iPhone to support third-party Web 2.0 applications - Page 2

APP!=WEBSITE!

this is a web design platform, not a development platform.

How does one get the balls to stand there and say "YEA, you can build all the great apps you want as long as they are WEBSITES!!" Google is not an app, it is a web tool, Picasa or Google Earth are APPS...they by nature, do something that would be at best tricky, and usually impractical to impossible in a browser.

$10 says there will be an international auto-dialer virus for iPhone by Labor Day.

There is currently a web site that runs super mario world online from a server, or so i believe. As many as 100 people can play it only using their internet without any extra apps open. Is this kind of app posible on the iPhone.

Well, I think you're aware that Google Maps existed before Google Earth. And there are quite a number of full-featured web apps out there, including office suites like Google's. It will be interesting to see if they work in iPhone Safari.

If this had been discussed at the iPhone introduction, people would have realized how cool it is that a cell phone could run full-featured web apps like this. It's the direction things are going even on desktops, with Google apps and .net and Adobe's AIR just announced today.

But the D teaser and other rumors had people expecting that something else would be released, and so when Jobs announced what people basically already knew was possible, and no SDKs, it seemed like a letdown.

For me, it is unless Apple has amended Web 2.0 to allow for tracking multiple contact points. That's the distinguishing feature of the iPhone, and developers should be given some way to access it. Otherwise the iPhone is no different from any other smartphone currently out there.

How many programs do you use without the pointer from a mouse having a big impact on your interactivity? Pull down menus? Hi rez screens?

Now, as I said earlier, how many of those programs will translate to the iPhone's sparse interface? Its 480 x 320 rez, and its lack of a mouse pointing device?

Not many.

My answer is the same as I gave to Jeff, but I can expand it to cover that.

Google Docs are no different. They are accessed the same way any other app is accessed.

But, Jobs didn't say that NO OS X apps could be translated over, he said MOST couldn't.

We'll have to see how many make it.

But I don't like the web app concept. I don't want to be dependent on that kind of interaction every time I want to do something. That's assuming that we will even be able to get service everywhere when we need it.

It's not an app on the phone. It's people joining a web site to play a web game together.

I think a number of you should do a little due diligence and look up Web 2.0 and Google Docs & Spreadsheet with their forthcoming Writely application.

The iPhone with Leopard, Safari and Multitouch offers a means to access internet or web based applications through a cell phone with relative, speed, ease and expense.

Whether one uses Google Docs & Spreadsheets to input or obtain data stored and secured on a Google server is one thing. Having the capability to easily create such an app for ones own private server, thus limiting access and increasing security, is another. In any event, it means that it is virtually on one's own, or corporately, on the companies' computers simply by accessing a web site or internet connection through a cell phone. Not having the actual application installed on the cell phone obviously negates any possibility of jeopardizing the integrity of the phone itself.

From a corporate perspective, the possibilities seem endless. For example, the information that the 'company' needs is not sitting on some wandering exec's or salesman's cell phone, but right in the companies office. Knowingly current and secure. And vice versa.

Sure web apps can do plenty but no local storage (no internet connection, no program), speed limited (EDGE, since you can't count on WiFi), having them in freakin' bookmarks instead of the home screen, no multitouch (just imagine how many cool ways Mac developers could come up to use multitouch) beyond whatever Safari uses, and so forth.

And then to say your applications will crash AT&Ts network (um, no it will crash the application itself—nothing else) and that you can develop iPhone apps—they're called websites. It's pretty much screw you developers. Especially if you notice that every smartphone in existence can do exactly the same thing. Like the guy above me said, multitouch is the feature of the iPhone and web apps can't do it beyond basic Safari navigation.

Repeat after me, they told everybody what everybody with a brain already knew—the iPhone can go to websites. There is nothing new, nothing revolutionary, and nothing special about this—any phone with a full browser can do this. For all the neat things you can do with web apps, they have exactly zero to do with anything special the iPhone can do.

Now if they said a) the SDK isn't ready as multitouch programs are difficult to design for and hence the SDK is difficult to make, and b) we'll have it out in the Fall and we'll keep you updated OR 1) no SDK, full stop; that would have fine. Telling them to make web apps? Insulting.

There is simply no way any web app can come close to what a real iPhone app can do. I, for one, am hugely disappointed.

if it can dial on button press, then why not dial on page load?

If there where any external apps. on my phone, they were about games or about connectivity.

I have one java app. now (Salling Clicker) that can control iTunes or other programs on a PC or Mac. It runs with bluetooth or wifi, i don't see the Web 2.0/Ajax app. connect with these interfaces!!!
Java is also sandboxed and has way more features than a web app. in a browser!! Grrr
Stupid move not to include that, they are not going to write their own secured interface/compiler to run secured applications/widgets.

This iPhone annoucenment from yesterday was really weak, he we would be better of not saying anything about it. Most people who had seen the keynote where dissapointed at the end.
I also expect the AAPL stocks to go down again today.

Hope steve does better in the future!

My big point would be this: If you thought the iPhone could replace your laptop for trips, forget about it. Unless you have no need to spend that 5 hours on the plane doing any type of work.


I think he's going on about using the whole multi-touch interface stuff.


Right, because if a demo shows it can only work one way, then there's no way that it could work in any other way. And we know Apple's programmers can do no wrong, so there's no way there could be a bug in the software.

I have a Google Docs account with maybe a couple dozen tiny documents on their server. I thought Writely was the retired name for the text editor, I haven't heard from anywhere that it's going to be used again. It's nice, but on broadband & a fast computer, it's still a little clunky. I don't think I would enjoy it on a small ARM system and EDGE. It's all interpreted text as well, which is not a very machine-efficient way to program.


That's not a bad idea, but there is a lot more to server and connection security than that. Server hosted apps and data can be more secure, but there is no guarantee of that. An AJAX app with bad security may as well be like losing your data on a weekly basis.

Given that Apple claims that the pointer from a finger is plenty good to punch into a keyboard, I really don't see the problem here. It looks to me like it has better operation than a mouse, and without having to push around a piece of plastic. I've used my fingernail on a Palm to handle drop-down menus without trouble, and my Palm has exactly the same size and rez screen as the iPhone. I'm well aware that a fingerprint is a larger area to track than a fingernail impression, but it looks like maybe they have improved tracking enough to make it a viable means of "mouse" input, and IMO, better than a trackpad.

Nothing is. But I can guarantee that when a member of my staff hits the road, he/she will have custom apps via Web 2 that connects to a secure internal in-house server, allowing them to communicate with the company in the manner that I want them to. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to make the connection bullet-proof. Sure there could be a few scars on the way, but by the time the vault is cracked, the safe is empty or worthless and moved.

Suggest you start thinking out of the box. Apple is giving us tools, i.e., Multitouch, Safari 3 and the iPhone to do some highly innovative things. But first and foremost, the iPhone is a just a phone. I don't expect anybody to be playing, surfing or creating artwork wasting connect time on something that I am paying for it. They can do that on their MacBooks faster, easier and cheaper.

No, I want my iphone to be able to replace my Treo. But it can't. It's not as capable.

The big touted feature of the iPhone: multitouch (tracking multiple touch points at the same time). That's what really interests me as a developer.

Now that I think about it, Apple hasn't really mentioned anything about multiple fingers being dragged across the screen (only multiple fingers touching the screen). I hope it isn't a weird hack that's only useful for typing. That would be a bit of a disappointment.

I don't agree at all. Just using the finger will prove to be very limiting.

I have no problem with the stylus from my Treo. Jobs should have given the option of both. There is at least one new phone from HTC that does. It's far better. I can use my finger even with my Treo, in the right application. I can also use my nail to select, which you can't do on the iPhone either. Don't forget that. So, if you were thinking that you could use your nail, don't.

It's not the keyboard that's the problem. You're just picking one part of the computer interface. It's everything else.

Doesn't the "pinch" to zoom work by dragging two fingers?

My new iPhone to come, will replace my Treo like shit through a goose. And to suggest that it is not as capable, man you better get your head out of the way

can you plug in an ethernet port when there isn't wifi.

No. Then it can't replace my laptop when traveling. Unless I also pack an airport express.

Let's wait and see what develops. I get a sense that we are only seeing some of the pieces of the puzzle. The full feature rich iphone (which apple is booking as a 24 month revenue stream) will be revealed when leopard pounces. I am sure.

Right now there are a bazillion people about to line up on june 29th at 6pm. The wall to wall coverage of the hoards and the ensuing ramp up is what is probably concerning steve and co right now.

Once all of the iphones go live there will be updates. My guess is that Steve wants as smooth a roll out as possible with as few feature sets as he can safely roll out. Then later add fancy stuff.

Think ipod + itunes paradigm. Web 2.0 is a stop gap measure. There will be a sdk just not yet.

I am disappointed that Apple will not allow 3rd party widgets. And it appears they won't even allow an interface for web apps.

90% of the use of any phone will be for communication: phone calls, sms text, and e-mail. All of those other functions will fall into the lower 10%. I think the ultimate success of a phone will be on how well it performs the main communication functions. And depend less on how you can use a drawing app or word processing app. Why would you do that stuff on a phone anyway?

Lets wait and see what Apple's ideas are.

Between this thread and the other, you are proving yourself to be quite the fanboy.

What bothers me about all of this is the expectation that there is so much that is possible, but so little that is being offered.

I have nothing against what it can do.

My disappointment is where it falls down.

What's the point of Jobs emphasizing that it uses the full version of OS X (other than unneeded drivers, etc), if it isn't being used?

If we can't take full advantage of the OS then Apple could have put in a much simpler version with just the barest number of API's to get the job done. But, they didn't. Why?

I still have to hope that using AJAX and XML will be only the first method allowed. That at some point in time, perhaps before the end of the year, as he said, there will be another way that we will all be happy with.

Come on boys and girls... Until just a few weeks ago (where Steve dropped a hint) it was ALL BUT GUARANTEED that the iPhone was to be a 'protected/limited-access' device. Where Apple and a perhaps a handful of anointed-others would be the only ones with developer privileges.

Now this is not entirely true - we've been shown that a method of adding functionality to the iPhone does exist for mere mortal-developers. Sure it's overflowing with limitations and unmovable roadblocks but none the less it exists.

If nothing else, it's a sign that Apple not only realizes that people want to develop for the iPhone but they are attempting to do something about it (as opposed to simply ignoring the situation - ala iPod).

With any luck this is simply the first set of many for iPhone development solutions...

Just my .02

Dave

Please define.

I'm thinking that they will eventually open it up to 3rd parties. This Web 2.0 stuff is just to tie us over until they do.

Clean up that analogy, Tommy Boy.

If you're pushing iPhones on your company, I hope they realize they can get web enabled phones for less than half the $600 price.

"We've been shown" that the iPhone has a web browser ... we've known this for many months (as do other phones). That is all we've been shown and offered. You're severely misinterpreting web browsing as "a method of adding functionality to the iPhone."

In that case, Apple is adding development capabilities to Windows PCs by offering Safari for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy

Hopefully so.

Oh lord. I hope not.