probably allow native apps as soon as they were ready, and that the official Apple line was a load of bull. Also, how is it mean spirited? It's neither malicious nor petty to simply call a spade a spade.