If the HTML5 webapp doesn't have access to the camera, camera roll, GPS location data, push notifications (at all, let alone in a secure way), this initiative would seem to be a non-starter. It might be good for browsing facebook, but not so much for using it in certain ways that are most useful when you're on a mobile device.
Actually according to this Sergey's HTML5 book Ive just purchased and according to caniuse.com both HTML5 and iOS 4 browser support touch gestures, GPS location data, push notifications (Server-sent DOM events) and other HTML5 APIs. HTML5 geolocation and HTML5 gestures I tested myself (on Android though) and it works well.
Device camera access also supported by HTML5 in specification but not by iOS4 browser, so it is just a matter of catching up by Safari iOS browser with HTML5 specs - hopefully iOS5 will have that support.
In the next few month we will see a migration to HTML5 mobile apps since this way you can bypass app store and also make your app available for Android/Win Mobile devices.
You both are seriously clueless to what makes Apple tick, and what makes them money.
It's the hardware. Apple has the best on the planet, including desktop, laptop, tablets, music players and phones. That's not going to change, and neither is Apple's margins. Some people see paying for it, some don't. So is the marketplace. But regardless, their devices are consistently the one's that are held up as the one's to beat.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
The threat is not from Apple losing their 30% from appstore purchases. It is what affect this might have on hardware sales.
This could hurt Apple if developers see it as a way to avoid giving Apple their 30% cut. They could either develop their own HTML5 webapps or they could join up with Facebook (a large and influential internet company). If enough developers do it, Apple could be hurting.
Apple says the App Store is running at about break-even for them. If web apps take over in the way you describe, Apple would still be as profitable.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
The threat is not from Apple losing their 30% from appstore purchases. It is what affect this might have on hardware sales.
Yeah, Apple is soooo worried about that, they freely share WebKit with Google and other companies competing against them
Frankly, Facebook is just making noise. They have no secret sauce when it comes to web apps. If they really wanted to impress me, they will release a SDK that'll make HTML5/JavaScript/AJAX more tolerable to work with. But Facebook as a technology platform? I don't think so.
FaceBook is popular, and users will put up (seemingly) with whatever FaceBook feeds them. Even an HTML5 app which is highly unlikely to be as good as a native app. (But this is one case where it COULD be good, since FaceBook doesn’t do anything all that sophisticated; at least not user-facing. If they try to do TOO much, with animation etc. for better games, then it won’t be good; not for battery, nor experience.)
At most, they’ll be snubbing their own users. They won’t be snubbing Apple: Apple actively supports web apps outside the App Store, arguably offers an even better platform than Google for doing so, and gets no cut on FaceBook’s free app anyway.
At best, it will be one more interesting option for developers to use to make (some limited) stuff for us, and that’s not all bad.
Apple has no stranglehold on browser-based apps, and doesn’t want one! They keep adding features just for non-App Store browser apps on iOS. Like fullscreen support, tilt, GPS, etc. Web apps cannot normally be AS good as native, but Apple doesn’t intend to kill them. That would be absurd.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
Lots of reasons.
a) High design standards
b) High build quality
c) Long product lifespan (3 years of software support for iPhone models so far, Android handsets averagesaround a year, unless you jailbreak)
That's without even getting into the fact that there will still be a vibrant native App market, especially for the more sophisticated offerings. Apple doesn't even have crazy high margins on its phones, the price of top end Android phones are close to iPhone prices, the price of other handheld game/music devices are comparable or more than the price of the touch, the iPad is famously cheaper than many android tablets.
The financial times is already doing this. The latest version of the FT for iOS is fully HTML5 and doesn't need you to go to the app store, even for the offline version. It's far far faster than the app and has all the same offline features (you just need to increase the Safari database size to 50mb.
Facebook (as usual) is WAY behind the curve here and I'm quite surprised this is even a story. The main reason this is good news for consumers is that any handset that has full HTML5 capability can use these free apps. If you decide to switch to Android or WinMob then it doesn't matter.
As far as I can tell, mobile Safari is the best HTML5 mobile web browser.
If you use the most common, overused, crass, swearword on the planet to make your point, it can't really be considered to be "well-made." Just yelling 'fuck' is not exactly commentary.
Sorry, it had to start with an 'f'. Next time, I'll use asterisks so Jesus Our Lord doesn't feel offended.
I believe doing some search and 5+ minutes of photoshop goes a little bit above 'yelling', i.e. it's more acceptable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
Also, the guy has the temerity to advertise in his signature which just makes it worse.
Well, you have the temerity to call yourself 'Prof.'. Others have the temerity of boasting their Apple products.
Regarding my app, it is kind of 'abandonware'; I made it long time ago, it's free now, and I've considered changing my signature, but I must admit I was lazy. Guess now I just won't.
Who? Really? You don't realize how popular it is with just about everyone with a computer and internet access? I'll give you a hint: it's freaking HUGE.
Facebook sucks - its populated by a large percentage of lonely housewives talking about their kids soccer games. Facebook is trying to subvert the internet and have everything on the net tied to them and going through them. Please fail, quickly and painfully. It's such a load of worthless crap. Pick up the phone and call your mother for god's sake.
It reminds me so much of AOL about twenty five years ago, don't need or want to go back to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
One of the groups that seems most stuck in Flash right now is restaurant owners, who, as a group, tend to have the worst web sites on the web. When the restaurant web sites all convert over from Flash+PDF to HTML5, we'll know that the coffin is not only nailed shut, but in the ground covered with dirt.
WordPress has some very nice professional restaurant themes, no Flash at all.
Oh please. The guy who realesed worked with a now jailed spy, to realease thousands of US and allied intelligence documents is accusing facebook of being a spy network? That's rich. What the hell is Wikileaks then?
And while I can understand some of what Assange does and his mission, some of what he does borders on cyber-terrorism. Releasing documents with source names, could get people killed (this is why they are often classified...not because of the information in them). Indeed, the Taliban has made exactly such statements and proceeded to act on them. The man has blood on his hands.
Who? Really? You don't realize how popular it is with just about everyone with a computer and internet access? I'll give you a hint: it's freaking HUGE.
Couldn't care less. And I'm pretty close to the generation that made Facebook big. Screw 'social networking'.
If they succeed in bypassing the AppStore's 30% cut (without using Flash), and Steve is OK with that, then it really was about the technology, and not just the money.
The technology behind webapps is advancing to the point that it can replicate much of what a native app does. For instance, apps like FaceBook should work equally well no matter the medium. Even some light games will transition well.
However, not ALL apps would find a good fit as a webapp. For instance, would you prefer to have a camera webapp? Play RageHD as a webapp?
So some apps (like banking, news, social media, Flash-esque games, etc) would work fine as webapps. Some wouldn't. For those that did, the problem next becomes getting your product to the consumer. If you're a bigwig corporation, you might just offer the webapp free on your sight, or go ad-based or freemium. But if you're a small developer? How do you get the exposure? The 30% cut Apple gets is worth it to most developers, because it provides exposure and an environment that encourages spur-of-the-moment purchases. Going it alone may not work so well. It would be like pulling your product out of Walmart's shelves and trying to sell it directly.
It is possible that a third party releases a webapp store in competition with the App Store? Sure. But how do you monetize it? You can't mimic the model of pay-once (i.e. $0.99) apps, unless you paid and then entered a password (since you're not downloading anything, just accessing a website in effect). Or you could charge a monthly fee. Or go ad-based for revenue. There's also the freemium route. I would expect the latter two to be the viable options.
If a third-party store did take off, it would still need to compete with the mindshare and the ease of use the App Store provides. The App Store is preinstalled in all iOS devices, and the OS is tied to it. You think the average consumer is going to find a webapp store on the web, give them their credit card info, etc.?
Besides, developers would be foolish to pull out of the App Store. They would just ALSO sell at the webapp store. It would be like if a new retail store opened down the street from Walmart; you're not going to stop selling at Walmart, because that's where the traffic is.
And while I can understand some of what Assange does and his mission, some of what he does borders on cyber-terrorism. Releasing documents with source names, could get people killed (this is why they are often classified...not because of the information in them). Indeed, the Taliban has made exactly such statements and proceeded to act on them. The man has blood on his hands.
Yes, you just never know when those cables from Australian Embassy to US home soil regarding a free trade agreement will teal to the Taliban killing your ass
Hey Jacksons, I think your KIN is ringing. Someone is calling you to build a web app for that phone!
WTF?
When was the last keynote where Apple actively and proactively promoted HTML5? I think you will find that Apple very much enjoys the world of dedicated apps at the current time.
Comments
You haven't been paying attention, have you?
A couple of years ago i heard Apple talk a lot about HTML 5. Lately, not so much.
If the HTML5 webapp doesn't have access to the camera, camera roll, GPS location data, push notifications (at all, let alone in a secure way), this initiative would seem to be a non-starter. It might be good for browsing facebook, but not so much for using it in certain ways that are most useful when you're on a mobile device.
Actually according to this Sergey's HTML5 book Ive just purchased and according to caniuse.com both HTML5 and iOS 4 browser support touch gestures, GPS location data, push notifications (Server-sent DOM events) and other HTML5 APIs. HTML5 geolocation and HTML5 gestures I tested myself (on Android though) and it works well.
Device camera access also supported by HTML5 in specification but not by iOS4 browser, so it is just a matter of catching up by Safari iOS browser with HTML5 specs - hopefully iOS5 will have that support.
In the next few month we will see a migration to HTML5 mobile apps since this way you can bypass app store and also make your app available for Android/Win Mobile devices.
@guch20 & @Jacksons
You both are seriously clueless to what makes Apple tick, and what makes them money.
It's the hardware. Apple has the best on the planet, including desktop, laptop, tablets, music players and phones. That's not going to change, and neither is Apple's margins. Some people see paying for it, some don't. So is the marketplace. But regardless, their devices are consistently the one's that are held up as the one's to beat.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
The threat is not from Apple losing their 30% from appstore purchases. It is what affect this might have on hardware sales.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
This could hurt Apple if developers see it as a way to avoid giving Apple their 30% cut. They could either develop their own HTML5 webapps or they could join up with Facebook (a large and influential internet company). If enough developers do it, Apple could be hurting.
Apple says the App Store is running at about break-even for them. If web apps take over in the way you describe, Apple would still be as profitable.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
The threat is not from Apple losing their 30% from appstore purchases. It is what affect this might have on hardware sales.
Yeah, Apple is soooo worried about that, they freely share WebKit with Google and other companies competing against them
Frankly, Facebook is just making noise. They have no secret sauce when it comes to web apps. If they really wanted to impress me, they will release a SDK that'll make HTML5/JavaScript/AJAX more tolerable to work with. But Facebook as a technology platform? I don't think so.
At most, they’ll be snubbing their own users. They won’t be snubbing Apple: Apple actively supports web apps outside the App Store, arguably offers an even better platform than Google for doing so, and gets no cut on FaceBook’s free app anyway.
At best, it will be one more interesting option for developers to use to make (some limited) stuff for us, and that’s not all bad.
Apple has no stranglehold on browser-based apps, and doesn’t want one! They keep adding features just for non-App Store browser apps on iOS. Like fullscreen support, tilt, GPS, etc. Web apps cannot normally be AS good as native, but Apple doesn’t intend to kill them. That would be absurd.
Agreed that Apple makes money from hardware; however, why should consumers buy from Apple with its high margins when they could buy a cheap low margin device from a competitor and get the exact same web apps?
Lots of reasons.
a) High design standards
b) High build quality
c) Long product lifespan (3 years of software support for iPhone models so far, Android handsets averagesaround a year, unless you jailbreak)
That's without even getting into the fact that there will still be a vibrant native App market, especially for the more sophisticated offerings. Apple doesn't even have crazy high margins on its phones, the price of top end Android phones are close to iPhone prices, the price of other handheld game/music devices are comparable or more than the price of the touch, the iPad is famously cheaper than many android tablets.
Facebook (as usual) is WAY behind the curve here and I'm quite surprised this is even a story. The main reason this is good news for consumers is that any handset that has full HTML5 capability can use these free apps. If you decide to switch to Android or WinMob then it doesn't matter.
As far as I can tell, mobile Safari is the best HTML5 mobile web browser.
Disagree.
If you use the most common, overused, crass, swearword on the planet to make your point, it can't really be considered to be "well-made." Just yelling 'fuck' is not exactly commentary.
Sorry, it had to start with an 'f'. Next time, I'll use asterisks so Jesus Our Lord doesn't feel offended.
I believe doing some search and 5+ minutes of photoshop goes a little bit above 'yelling', i.e. it's more acceptable.
Also, the guy has the temerity to advertise in his signature which just makes it worse.
Well, you have the temerity to call yourself 'Prof.'. Others have the temerity of boasting their Apple products.
Regarding my app, it is kind of 'abandonware'; I made it long time ago, it's free now, and I've considered changing my signature, but I must admit I was lazy. Guess now I just won't.
Who? Really? You don't realize how popular it is with just about everyone with a computer and internet access? I'll give you a hint: it's freaking HUGE.
Facebook sucks - its populated by a large percentage of lonely housewives talking about their kids soccer games. Facebook is trying to subvert the internet and have everything on the net tied to them and going through them. Please fail, quickly and painfully. It's such a load of worthless crap. Pick up the phone and call your mother for god's sake.
It reminds me so much of AOL about twenty five years ago, don't need or want to go back to that.
One of the groups that seems most stuck in Flash right now is restaurant owners, who, as a group, tend to have the worst web sites on the web. When the restaurant web sites all convert over from Flash+PDF to HTML5, we'll know that the coffin is not only nailed shut, but in the ground covered with dirt.
WordPress has some very nice professional restaurant themes, no Flash at all.
Sounds like you ought to start watch Judge Andrew Napolitano's Freedom Watch show, to expand your limited worldview:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/fr...tch/index.html
or
http://usaguns.net/patriots/fw10.php
Oh please. The guy who realesed worked with a now jailed spy, to realease thousands of US and allied intelligence documents is accusing facebook of being a spy network? That's rich. What the hell is Wikileaks then?
And while I can understand some of what Assange does and his mission, some of what he does borders on cyber-terrorism. Releasing documents with source names, could get people killed (this is why they are often classified...not because of the information in them). Indeed, the Taliban has made exactly such statements and proceeded to act on them. The man has blood on his hands.
Who? Really? You don't realize how popular it is with just about everyone with a computer and internet access? I'll give you a hint: it's freaking HUGE.
Couldn't care less. And I'm pretty close to the generation that made Facebook big. Screw 'social networking'.
If they succeed in bypassing the AppStore's 30% cut (without using Flash), and Steve is OK with that, then it really was about the technology, and not just the money.
just sayin'...
However, not ALL apps would find a good fit as a webapp. For instance, would you prefer to have a camera webapp? Play RageHD as a webapp?
So some apps (like banking, news, social media, Flash-esque games, etc) would work fine as webapps. Some wouldn't. For those that did, the problem next becomes getting your product to the consumer. If you're a bigwig corporation, you might just offer the webapp free on your sight, or go ad-based or freemium. But if you're a small developer? How do you get the exposure? The 30% cut Apple gets is worth it to most developers, because it provides exposure and an environment that encourages spur-of-the-moment purchases. Going it alone may not work so well. It would be like pulling your product out of Walmart's shelves and trying to sell it directly.
It is possible that a third party releases a webapp store in competition with the App Store? Sure. But how do you monetize it? You can't mimic the model of pay-once (i.e. $0.99) apps, unless you paid and then entered a password (since you're not downloading anything, just accessing a website in effect). Or you could charge a monthly fee. Or go ad-based for revenue. There's also the freemium route. I would expect the latter two to be the viable options.
If a third-party store did take off, it would still need to compete with the mindshare and the ease of use the App Store provides. The App Store is preinstalled in all iOS devices, and the OS is tied to it. You think the average consumer is going to find a webapp store on the web, give them their credit card info, etc.?
Besides, developers would be foolish to pull out of the App Store. They would just ALSO sell at the webapp store. It would be like if a new retail store opened down the street from Walmart; you're not going to stop selling at Walmart, because that's where the traffic is.
And while I can understand some of what Assange does and his mission, some of what he does borders on cyber-terrorism. Releasing documents with source names, could get people killed (this is why they are often classified...not because of the information in them). Indeed, the Taliban has made exactly such statements and proceeded to act on them. The man has blood on his hands.
Yes, you just never know when those cables from Australian Embassy to US home soil regarding a free trade agreement will teal to the Taliban killing your ass
Sounds like you ought to start watch Judge Andrew Napolitano's Freedom Watch show, to expand your limited worldview:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/fr...tch/index.html
or
http://usaguns.net/patriots/fw10.php
Fox to expand your world view! This is going from good to great.
A couple of years ago i heard Apple talk a lot about HTML 5. Lately, not so much.
Hey Jacksons, I think your KIN is ringing. Someone is calling you to build a web app for that phone!
Hey Jacksons, I think your KIN is ringing. Someone is calling you to build a web app for that phone!
WTF?
When was the last keynote where Apple actively and proactively promoted HTML5? I think you will find that Apple very much enjoys the world of dedicated apps at the current time.