Apple working on improvements to Web-based iPhone SDK

[AppleInsider]

Apple is reportedly working on solutions that will help developers gain more exposure for their Web-based iPhone apps, but presently holds no plans to issue a "true" software developers kit (SDK) that would allow for native third-party application development.

Our friends over at Ars are citing what we believe to be a reliable source in saying that the Cupertino-based company is currently working on a handful of updates to Safari and the iPhone that may address some of the more common gripes developers are waging regarding their ability to write useful apps for the touch-screen handset.

"For example, Apple is currently jamming on adding offline storage capabilities to Safari -- something that would rival Google Gears in being able to serve up web applications locally without having to access the Internet," Ars writes.

The publication's sources say that the project is entirely geared towards the iPhone, with the goal of making the current WebKit-based iPhone 'SDK' more functional from a developer standpoint, in turn allowing them to produce more user-friendly applications for end users.

Those same sources say that because of this, the SDK will remain web-based, where applications will continue to be based primarily on a mix of HTML, CSS, and AJAX technologies, rather than native Mac OS X APIs.

Still, Ars hints at the distinct possibility that Apple as part of its improvements will offer "more local JavaScript access to useful iPhone functionalities, and developers might eventually also be able to create home screen icons that will point to their (presumably) offline web apps."

As for why Apple continues to block efforts on the part of developers to write more powerful native applications for iPhone, their sources have no concrete explanation. However, once source offered the following quote as part of his theory: "[Steve] Jobs is a control freak and doesn't want people messing with perfection."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[BingeBoy]

Who cares about web apps? We want native 3rd party apps. Apple is going down a dark path!

[neven]

If this is true, it's bittersweet news for me. As a web developer I would certainly appreciate some real support with iPhone web apps from Apple, but as an iPhone user, I'm a little disappointed that web apps are all we'll get.

Here's hoping that:

1) We get an actual SDK, not a few scattered tech papers. Something Dashcode-like?
2) It lets web apps pop out of Safari and run full-screen
3) It gives us capabilities beyond what's currently possible on the web

This *could* support quite decent apps, if done right. But until an iPhone web app runs ONLY on iPhone (and iPod Touch), it won't be taking full advantage of its features.

[macinthe408]

If Jobs is a control freak, why not open up an iPhone Certification Lab at Apple? Get the platinum seal of approval on your app and it's ready.

You also get a 512-bit hash "seal of approval" that you insert into the code, which gets decoded by the iPhone at runtime. This prevents unauthorized developers from circumventing the approval process.

JUST GET ME 3RD PARTY APPS!!!!!!!!

[mr_cazorp]

I'm tellin ya. If this is all I can expect from this platform - a crash-prone Safari, bare-bones email, crappy webapps that require a working Internet connection to run, and Apple Approved Cashflow Enhancing Applications (like iTunes and the spiffy Starbucks interface) - then I'm sorry, but I'm outta here when my AT&T sub is up - maybe even before then. As hardware, iPhone is more computer than phone. In fact it's the first palmtop computer I've ever seen that was actually pleasant to use.

As an enhanced iPod with phone and email, iPhone is fantastic. But as a device that lives up to its potential, it's turning out to be an appalling travesty. Apple: liberate this device!

Sent from Steve Jobs' iPhone.
(Cause it sure doesn't feel like it's mine.)

[neven]

Originally Posted by mr_cazorp

crappy webapps that require a working Internet connection to run

You may have noticed this in the original article:

something that would rival Google Gears in being able to serve up web applications locally without having to access the Internet

[Hattig]

It would be a crying shame if Javascript + HTML + CSS + Ajax remained the only official way to write third party applications on the iPhone.

However with offline storage, compiled Javascript, ability to run full screen, home screen icons, and iPhone GUI tags (like <toolbar>, etc, rather than having to duplicate the iPhone GUI in HTML + CSS with loads of little images, etc) it could be sufficient. It needn't even be HTML, it could be an iPhone GUI markup language that ties in with Javascript for processing.

It doesn't need to have full access to the iPhone's system, and Apple could expose access to data on the device via a web service on the device itself, rather than direct access, and other things to provide functionality and access to local data, without compromising the device.

Otherwise in the end people will be hacking the iPhone, writing native applications, and the tools to do it will become more reliable and effective.

[solipsism]

Wouldn't it be a good compromise for Apple to regulate iPhone Widgets for the iPhone through the Tunes interface? With over 3700 widgets there are many that would be useful to port to the iPhone. A seperate icon for Widgets that we can add and remove at will while synced to iTunes would make me very happy.

I expect to see new features the day Leopard is released (Tuesday, October 30th). For instance, iPhone Notes should sync with Mail 3.0 in Leopard.

[kenaustus]

While a lot of people would love 3rd party apps I don't see that being delivered until Apple has the iPhone environment established at the level they want it to be at. Part of the roadmap may be related to the software side and, more importantly, part may be related to the review that Apple is said to be doing on Intel's new mobile chip. Throw in the fact that a user with a lot of songs, pics, etc. starts downloading some apps that eat memory and the initial iPhones could be overloaded rather quickly. People tend to look at the iPhone as "part computer" and I can see a lot loading it to the hilt. My thinking is that Apple will want to wait until there is 16 or even 32 gigs available for 3rd party apps to happen.

[Duddits]

Originally Posted by macinthe408

JUST GET ME 3RD PARTY APPS!!!!!!!!

Exactly which one do you miss the most?

Popcorn?

iBrator?

[mrjoec123]

I fully expect Apple to eventually sell approved 3rd party apps for iPhone through the iTunes Store, just as they do now for the iPod games. It's just too obvious. That way, Apple maintains control over stability and takes a cut of the revenue; third party developers benefit from the iTunes exposure (saving them on advertising costs) and built-in piracy protection; and end users benefit from apps that are guaranteed to be secure, relatively crash-free, and probably rather inexpensive ($5-$10), as opposed to $20-$50 for Palm apps that crash on an hourly basis.

Expect the first apps to come from big names like EA, Yahoo, Google, or Apple itself. Later, smaller developers will get invited into the fray, if they come up with truly innovative ideas. The selection of apps I toyed around with briefly before the 1.1.1 update were all pretty useless, if you ask me. I ended up uninstalling everything before the update, not out of fear of bricking my iPhone, but for lack of finding anything I wanted to keep.

[scotty321]

Dear Steve Jobs, why won't you open up the iPhone to REAL 3rd party applications? I need to run Pocket Quicken & FileMaker Pro & SOHO Notes & a myriad of other software programs on my mobile device, all which sync back to their respective applications on my Mac. Until that happens, I can never leave the Treo and neither can any of my clients. As mentioned above, if you're worried about 3rd-party apps crashing the iPhone, you could could give developers a 512-bit hash seal of approval that developers insert into their code, which gets decoded by the iPhone at runtime. This would prevent unauthorized developers from circumventing the approval process. PLEASE open up the iPhone to real 3rd-party applications -- web apps are not real apps. I've got 100 clients in Los Angeles waiting to buy an iPhone, but they can't purchase it until I allow them to purchase it because of FileMaker Pro & Quicken synchronization.

[MacTel]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

As for why Apple continues to block efforts on the part of developers to write more powerful native applications for iPhone, their sources have no concrete explanation. However, once source offered the following quote as part of his theory: "[Steve] Jobs is a control freak and doesn't want people messing with perfection."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

Or how about AT&T telling Apple if you want revenue sharing then guarantee that you'll thwart hacks that will break our revenue streams from the iPhone. I believe that's closer to the truth than anything posted yet.

[imacFP]

I think the real problem, along with the above statement, is that Apple has not locked down the OS and it's not really ready for prime time. In other words, Apple does not have a good enough SDK for others to use and the system is still in flux. I think they feel that if they allowed developers access the phone would blow up and they'd realize the software is not totally ready yet. That doesn't mean Apple shouldn't be more open with their plans but we all know how secretive they are. The article from Wired below talks about it.

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com...urrentPage=all

[SpamSandwich]

The best way to indicate your displeasure with Apple is to go into an Apple Store and tell the staff that you're not buying the iPhone because of (insert reason here).

[alienzed]

You can't possibly be a developer, because any real developer with common sense knows that the future of computing, most of which is already here, is NOT run on your local computer. Why in God's name would you want to run an app ON your iPhone, lose valuable offline memory (8gbs isn't much buddy) and worry about tiny little processing power when ANYTHING you can do in a real world app can be done over the web, using a web interface.

You want a note pad? Use google docs!!

The industry is moving towards 100% online applications, why would Apple, who historically uses modern technologies first as standard(USB, Firewire) break their pattern and support the old programming model.

The big problem with you people who want true third party apps, is your age, and it really shows. Get with the times already and make your app work on the web like it should.

I applaud you Apple, for protecting your name by not letting people f%#* with your product: the way you always have and hopefully always will.

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by alienzed

You want a note pad? Use google docs!!

This is a perfect summation of the insanity. Buy a paper note pad, it'll cost you next to nothing and a physical object is more likely to be remembered.

[alienzed]

Of course you can do that, but for people complaining about the iPhone itself not providing the capability, google docs is the counter argument.
Personally, I wouldn't want to carry around a pen and paper because I'd need to bring it with me everywhere, which i most certainly will not do (i've tried, it's just not convenient or attractive to appear to be taking notes on life in public). My phone, however, is always with me and should provide that simple function, which the iPhone does with the ease of a bookmark.
All in all, what people don't understand is that you SHOULDN'T load your tiny little device with a thousand tiny little applications, because you're going to fill it up and slow it down; using safari will keep that zippity speed, let you bring more movies, music and photos with you and even let you find new tools you didn't even know existed, without having to pay for or go through the trouble of finding them.

This is a GOOD thing. 3rd party apps that cannot run on the web is NOTHING more than a total lack of effort on the part of the developer. ANYTHING is possible using computers, so don't give that 'it can't be done on the web' bs. (not you spamsandwhich)

[suhail]

Originally Posted by alienzed

You want a note pad? Use google docs!!

Alright… How about apps like GPS, or Audio recorder/playback?
Such apps cannot be programmed through a web-browser, and they were available via Installer before firmaware 1.1

[Gizmo-xl]

Originally Posted by alienzed

(8gbs isn't much buddy)

I remember making apps for Prime computers with only 16k of memory that ran complete companies.

Just because we can make devices that can support 8gig of ram does not mean we as developers have to be bad programers and use all of it.

You are showing your age by making remarks like this.

[lantzn]

Originally Posted by Duddits

Exactly which one do you miss the most?

Popcorn?

iBrator?

I'm tired of editing my video in Final Cut on my big bulky MacBook Pro!

Apple GIVE us 3-party apps on iPhone NOW!

[McHuman]

Originally Posted by lantzn

I'm tired of editing my video in Final Cut on my big bulky MacBook Pro!

Apple GIVE us 3-party apps on iPhone NOW!

Years ago when I bought my Palm, I was overjoyed with the ability to add 3rd party apps.

...

1.5 years later, I threw it into the trash after it became so riddled with bugs and system crashes from all the crap developer code out there. Literally threw the phone into the trash, it was a POS.

I'd rather wait to have Apple develop more apps properly.

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by kenaustus

My thinking is that Apple will want to wait until there is 16 or even 32 gigs available for 3rd party apps to happen.

Huh?

The 8GB of RAM in the iPhone is for storage not main ram. I don't know how much it's actually got as main ram but I'd guess no more than 256MB.

Most smart phones have 32 to 128MB of RAM, not GBs. One of the complaints I had with the SE P990i was that it only had 21MB free for Applications. They fixed that in the P1i, adding more RAM.

The whole of the iPhone OS, including all it's applications is a couple of hundred MB at most. The apps are tiny. We're not talking about running Final Cut on an iPhone, just simple apps.

Originally Posted by alienzed

You can't possibly be a developer, because any real developer with common sense knows that the future of computing, most of which is already here, is NOT run on your local computer. Why in God's name would you want to run an app ON your iPhone, lose valuable offline memory (8gbs isn't much buddy) and worry about tiny little processing power when ANYTHING you can do in a real world app can be done over the web, using a web interface.

That's simply not true and apart from that you're stuck with using Javascript for any local application logic which is horrendously slow on the iPhone, making AJAX apps painful. Google Gears is basically an offline Javascript library and SQLlite database.

Then we've got the problem of access to online apps with no or slow net access - no 3G remember.

Originally Posted by alienzed

The industry is moving towards 100% online applications, why would Apple, who historically uses modern technologies first as standard(USB, Firewire) break their pattern and support the old programming model.

The big problem with you people who want true third party apps, is your age, and it really shows. Get with the times already and make your app work on the web like it should.

So if that were the case, the iPhone would only have a browser on it and wouldn't come with Apple's Email app, stocks, weather, googlemaps, youtube, iTunes.... etc and you'd have to get mail from .Mac via a web interface and all your music would be streamed from Apple not synced.

Really, there's a place for online apps and there's a place for offline apps and there's a place for meddling with Job's flawed idea of perfection.

[rabber]

personally, I see nothing wrong with web apps. I would love to see thousands of them that I could use on an iPhone. However, I happen to use my phone/PDA where an internet connection isn't available or isn't fast enough to use web apps. Why should I be written off completely? If I wanted to use Google Docs as my note pad, then I would. I don't want to. That's the point of choice.

Here is a perfectly good example of how useful an application running locally can be. I use Metro on my Palm T/X quite a bit when I am riding a subway in foreign cities. Metro has lots of useful information about getting from point A to point B. Unfortunately, access to the internet is usually quite limited when deep in the bowels of London or New York. Sure, I could plan everything out ahead, but if I was that good at knowing exactly what I was going to do then I could plan my trips from the hotel before I leave in the morning. I could stick to a rigid schedule in the face of changes occurring during the day.

[iJOAT]

I'm somewhat okay with web apps, meaning I can deal with them. But only if it was on a network with descent speed. This EDGE crap is worthless. What good is a web app if I primarily can only use it at home on my WiFi network? I think I'd rather just walk 10 feet to my Mac and just use that.

I'm holding on wishing that Jobs will push AT&T to improve their EDGE service. I can't imagine Jobs would want to tie his name with anything that is sub-par (well, then again, I never did see how big that check from AT&T was).

[badNameErr]

We are witnessing one of the great blunders of the computer industry and without a doubt the greatest blunder of Apples history.

Steve, your a genius.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by alienzed

You can't possibly be a developer, because any real developer with common sense knows that the future of computing, most of which is already here, is NOT run on your local computer.

....

The industry is moving towards 100% online applications, why would Apple, who historically uses modern technologies first as standard(USB, Firewire) break their pattern and support the old programming model.

If you've been developing for a while, I'd think you'd know the pendulum swings both ways, between centralized/remote apps and local apps for many tasks. I really doubt that web apps can be used for everything, 100% is a long, long ways away.

iPhone apps aren't big, they don't need to be and shouldn't be big.

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by kenaustus

While a lot of people would love 3rd party apps I don't see that being delivered until Apple has the iPhone environment established at the level they want it to be at. Part of the roadmap may be related to the software side and, more importantly, part may be related to the review that Apple is said to be doing on Intel's new mobile chip. Throw in the fact that a user with a lot of songs, pics, etc. starts downloading some apps that eat memory and the initial iPhones could be overloaded rather quickly. People tend to look at the iPhone as "part computer" and I can see a lot loading it to the hilt. My thinking is that Apple will want to wait until there is 16 or even 32 gigs available for 3rd party apps to happen.

I agree. The first half of your comment is similar to one I've read before at Ars, and I think it's very compelling.vThe second half about the memory is very interesting. It might be true. But dayum, 8GB is really a LOT of memory. How much does the OS itself take up? Anybody out there know offhand? I seem it recall it's less than a half gig, but I can't remember for sure anymore.

[GregAlexander]

A few thoughts come to mind

- Offline apps are a necessity - you need them when away from a network, and they usually run faster than online apps. A hybrid is the best IMO - local code for quick response, updating itself remotely.

- Cocoa is supposed to offer so many goodies - so that a small program is capable of so much. Does this not apply on the iPhone?

- I hope that Apple's offline efforts dovetail with Googles offline web apps efforts at some level

- Aren't widgets web based too? Should they come together to some degree?

[lanl_menace]

Originally Posted by alienzed

You can't possibly be a developer, because any real developer with common sense knows that the future of computing, most of which is already here, is NOT run on your local computer. Why in God's name would you want to run an app ON your iPhone, lose valuable offline memory (8gbs isn't much buddy) and worry about tiny little processing power when ANYTHING you can do in a real world app can be done over the web, using a web interface.

You can't actually be for real.

1. Ever been on an airplane? So much for your ability to jot down notes while you're sitting there with nothing else to do.

2. Ever look at the coverage area for AT&T/Cingular for the left half of the US other than California? Go to <http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/> if not and tell me how I'm supposed to use online apps. I live in Los Alamos (87545) which contrary to what shows on the map, has NO coverage at all.

3. As mentioned by someone else, what about things like GPS.

And for ANYONE that says you'll ruin your iPhone by loading it with apps, that's total BS IF the device was created correctly. Maybe you should google "protected memory"

For the person who said 8 GB isn't enough for apps, I started on a Commodore 64 (that would be 64K of memory) with a 170K floppy. On that device, I had a pretty damn good word processor WITH spell-checking, a spreadsheet application, tons of games, etc. I don't think everything I had took up more than about 10-15 MEG. I still remember being extremely envious when a friend of mine got a 20 MEG hard drive.

Maybe you need to go back to school and learn how to program from someone that still remembers punched cards and paper tape.

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by badNameErr

We are witnessing one of the great blunders of the computer industry and without a doubt the greatest blunder of Apples history.

Steve, your a genius.

And you've thought through the matter deeply from both angles? Please show us evidence of this. Otherwise you just sound like the comic book guy from the Simpsons, "Worst. Decision. Ever."

I wonder if you know what it takes to produce a solid SDK with entirely new modes of interaction whose rules may still be in flux even amongst the actual iPhone development team?

[Ronbo]

Originally Posted by lanl_menace

1. Ever been on an airplane? So much for your ability to jot down notes while you're sitting there with nothing else to do.

Nice point.

[daratbastid]

Long live 1.0.2 !! We should all go out and buy Zunes for this lunacy. Stop being a hammer Jobs and open the f'en thing...or at least stop messing with the dev team and let them do what you are apparently are to pride hungry to do. The device is NOT perfect but that's OK! Let the PEOPLE make it perfect for themselves so it is perfect for their needs... Jeez

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by lanl_menace

1. Ever been on an airplane? So much for your ability to jot down notes while you're sitting there with nothing else to do.

Actually, that's the point of 'Google Gears' and what this story is about. Google gears is an OFFLINE AJAX library with a LOCAL SQL database store that caches any changes you do locally and then syncs back the changes when you're online again.

Originally Posted by Ronbo

I wonder if you know what it takes to produce a solid SDK with entirely new modes of interaction whose rules may still be in flux even amongst the actual iPhone development team?

It's a pity they didn't finish it before release. As such the current iPhone isn't even a beta product. Heck, I've worked on pre-release operating systems that came with extensive SDKs.

And it's still no excuse for what would seem to be a deliberate act to break 3rd party applications and to deliberately stomp over applications like iToner which just modified data on the iPhone, not installing apps.

[pmjoe]

Originally Posted by alienzed

You can't possibly be a developer, because any real developer with common sense knows that the future of computing, most of which is already here, is NOT run on your local computer. Why in God's name would you want to run an app ON your iPhone, lose valuable offline memory (8gbs isn't much buddy) and worry about tiny little processing power when ANYTHING you can do in a real world app can be done over the web, using a web interface.

[...]

The big problem with you people who want true third party apps, is your age, and it really shows. Get with the times already and make your app work on the web like it should.

LOL. Your immaturity shows. The absolute best a web app could ever do is emulate a native app ... through HTML and interpreted JavaScript. Mobile networks are not infallible. You don't always want to rely on them for access to your software and/or to store your private data. Even if you allow web apps to store data locally, do you seriously think interpreted web apps take less storage space than a compiled one or execute faster??? Web apps are also far more expensive to develop and maintain because they usually rely on 3-4 different languages just to code and require a server to operate.

[GregAlexander]

Originally Posted by daratbastid

at least stop messing with the dev team and let them do what you are apparently are to pride hungry to do. The device is NOT perfect but that's OK! Let the PEOPLE make it perfect for themselves so it is perfect for their needs... Jeez

I'd like to see the iPhone open... but there's one good reason I can see for keeping it closed.

Jobs criticised phones for being hard to use - they have so many features but most people can't work them out. The iPhone is simple - and it has less features. If you add customised apps to an iPhone, and you add customised apps to a Nokia, you run the risk of having similar levels of "ease of use" on both phones.

However, I believe an Apple quality assurance program, with particular interaction paradigms etc, and a requirement to place apps in particular positions, would do that quite well.

[pmjoe]

Let me guess ... Apple will:

1. add opening a linked vCal/iCal event(s) in the Calendar and vCard in Contacts to it's currently huge SDK of: using mailto to send mail, dialing the phone, and opening a map at a location (if it doesn't already do it)
2. create a whole new storage mechanism that is incompatible with and competes with Google Gears

Somebody pinch me and see if I'm excited.

[daratbastid]

Originally Posted by GregAlexander

I'd like to see the iPhone open... but there's one good reason I can see for keeping it closed.

Jobs criticised phones for being hard to use - they have so many features but most people can't work them out. The iPhone is simple - and it has less features. If you add customised apps to an iPhone, and you add customised apps to a Nokia, you run the risk of having similar levels of "ease of use" on both phones.

However, I believe an Apple quality assurance program, with particular interaction paradigms etc, and a requirement to place apps in particular positions, would do that quite well.

that is nonsense... I would control the level of complexity on the phone because i choose what apps i want to run.. If they want to ship a phone that comes out of the box with your basic functionality that a dunce will understand... Then go right ahead....but dont limit me because i want to do more "advanced" things ( that the phone has no problem running as we have seen).. The phones ease of use is its interface, not its features.. The gestures, scrolling, zooming.... These can all be put to use in native apps

[Ireland]

Steve, you must drop round to the house sometime, I've got some good wine, and afterwards I can break your legs

[neutrino23]

This seems to be a response to the outcry over the recent firmware update killing the third party apps. That is a good thing. It shows that Apple responds to the pressure of the market place. We'll have to see how far this goes.

My personal take is that Apple has extensive future plans for adding apps to the iPhone. Whether these are good plans or not they may want to keep the field clear for their own development. This does not necessarily jibe with the needs of the consumer so I think there will be a bit of tug-of-war on this topic in the next six months.