6 ms·

While he basically raises some valid points, he ignores two critical ones: 1) With the appstore being the one authority to get apps on your iPhone, you will au

by ulf 17y ago

While he basically raises some valid points, he ignores two critical ones: 1) With the appstore being the one authority to get apps on your iPhone, you will automatically get much less traction using the web 2) The appstore makes it VERY easy for the devs to actually get paid. If you launch your app web-only, you have to incorporate the whole payment process yourself, which sucks. Catch 22...

edd 17y ago
Your first point is so valid. Having created a webapp for the iPhone myself there really are few places I can go to put my webapp on a stage that anyone cares about. If someone knows of any I honestly would love to know where they are.
- patio11 17y ago
  Organic SEO. (Lots of work. Requires savvy. Not guaranteed. Stupendous ROI if you do it right.)
  - jimboyoungblood 17y ago
    Example(s)?
    - qeorge 17y ago
      Its hard to give examples of successful SEO, because you don't want extra competition in your niche. As a result, all we (SEOs) can offer for free is general advice on how to do it yourself. That said, I've been wanting to write a free guide to SEO aimed at HN-like companies, because I think its important. However, the response from HackerNews to anything involving SEO is so harsh, I've felt it would be a waste of my time. If that's not the case, please let me know.
    - patio11 17y ago
      I get about 60~70% of my new users from organic SEO. (I have not run that calculation in a while -- it may be higher now. It was certainly a lot higher in October.) Almost every successful startup you've heard of which publishes lots of content has an SEO strategy. Slideshare, Scribd (good golly were they aggressive with it -- good thing they got big before they got smacked), Yelp, etc etc.
      - jimboyoungblood 17y ago
        That applies to standalone websites, not webapps-as-an-appstore-alternative, which is what (I thought) the discussion was about. As a distribution outlet, nothing (yet) can compete with the app store.
- microkid 17y ago
  Why not create an iPhone app, which is simply a WebKit view dedicated to your web app? The client see's it as a "iPhone app" you can host/sell it in the store, but it's really just a web app. (Maybe there's a restriction on this, but I can't see why there would be...)
  - st3fan 17y ago
    Same restrictions apply: the web view has a limited set of functionality and there is no way to communicate between the native cocoa part of the app and the javascript part running in the web view.
    - Ionic_Walrus 17y ago
      simply untrue - its easy to communicate between javascript and native cocoa code. Take a look at the UIWebView and UIWebViewDelegate documentations here - http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebView_Class/Reference/Reference.html http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi... and here http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebViewDelegate_Protocol/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/occ/intf/UIWebViewDelegate http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi...
  - holdenk 17y ago
    Its my understanding that Apple would like require an "explicit" rating, since you could change your web page to have pictures of an "inappropriate" nature. So this doesn't solve the problem.
- bumblebird 17y ago
  This is the problem though. The app store is like "American Idol". Singers see American Idol etc as a quick route to fame. Then they're "famous" for 30 minutes, then not. It's far better to build up a real sustainable following yourself based on real merits. The app store is full of gimicky one time apps people will use once to show their friends, then never use again :/
rodyancy 17y ago
And, the payment system you end up incorporating will not be as dead simple to use as iTunes. As bad as Apple is at vetting and distributing software (when compared to the web they are bad a distributing software, at least in terms of speed), they are terrific, although expensive, payment processes. The fact that every iPhone user necessarily has an iTunes account, and they are only one touch and a password away from paying you for your software, can't be overstated.
mvaerle 17y ago
I don't know if this is already done. But the second point really begs for an entrepreneur to solve this. A simple model for payment for web apps, you could support one off sales, subscriptions models etc. Make an API for developers and handle all the credit-card processing stuff.
- tiffani 17y ago
  See Spreedly, CheddarGetter, or Recurly. All good for subscription billing at least. http://www.spreedly.com http://www.spreedly.com http://www.cheddargetter.com http://www.cheddargetter.com http://www.recurly.com http://www.recurly.com
SamAtt 17y ago
You left out one important point that he mentions but doesn't give enough credit to... 3) There's still a lot of features on the iPhone that you can only access through native apps. He claims most of the apps he has could be web apps. But I just opened my iPhone to the Top 25 paid apps and 7 out of the top 10 could only exist as native apps (and the other three are debatable but in theory you could write them in Javascript) Here's the list... Voices: Requires access to the mic JellyCar: Requires native app for soundtrack (which is actually a big deal in the game) RedLaser: Requires access to the camera Call of Duty: Graphics require a native app All in One Gamebox: Graphics require a native app Alarm Clock Pro: Has to be able to play music library Metal Gear: Graphics require a native app
- mattmaroon 17y ago
  All sufficiently popular platforms trend towards games. Graphics alone makes the app store a necessity.
  - dgallagher 17y ago
    When carrier bandwidth allows for it in ~5 or more years, streaming live content to cell phones might become an option (3D games over OnLive, etc). But it's likely going to be a while before carriers can support this, given the need for low latency and high-bandwidth for many games to provide a good end-user experience. Streaming live video en-masses would likely exist* far before streaming games, given you can buffer video to compensate for latency. Games couldn't be easily buffered as they require instant feedback between button-presses and what's seen on the screen. *Streaming video does indeed exist for cell phones, but not on a mass-scale, at least in the United States.
    - dangrossman 17y ago
      Unlimited live streaming television was one of the selling points of the Samsung Instinct from Sprint in the US. Six months later they cut back the free channel lineup so there's nothing interesting to watch.
  - 17y ago
JunkDNA 17y ago
Bingo. The big attraction is that developers can make a silly puzzle game that would have to be free on the web, but they can charge 99 cents for it in the app store. Plus, billing and credit card processing is just done for you. It makes me wonder if there is an opportunity for a startup to provide a web app store. Would be hard to pull off, and would likely really irritate Apple. But it might be possible.
ubernostrum 17y ago
Counterpoint: Apple releases a highly-portable computing platform (iPhone) and initially says "if you want to develop for it, all you have to do is write web applications". Developers rage against the irrational locking down of the system. Google releases a highly-portable computing platform (Chrome OS) and initially says "if you want to develop for it, all you have to do is write web applications". Developers fawn over it and talk about the simplicity and openness of the system. In other words: if writing a web app is sufficiently bad to not be worth the time on iPhone, why is it apparently generally held that it'll be sufficiently good to be worth the time on Chrome OS?
- blasdel 17y ago
  1) ChromeOS has Google's NaCL baked in -- you can still build native x86 or ARM code to blit to a framebuffer, just with a browser as the window decoration. 2) Your webapp for ChromeOS does not need to be specialized -- you don't have to account for fat-fingered multitouch on a small fixed screen.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
lisper 17y ago
3) An appstore app will (or at least could) continue to work even when I don't have network connectivity. A Web app won't.
- buckwilson 17y ago
  Yep. And I don't have to bear the time cost of the interface downloading and rendering. As a user and not a developer I will take a native app over a web app any day. But giving this article any credence is giving it too much credit. It's shock-blogging and nothing more.
- PanMan 17y ago
  That's just not true. In the latest iPhone OS you can have a webapp run offline...
  - wvenable 17y ago
    Any reasonably interesting web app is going to do it's "work" on the server. A web app can run it's UI in offline mode but you've scooped it out's brains.
    - ynniv 17y ago
      Either you meant "it's data", or you're doing it wrong. http://sproutcore.com http://sproutcore.com http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-anderson-couchdb-relaxing-offline.html http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-anderson-couchd...
      - wvenable 17y ago
        Wow, you can store data and retrieve it. Why do we need web browsers at all -- Microsoft released Access decades ago!
        ynniv 17y ago
        Impressively worthless comment. If MS Access apps were free to develop and worked on any platform in useful sandboxes, your sarcasm would be warranted. Instead you make yourself look like as idiot, suggesting that the Web is popular because people didn't know about Access.
GrandMasterBirt 17y ago
Maybe its a rephrase but: Currently the App Store is a benevolent dictator. I don't care how much lipstick they put on the pig, I want free speach. I don't care if that means 10% of apps will have a flag "may be spyware or inappropriate" but I want those apps distributed! EVEN if those apps help violate apple's own license terms. I want the courts to decide who takes shit down, not apple. Apple is a company whereas the courts are government.

by ulf 17y ago

edd 17y ago

Your first point is so valid. Having created a webapp for the iPhone myself there really are few places I can go to put my webapp on a stage that anyone cares about. If someone knows of any I honestly would love to know where they are.

patio11 17y ago
Organic SEO. (Lots of work. Requires savvy. Not guaranteed. Stupendous ROI if you do it right.)
- jimboyoungblood 17y ago
  Example(s)?
  - qeorge 17y ago
    Its hard to give examples of successful SEO, because you don't want extra competition in your niche. As a result, all we (SEOs) can offer for free is general advice on how to do it yourself. That said, I've been wanting to write a free guide to SEO aimed at HN-like companies, because I think its important. However, the response from HackerNews to anything involving SEO is so harsh, I've felt it would be a waste of my time. If that's not the case, please let me know.
  - patio11 17y ago
    I get about 60~70% of my new users from organic SEO. (I have not run that calculation in a while -- it may be higher now. It was certainly a lot higher in October.) Almost every successful startup you've heard of which publishes lots of content has an SEO strategy. Slideshare, Scribd (good golly were they aggressive with it -- good thing they got big before they got smacked), Yelp, etc etc.
    - jimboyoungblood 17y ago
      That applies to standalone websites, not webapps-as-an-appstore-alternative, which is what (I thought) the discussion was about. As a distribution outlet, nothing (yet) can compete with the app store.
microkid 17y ago
Why not create an iPhone app, which is simply a WebKit view dedicated to your web app? The client see's it as a "iPhone app" you can host/sell it in the store, but it's really just a web app. (Maybe there's a restriction on this, but I can't see why there would be...)
- st3fan 17y ago
  Same restrictions apply: the web view has a limited set of functionality and there is no way to communicate between the native cocoa part of the app and the javascript part running in the web view.
  - Ionic_Walrus 17y ago
    simply untrue - its easy to communicate between javascript and native cocoa code. Take a look at the UIWebView and UIWebViewDelegate documentations here - http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebView_Class/Reference/Reference.html http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi... and here http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebViewDelegate_Protocol/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/occ/intf/UIWebViewDelegate http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi...
- holdenk 17y ago
  Its my understanding that Apple would like require an "explicit" rating, since you could change your web page to have pictures of an "inappropriate" nature. So this doesn't solve the problem.
bumblebird 17y ago
This is the problem though. The app store is like "American Idol". Singers see American Idol etc as a quick route to fame. Then they're "famous" for 30 minutes, then not. It's far better to build up a real sustainable following yourself based on real merits. The app store is full of gimicky one time apps people will use once to show their friends, then never use again :/

rodyancy 17y ago

And, the payment system you end up incorporating will not be as dead simple to use as iTunes. As bad as Apple is at vetting and distributing software (when compared to the web they are bad a distributing software, at least in terms of speed), they are terrific, although expensive, payment processes. The fact that every iPhone user necessarily has an iTunes account, and they are only one touch and a password away from paying you for your software, can't be overstated.

mvaerle 17y ago

I don't know if this is already done. But the second point really begs for an entrepreneur to solve this. A simple model for payment for web apps, you could support one off sales, subscriptions models etc. Make an API for developers and handle all the credit-card processing stuff.

tiffani 17y ago
See Spreedly, CheddarGetter, or Recurly. All good for subscription billing at least. http://www.spreedly.com http://www.spreedly.com http://www.cheddargetter.com http://www.cheddargetter.com http://www.recurly.com http://www.recurly.com

SamAtt 17y ago

You left out one important point that he mentions but doesn't give enough credit to... 3) There's still a lot of features on the iPhone that you can only access through native apps. He claims most of the apps he has could be web apps. But I just opened my iPhone to the Top 25 paid apps and 7 out of the top 10 could only exist as native apps (and the other three are debatable but in theory you could write them in Javascript) Here's the list... Voices: Requires access to the mic JellyCar: Requires native app for soundtrack (which is actually a big deal in the game) RedLaser: Requires access to the camera Call of Duty: Graphics require a native app All in One Gamebox: Graphics require a native app Alarm Clock Pro: Has to be able to play music library Metal Gear: Graphics require a native app

mattmaroon 17y ago
All sufficiently popular platforms trend towards games. Graphics alone makes the app store a necessity.
- dgallagher 17y ago
  When carrier bandwidth allows for it in ~5 or more years, streaming live content to cell phones might become an option (3D games over OnLive, etc). But it's likely going to be a while before carriers can support this, given the need for low latency and high-bandwidth for many games to provide a good end-user experience. Streaming live video en-masses would likely exist* far before streaming games, given you can buffer video to compensate for latency. Games couldn't be easily buffered as they require instant feedback between button-presses and what's seen on the screen. *Streaming video does indeed exist for cell phones, but not on a mass-scale, at least in the United States.
  - dangrossman 17y ago
    Unlimited live streaming television was one of the selling points of the Samsung Instinct from Sprint in the US. Six months later they cut back the free channel lineup so there's nothing interesting to watch.
- 17y ago

JunkDNA 17y ago

Bingo. The big attraction is that developers can make a silly puzzle game that would have to be free on the web, but they can charge 99 cents for it in the app store. Plus, billing and credit card processing is just done for you. It makes me wonder if there is an opportunity for a startup to provide a web app store. Would be hard to pull off, and would likely really irritate Apple. But it might be possible.

ubernostrum 17y ago

Counterpoint: Apple releases a highly-portable computing platform (iPhone) and initially says "if you want to develop for it, all you have to do is write web applications". Developers rage against the irrational locking down of the system. Google releases a highly-portable computing platform (Chrome OS) and initially says "if you want to develop for it, all you have to do is write web applications". Developers fawn over it and talk about the simplicity and openness of the system. In other words: if writing a web app is sufficiently bad to not be worth the time on iPhone, why is it apparently generally held that it'll be sufficiently good to be worth the time on Chrome OS?

blasdel 17y ago
1) ChromeOS has Google's NaCL baked in -- you can still build native x86 or ARM code to blit to a framebuffer, just with a browser as the window decoration. 2) Your webapp for ChromeOS does not need to be specialized -- you don't have to account for fat-fingered multitouch on a small fixed screen.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

lisper 17y ago

3) An appstore app will (or at least could) continue to work even when I don't have network connectivity. A Web app won't.

buckwilson 17y ago
Yep. And I don't have to bear the time cost of the interface downloading and rendering. As a user and not a developer I will take a native app over a web app any day. But giving this article any credence is giving it too much credit. It's shock-blogging and nothing more.
PanMan 17y ago
That's just not true. In the latest iPhone OS you can have a webapp run offline...
- wvenable 17y ago
  Any reasonably interesting web app is going to do it's "work" on the server. A web app can run it's UI in offline mode but you've scooped it out's brains.
  - ynniv 17y ago
    Either you meant "it's data", or you're doing it wrong. http://sproutcore.com http://sproutcore.com http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-anderson-couchdb-relaxing-offline.html http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-anderson-couchd...
    - wvenable 17y ago
      Wow, you can store data and retrieve it. Why do we need web browsers at all -- Microsoft released Access decades ago!
      - ynniv 17y ago
        Impressively worthless comment. If MS Access apps were free to develop and worked on any platform in useful sandboxes, your sarcasm would be warranted. Instead you make yourself look like as idiot, suggesting that the Web is popular because people didn't know about Access.

GrandMasterBirt 17y ago

Maybe its a rephrase but: Currently the App Store is a benevolent dictator. I don't care how much lipstick they put on the pig, I want free speach. I don't care if that means 10% of apps will have a flag "may be spyware or inappropriate" but I want those apps distributed! EVEN if those apps help violate apple's own license terms. I want the courts to decide who takes shit down, not apple. Apple is a company whereas the courts are government.