I don't see why everyone is surprised. This is the way I expected to use my iPhone if I get one. I did not necessarily want to download a bunch of apps. I expected to use web apps. Adobe and Google are working on solutions for creating Web 2.o apps. I'm sure over the week Apple will be showing developers how to leverage web apps and the iPhone.
Also there have been several blogs stating that there is no way Apple could create and support a reliable SDK in this short amount of time. The iPhone has a new type of UI and is a first generation product, it would be better for Apple to internally work out development kinks before releasing a general SDK. Of course this does not mean Apple will not release an SDK at some point in the future.
I would imagine web apps are the solution at the moment.
I don't like what I'm hearing about the limitations. Web 2 apps are nice, but if they aren't downloadable to the phone so that they can reside there, they won't be that useful. Can you imagine downloading the app each time you use it? Or having to send back and forth from the website while you are using it?
If we had a fast up and download speed, that might not be too bad, but I don't want everything I do leaving my phone anymore than I want it leaving my computer.
As for the timescale. Jobs said that they were working on the phone for three years. That's planty of time. After all three years is about the time it takes to get one and a half full upgrades to OS X out the door.
The phone SDK is a far simpler thing than ones for OS X would be. there is simply far less hardware to worry about having API's for, among other things.
I read elsewhere today that this just allows Apple to keep the innards of the phone to themselves. After all, they must have an SDK for themselves, or they couldn't write their own apps.
Apple didn't show it, but I'm willing to bet that the iPhone can tap into the 'remote finder' functionality showcased today, giving you access to your entire desktop via .Mac; so you may end up with all of your Mac apps on your iPhone, in a sense.
I don't like what I'm hearing about the limitations. Web 2 apps are nice, but if they aren't downloadable to the phone so that they can reside there, they won't be that useful.
I don't think this is a huge problem if the the material you are working on resides on the phone and can be transfered to a computer.
Quote:
The phone SDK is a far simpler thing than ones for OS X would be. there is simply far less hardware to worry about having API's for, among other things.
You should read John Siracusa's blog about developing for the iPhone.
He talks about the difference between developing for desktop API's and how different that is from developing for a phone. Then on top of that the iPhone has no windows, close/minimize/zoom widgets, checkboxes, radio buttons, or scroll bars. Which most other phone UI's do have. So that makes development even more tricky.
He suggests that Apple will need to figure out within itself how to best write apps for the UI and that will take some time after its in the wild and people are using it.
…\\ does this also means that, if you're currently in a location where you do not have wifi or cell access, you have absolutely no access to these apps, nor your data?
Exactly. The iPhone as Steve said in the very beginning, "it is not a smart phone."
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
“We have been trying to come up with a solution to expand the capabilities of iPhone by letting developers write great apps for it, and yet keep the iPhone reliable and secure. and we’ve come up with a very sweet solution,” said Jobs.
This capability is being exposed through the full version of Safari that will run on the iPhone, said Jobs, using “Web 2.0”-style technologies like AJAX that will enable developers to create content that “looks and behaves exactly like apps,” integrated with the iPhone and iPhone services.
“They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,” Jobs added for emphasis. What’s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
“They run securely on the iPhone, so they don’t compromise its reliability or security. And guess what? There’s no [software development kit]. You’ve got everything you need, if you know how to write apps using existing Web standards,” Jobs said.
Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
Apple didn't show it, but I'm willing to bet that the iPhone can tap into the 'remote finder' functionality showcased today, giving you access to your entire desktop via .Mac; so you may end up with all of your Mac apps on your iPhone, in a sense.
Lets hope so, there may be hope for dark forces yet
Either this or i just instal some early apple os on the iPhone and run it from there. things could get messy in the long run though.
Exactly. The iPhone as Steve said in the very beginning, "it is not a smart phone."
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
?We have been trying to come up with a solution to expand the capabilities of iPhone by letting developers write great apps for it, and yet keep the iPhone reliable and secure. and we?ve come up with a very sweet solution,? said Jobs.
This capability is being exposed through the full version of Safari that will run on the iPhone, said Jobs, using ?Web 2.0?-style technologies like AJAX that will enable developers to create content that ?looks and behaves exactly like apps,? integrated with the iPhone and iPhone services.
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis. What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
?They run securely on the iPhone, so they don?t compromise its reliability or security. And guess what? There?s no [software development kit]. You?ve got everything you need, if you know how to write apps using existing Web standards,? Jobs said.
Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
Apple didn't show it, but I'm willing to bet that the iPhone can tap into the 'remote finder' functionality showcased today, giving you access to your entire desktop via .Mac; so you may end up with all of your Mac apps on your iPhone, in a sense.
Even if that were true, just how do you expect to use those apps?
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis."
Irregardless of the security issues being able to make a call from a web app ... sending an e-mail and pulling up a location on Google Maps have zero to do with developing an application. If that's the functionality a developer can get out of the iPhone ... it's a real yawner.
Quote:
?What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide."
Developers have to have a web server to have an app. With a database. And they're responsible for maintaining and the security of your data on that server ... which otherwise, they could've just stored on your phone.
Quote:
?They run securely on the iPhone, so they don?t compromise its reliability or security."
Instead you'll get to keep a gazillion accounts elsewhere for every little app, and download it every time, and require an Internet connection all the time. But Apple won't be responsible for your security ... it'll be websites everywhere that are responsible.
Quote:
?And guess what? There?s no [software development kit]." Jobs said.
How convenient ... for Apple.
Quote:
?Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
Well there's a sophisticated application ... NOT! Links to an e-mail and a phone number ... wow!
Quote:
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
As long as my AJAX app can run as a top-level iPhone app I'm happy. Not sure if you'll be able to have them show there rather than as Safari bookmarks.
As long as my AJAX app can run as a top-level iPhone app I'm happy. Not sure if you'll be able to have them show there rather than as Safari bookmarks.
Great. So a hundred developers will be doing the same thing, because, unless there's something we don't know about this, there's just about one thing that can be done.
also, could one use a bluetooth key board and mouse or will that not work at all.
From Job's response to the question of would OS X apps be ported over during the "D" conference, his answer was probably not, for most, at least.
The reasons he gave was that as the desktop was so different, and and that there was no mouse available, they couldn't be accessed.
So, I would have to say no. At least not at this time, with Apple's blessings. Perhaps someone will be able to figure it out, or provide one for the iPhone, like the ones for the Palm, or windows Mobile models.
From Job's response to the question of would OS X apps be ported over during the "D" conference, his answer was probably not, for most, at least.
The reasons he gave was that as the desktop was so different, and and that there was no mouse available, they couldn't be accessed.
I can understand that the desktop and handheld are different environments, but no mouse? How is that an argument? That would be obtusely ignoring the device's main control mechanism, which does (or can do) the same thing, even if it does it differently.
Great. So a hundred developers will be doing the same thing, because, unless there's something we don't know about this, there's just about one thing that can be done.
So what am I missing here.
1) First a question - is google docs an app that fits this definition?
2) If so, and since the new Safari Beta runs google docs, this seems like a rather sophisticated application so many things can be done with this approach.
3) Add Google Gears, which is most certainly coming it becomes independent of the Web.
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis. What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
Gee, and I could swear I read an article last month about how insecure so many AJAX apps are, as the tools they're built with lack a lot of the validation/verification that is needed.
Plus, as others have said, there is nothing intrinsically 'secure' about web 2.0 apps. Its only as secure as the servers the data is stored on, and the channel the data is sent through.
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.
Comments
I don't see why everyone is surprised. This is the way I expected to use my iPhone if I get one. I did not necessarily want to download a bunch of apps. I expected to use web apps. Adobe and Google are working on solutions for creating Web 2.o apps. I'm sure over the week Apple will be showing developers how to leverage web apps and the iPhone.
Also there have been several blogs stating that there is no way Apple could create and support a reliable SDK in this short amount of time. The iPhone has a new type of UI and is a first generation product, it would be better for Apple to internally work out development kinks before releasing a general SDK. Of course this does not mean Apple will not release an SDK at some point in the future.
I would imagine web apps are the solution at the moment.
I don't like what I'm hearing about the limitations. Web 2 apps are nice, but if they aren't downloadable to the phone so that they can reside there, they won't be that useful. Can you imagine downloading the app each time you use it? Or having to send back and forth from the website while you are using it?
If we had a fast up and download speed, that might not be too bad, but I don't want everything I do leaving my phone anymore than I want it leaving my computer.
As for the timescale. Jobs said that they were working on the phone for three years. That's planty of time. After all three years is about the time it takes to get one and a half full upgrades to OS X out the door.
The phone SDK is a far simpler thing than ones for OS X would be. there is simply far less hardware to worry about having API's for, among other things.
I read elsewhere today that this just allows Apple to keep the innards of the phone to themselves. After all, they must have an SDK for themselves, or they couldn't write their own apps.
I don't like what I'm hearing about the limitations. Web 2 apps are nice, but if they aren't downloadable to the phone so that they can reside there, they won't be that useful.
I don't think this is a huge problem if the the material you are working on resides on the phone and can be transfered to a computer.
The phone SDK is a far simpler thing than ones for OS X would be. there is simply far less hardware to worry about having API's for, among other things.
You should read John Siracusa's blog about developing for the iPhone.
He talks about the difference between developing for desktop API's and how different that is from developing for a phone. Then on top of that the iPhone has no windows, close/minimize/zoom widgets, checkboxes, radio buttons, or scroll bars. Which most other phone UI's do have. So that makes development even more tricky.
He suggests that Apple will need to figure out within itself how to best write apps for the UI and that will take some time after its in the wild and people are using it.
…\\ does this also means that, if you're currently in a location where you do not have wifi or cell access, you have absolutely no access to these apps, nor your data?
Exactly. The iPhone as Steve said in the very beginning, "it is not a smart phone."
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
“We have been trying to come up with a solution to expand the capabilities of iPhone by letting developers write great apps for it, and yet keep the iPhone reliable and secure. and we’ve come up with a very sweet solution,” said Jobs.
This capability is being exposed through the full version of Safari that will run on the iPhone, said Jobs, using “Web 2.0”-style technologies like AJAX that will enable developers to create content that “looks and behaves exactly like apps,” integrated with the iPhone and iPhone services.
“They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,” Jobs added for emphasis. What’s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
“They run securely on the iPhone, so they don’t compromise its reliability or security. And guess what? There’s no [software development kit]. You’ve got everything you need, if you know how to write apps using existing Web standards,” Jobs said.
Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
Apple didn't show it, but I'm willing to bet that the iPhone can tap into the 'remote finder' functionality showcased today, giving you access to your entire desktop via .Mac; so you may end up with all of your Mac apps on your iPhone, in a sense.
Lets hope so, there may be hope for dark forces yet
Either this or i just instal some early apple os on the iPhone and run it from there. things could get messy in the long run though.
Exactly. The iPhone as Steve said in the very beginning, "it is not a smart phone."
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
?We have been trying to come up with a solution to expand the capabilities of iPhone by letting developers write great apps for it, and yet keep the iPhone reliable and secure. and we?ve come up with a very sweet solution,? said Jobs.
This capability is being exposed through the full version of Safari that will run on the iPhone, said Jobs, using ?Web 2.0?-style technologies like AJAX that will enable developers to create content that ?looks and behaves exactly like apps,? integrated with the iPhone and iPhone services.
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis. What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
?They run securely on the iPhone, so they don?t compromise its reliability or security. And guess what? There?s no [software development kit]. You?ve got everything you need, if you know how to write apps using existing Web standards,? Jobs said.
Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
Yeah, revolutionary in that it's almost useless.
Apple didn't show it, but I'm willing to bet that the iPhone can tap into the 'remote finder' functionality showcased today, giving you access to your entire desktop via .Mac; so you may end up with all of your Mac apps on your iPhone, in a sense.
Even if that were true, just how do you expect to use those apps?
480 x 320, no mouse or pointer, no full keyboard.
I would suggest that when the link to the keynote is up, take heed. Right now the best I can do is quote Macworld which is as follows:
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis."
Irregardless of the security issues being able to make a call from a web app ... sending an e-mail and pulling up a location on Google Maps have zero to do with developing an application. If that's the functionality a developer can get out of the iPhone ... it's a real yawner.
?What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide."
Developers have to have a web server to have an app. With a database. And they're responsible for maintaining and the security of your data on that server ... which otherwise, they could've just stored on your phone.
?They run securely on the iPhone, so they don?t compromise its reliability or security."
Instead you'll get to keep a gazillion accounts elsewhere for every little app, and download it every time, and require an Internet connection all the time. But Apple won't be responsible for your security ... it'll be websites everywhere that are responsible.
?And guess what? There?s no [software development kit]." Jobs said.
How convenient ... for Apple.
?Apple VP Scott Forstall demonstrated how this can work by showing an Apple directory application that runs in less than 600 lines of code. The application returned a search query from safari into an address book-style card, where the identified user could be called or e-mailed using the built-in services on the iPhone."
Well there's a sophisticated application ... NOT! Links to an e-mail and a phone number ... wow!
As everybody isl talking here, this is a very sweet solution. Revolutionary in more ways than one!
Revolutionary? ROTFLMAO
As long as my AJAX app can run as a top-level iPhone app I'm happy. Not sure if you'll be able to have them show there rather than as Safari bookmarks.
Great. So a hundred developers will be doing the same thing, because, unless there's something we don't know about this, there's just about one thing that can be done.
Can someone more knowledgable explain the limitatons of this. Could i have a server that only i can acess, what can i run, are there limits?
Good questions. I don't have an answer.
also, could one use a bluetooth key board and mouse or will that not work at all.
From Job's response to the question of would OS X apps be ported over during the "D" conference, his answer was probably not, for most, at least.
The reasons he gave was that as the desktop was so different, and and that there was no mouse available, they couldn't be accessed.
So, I would have to say no. At least not at this time, with Apple's blessings. Perhaps someone will be able to figure it out, or provide one for the iPhone, like the ones for the Palm, or windows Mobile models.
From Job's response to the question of would OS X apps be ported over during the "D" conference, his answer was probably not, for most, at least.
The reasons he gave was that as the desktop was so different, and and that there was no mouse available, they couldn't be accessed.
I can understand that the desktop and handheld are different environments, but no mouse? How is that an argument? That would be obtusely ignoring the device's main control mechanism, which does (or can do) the same thing, even if it does it differently.
Great. So a hundred developers will be doing the same thing, because, unless there's something we don't know about this, there's just about one thing that can be done.
So what am I missing here.
1) First a question - is google docs an app that fits this definition?
2) If so, and since the new Safari Beta runs google docs, this seems like a rather sophisticated application so many things can be done with this approach.
3) Add Google Gears, which is most certainly coming it becomes independent of the Web.
This doesn't seem so disastrous.
?They can make a call, they can send an e-mail, they can look up a location on Google Maps,? Jobs added for emphasis. What?s more, distribution is simple because developers can put them up on their own servers, update the code themselves, and incorporate the built-in security that Web 2.0 applications provide.
Gee, and I could swear I read an article last month about how insecure so many AJAX apps are, as the tools they're built with lack a lot of the validation/verification that is needed.
Plus, as others have said, there is nothing intrinsically 'secure' about web 2.0 apps. Its only as secure as the servers the data is stored on, and the channel the data is sent through.
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.