Right now Apple still needs the web browser in iOS because apps can't cover everything in the web. But there's no reason why Apple would need web apps, it's just a back-door way for companies to avoid paying Apple the 30% cut. I could see Apple totally banning web apps, and they're not doing it yet only because they're worried about the PR hit they'd get if they did that.
I think it is ABSURD that Apple is not back-porting improvements like Nitro to ALL iOS devices, even the first generation. Apple had a standard of providing Safari, QuickTime, iTunes and Security updates to older Mac OS X system versions for the last two iterations! Sucks that they are not continuing that great tradition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
It does seem odd that we?d get this much of a webkit.framework overhaul with a point update. I?d think moving to WebKit2 and Nitro would be an iOS 5.0 feature, but maybe they wanted it for the iPad 2 knowing that it would be compared to other mobile devices.
I?m surprised it?s doing so well against Google?s V8 when this was the one area in which Google has the most direct reason to make their JS the best. Even the original iPad with iOS 4.3 is doing great against Android 3.0 in JS tests, which is impressive considering the HW compared to the Xoom.
Are there really two WebKit frameworks in iOS 4.3 or is there something else at work here? Why is it good enough for Safari, but not for web apps and in-app browsing, which I thought connected to the same framework? So what does that mean for iOS 5.0?s feature list?
The surprising thing here is that this article is well written relative to the crap seen in other forums.
However it appears that you did not read the article. Please try again.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be a bad idea to use Nitro and the new web kit but there is a clear reason why that hasn't happened. Basically Apple will need to either overhaul UIWebView to use the latest WebKit/Nitro or back port functionality. This is not a minor effort and would likely require holding off till the 5.0 release.
There really is nothing to complain about here, we are fortunate to get the Safari/Nitro update. If it wasn't for this update people wouldn't even notice the difference.
Oh ohh, somebody is actually paying attention. You are giving the internet a bad name Mr Wiz.
Javascript engine tweaking is a battleground right now and the Safari group are working wonders. I suspect the integration of Nitro into the web view kit will be the responsibility of the iOS group who will have a somewhat different agenda and timetable - and testing requirement. One has to take the sarcastic fuckers at the Register with a pinch of salt. In the UK they would be known as "wind-up merchants". Its their schtick (to mix up the ethnic slang}
They've said from the beginning that they would only give official software updates to iOS devices for two years. Its clear that the hardware in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G are not up to the task of newer iOS updates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall
I think it is ABSURD that Apple is not back-porting improvements like Nitro to ALL iOS devices, even the first generation. Apple had a standard of providing Safari, QuickTime, iTunes and Security updates to older Mac OS X system versions for the last two iterations! Sucks that they are not continuing that great tradition.
I thought it was three years. Besides, where did I say iOS updates, I am talking about app and framework updates which have been done on Mac OS X WITHOUT a full OS update!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
They've said from the beginning that they would only give official software updates to iOS devices for two years. Its clear that the hardware in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G are not up to the task of newer iOS updates.
I thought it was three years. Besides, where did I say iOS updates, I am talking about app and framework updates which have been done on Mac OS X WITHOUT a full OS update!!!
1) They never said ?3 years?.
2) Your comment "I think it is ABSURD that Apple is not back-porting improvements like Nitro to ALL iOS devices, even the first generation.? clearly states iOS.
3) You?re inventing a problem just to be an ass or you have an inability to see how a desktop OS that has separate OS updates from app updates, is different from iOS, which updates the entire OS each time, even if it?s just for bug fixes.
4) You haven?t made a single compelling argument as to why Safari, Quicktime and the iTunes app on iOS should be updated independently of the OS and why even iOS 1.0* (the 1st generation, as you put it) should be getting these updates separately from the rest of the OS.
* This is where you say that you meant the 1st generation of the iPhone, not the OS, but to argue that point you?d have to admit that there is a different dynamic involved when you are compared a desktop OS and separate app updates to mobile devices.
They've said from the beginning that they would only give official software updates to iOS devices for two years. Its clear that the hardware in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G are not up to the task of newer iOS updates.
That being said, I'm one of the unfortunate who bought a 3G just prior to the release of the 3GS and am still under my original 2 year contract. Using your logic, I should still be receiving official software updates. I do agree, however, with the second part of your quote. My 3G has been extremely crashy since the v.4 "upgrades."
That is unfortunate. I have a friend who just bought an iPhone. I told her she should have checked with me. We are a couple of months out from the iPhone 5. She might as well have waited.
At this point they can no longer support the iPhone 3G. Soon we'll have dual core 1GHz phones, the software has moved on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcraig
That being said, I'm one of the unfortunate who bought a 3G just prior to the release of the 3GS and am still under my original 2 year contract. Using your logic, I should still be receiving official software updates.
Comments
It does seem odd that we?d get this much of a webkit.framework overhaul with a point update. I?d think moving to WebKit2 and Nitro would be an iOS 5.0 feature, but maybe they wanted it for the iPad 2 knowing that it would be compared to other mobile devices.
I?m surprised it?s doing so well against Google?s V8 when this was the one area in which Google has the most direct reason to make their JS the best. Even the original iPad with iOS 4.3 is doing great against Android 3.0 in JS tests, which is impressive considering the HW compared to the Xoom.Are there really two WebKit frameworks in iOS 4.3 or is there something else at work here? Why is it good enough for Safari, but not for web apps and in-app browsing, which I thought connected to the same framework? So what does that mean for iOS 5.0?s feature list?
And you my friend are a complete idiot who has no clue what you are talking about.
Totally agree.... Sounds like someone needs to spend a bit more time reading the wiki's.
Apple needs to fix them.
The surprising thing here is that this article is well written relative to the crap seen in other forums.
However it appears that you did not read the article. Please try again.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be a bad idea to use Nitro and the new web kit but there is a clear reason why that hasn't happened. Basically Apple will need to either overhaul UIWebView to use the latest WebKit/Nitro or back port functionality. This is not a minor effort and would likely require holding off till the 5.0 release.
There really is nothing to complain about here, we are fortunate to get the Safari/Nitro update. If it wasn't for this update people wouldn't even notice the difference.
Oh ohh, somebody is actually paying attention. You are giving the internet a bad name Mr Wiz.
Javascript engine tweaking is a battleground right now and the Safari group are working wonders. I suspect the integration of Nitro into the web view kit will be the responsibility of the iOS group who will have a somewhat different agenda and timetable - and testing requirement. One has to take the sarcastic fuckers at the Register with a pinch of salt. In the UK they would be known as "wind-up merchants". Its their schtick (to mix up the ethnic slang}
I think it is ABSURD that Apple is not back-porting improvements like Nitro to ALL iOS devices, even the first generation. Apple had a standard of providing Safari, QuickTime, iTunes and Security updates to older Mac OS X system versions for the last two iterations! Sucks that they are not continuing that great tradition.
They've said from the beginning that they would only give official software updates to iOS devices for two years. Its clear that the hardware in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G are not up to the task of newer iOS updates.
I thought it was three years. Besides, where did I say iOS updates, I am talking about app and framework updates which have been done on Mac OS X WITHOUT a full OS update!!!
1) They never said ?3 years?.
2) Your comment "I think it is ABSURD that Apple is not back-porting improvements like Nitro to ALL iOS devices, even the first generation.? clearly states iOS.
3) You?re inventing a problem just to be an ass or you have an inability to see how a desktop OS that has separate OS updates from app updates, is different from iOS, which updates the entire OS each time, even if it?s just for bug fixes.
4) You haven?t made a single compelling argument as to why Safari, Quicktime and the iTunes app on iOS should be updated independently of the OS and why even iOS 1.0* (the 1st generation, as you put it) should be getting these updates separately from the rest of the OS.
* This is where you say that you meant the 1st generation of the iPhone, not the OS, but to argue that point you?d have to admit that there is a different dynamic involved when you are compared a desktop OS and separate app updates to mobile devices.
They've said from the beginning that they would only give official software updates to iOS devices for two years. Its clear that the hardware in the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G are not up to the task of newer iOS updates.
That being said, I'm one of the unfortunate who bought a 3G just prior to the release of the 3GS and am still under my original 2 year contract. Using your logic, I should still be receiving official software updates. I do agree, however, with the second part of your quote. My 3G has been extremely crashy since the v.4 "upgrades."
It should be "iOS 4.3 fails to allow Web Apps to utilise the new Nitro engine".
It is iOS 4.3 that fails. Not the Web App failing.
At this point they can no longer support the iPhone 3G. Soon we'll have dual core 1GHz phones, the software has moved on.
That being said, I'm one of the unfortunate who bought a 3G just prior to the release of the 3GS and am still under my original 2 year contract. Using your logic, I should still be receiving official software updates.