Apple to launch official iPhone Web applications directory
Apple as early as Wednesday is expected to launch as part of its website a directory of official Web 2.0-based iPhone applications, AppleInsider has been told.
One developer familiar with the matter, who asked to remain anonymous, said Apple representatives have been tracking down authors of Web-based iPhone apps and asking them to submit official screenshots, icons, web addresses and descriptions of their applications to the company.
The submission processes is said to be very similar to that required of developers who submit their Dashboard widgets to Apple's official Dashboard downloads directory. In an effort to keep the initiative hush-hush, Apple has also reportedly 'sworn' these developers 'to secrecy.'
This latest move by the Cupertino-based company suggests that -- at least for the time being -- it is sticking to its guns regarding third party application development for its touch-screen handset -- mainly that it discourages native application development in favor of Web-based applications that do not pose a threat to the stability of the iPhone operating system in general.
The move also appears to fall in line with recent claims by ArsTechnica, which last week cited sources in saying that Apple was 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.
While the report suggested that Web app developers might eventually be able to create iPhone home screen icons that will point to their offline web apps, Apple could presumably also include a new home screen icon as part of a future iPhone software update that would jump users to its official directory of online applications.
One developer familiar with the matter, who asked to remain anonymous, said Apple representatives have been tracking down authors of Web-based iPhone apps and asking them to submit official screenshots, icons, web addresses and descriptions of their applications to the company.
The submission processes is said to be very similar to that required of developers who submit their Dashboard widgets to Apple's official Dashboard downloads directory. In an effort to keep the initiative hush-hush, Apple has also reportedly 'sworn' these developers 'to secrecy.'
This latest move by the Cupertino-based company suggests that -- at least for the time being -- it is sticking to its guns regarding third party application development for its touch-screen handset -- mainly that it discourages native application development in favor of Web-based applications that do not pose a threat to the stability of the iPhone operating system in general.
The move also appears to fall in line with recent claims by ArsTechnica, which last week cited sources in saying that Apple was 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.
While the report suggested that Web app developers might eventually be able to create iPhone home screen icons that will point to their offline web apps, Apple could presumably also include a new home screen icon as part of a future iPhone software update that would jump users to its official directory of online applications.
Comments
this web based app only stance from apple is truly insulting. like 'a real app is muuuuch to dangerous for you peopel...' > pathetic
Complaining about iPhone's lack of support for native apps is really getting tiring. From the very first moment that Apple unveiled the iPhone, they described it as 3 things:
1) a phone
2) an iPod
3) an Internet Communicator
Nowhere have they said that it's a PDA or general-purpose computing platform. Sure, it would be nice if native apps were supported out of the gate, but most people really don't have a clue just how complex that device is. Apple will support native apps when they are in a position to do so.
Would you have preferred they waited until native app support was available? We wouldn't have the iPhone today.
Complaining about iPhone's lack of support for native apps is really getting tiring. From the very first moment that Apple unveiled the iPhone, they described it as 3 things:
1) a phone
2) an iPod
3) an Internet Communicator
Nowhere have they said that it's a PDA or general-purpose computing platform. Sure, it would be nice if native apps were supported out of the gate, but most people really don't have a clue just how complex that device is. Apple will support native apps when they are in a position to do so.
Would you have preferred they waited until native app support was available? We wouldn't have the iPhone today.
Very well said.
A truly open Linux phone with GPS debuts
The OpenMoko is meant to be a fully mobile Linux machine that happens to look like a phone. The point is simple, where others have a Linux kernel with a locked proprietary stack on top of it, this one is open, top to bottom. You can use your own tools on it, compile your own kernel. and bang on the bare metal if you are into that sort of thing. Everything barring a few small drivers is GPL'ed.
Have at it.
SO Un-Apple. What is going on!
Lame.
In case you have been in a coma/enjoying a full and active family/social/work life, 3rd party apps do exist, just not with Apple's seal of approval. Some are really useful, most are really stable. No-one will be happy if Apple agree to open up native apps but charge for them- you can't take away what people have and charge them to give it back. Didn't Joni Mitchell say that?
Nowhere have they said that it's a PDA or general-purpose computing platform. Sure, it would be nice if native apps were supported out of the gate, but most people really don't have a clue just how complex that device is. Apple will support native apps when they are in a position to do so.
Would you have preferred they waited until native app support was available? We wouldn't have the iPhone today.
You should make some research before coming out with this crap that nobody in their right mind will believe in. It's also pretty insulting to any Mac developer...
The reason as to why Apple doesn't want you to be able to install native apps is pretty obvious: why do you want to make phone calls when you can use something like Skype...
You should make some research before coming out with this crap that nobody in their right mind will believe.
You'll notice I didn't say it wasn't _possible_ for the iPhone (or iPod touch) to support applications. There are hundreds available today. What I did say was (paraphrasing myself) "when Apple was in a _position_ to support them". There's a huge difference between _providing_ and _supporting_ such features on a device. Just think of all the training and technical resources needed at Apple's end.
This is not just a technical issue, but an infrastructure one. Check your own mind.
None of the links worked yet this morning. This was one of the links:
http://www.apple.com/webapps/games/s...foriphone.html
You'll notice I didn't say it wasn't _possible_ for the iPhone (or iPod touch) to support applications. There are hundreds available today. What I did say was (paraphrasing myself) "when Apple was in a _position_ to support them". There's a huge difference between _providing_ and _supporting_ such features on a device. Just think of all the training and technical resources needed at Apple's end.
This is not just a technical issue, but an infrastructure one. Check your own mind.
you know what, do you really think apple doesnt have the manpower and capacity to develop and support alot more apps? for whatever reason jobs decided to put this on the back burner. but instead of coming out with a dev kit he prefers to find ways, almost witch hunt style, to go after anybody not 'obeying' his rules. btw, where are updates for the apple tv???? mine still forgets the password overnight (wireless setup) most of the time!
You'll notice I didn't say it wasn't _possible_ for the iPhone (or iPod touch) to support applications. There are hundreds available today. What I did say was (paraphrasing myself) "when Apple was in a _position_ to support them". There's a huge difference between _providing_ and _supporting_ such features on a device. Just think of all the training and technical resources needed at Apple's end.
This is not just a technical issue, but an infrastructure one. Check your own mind.
Yeah, Apple will be in a position to do so once it receives all the money it can from the supposedly 30% share it receives from all the contracts and communications from iPhones. If you were able to install and run Skype as of tomorrow Apple would most likely lose such deals, as no company would then be crazy enough to give such a large share to Apple.
@ coolfactor : Jobs in january promised desktop class application developpement.
And he said exactly what?
Here's the phone people are wanting:
Have at it.
Ugghh!
You should make some research before coming out with this crap that nobody in their right mind will believe in. It's also pretty insulting to any Mac developer...
The reason as to why Apple doesn't want you to be able to install native apps is pretty obvious: why do you want to make phone calls when you can use something like Skype...
Other than the fact that Skype has been having some well publicized problems, Jobs did say that this is not a computer, but rather, a phone.
You don't have to agree, but it's his product, not yours.
You'll notice I didn't say it wasn't _possible_ for the iPhone (or iPod touch) to support applications. There are hundreds available today. What I did say was (paraphrasing myself) "when Apple was in a _position_ to support them". There's a huge difference between _providing_ and _supporting_ such features on a device. Just think of all the training and technical resources needed at Apple's end.
This is not just a technical issue, but an infrastructure one. Check your own mind.
There aren't hundreds, there are a few dozen, mostly very minor.
You don't have to agree, but it's his product, not yours.
Actually that's the problem with most of the things that Apple releases: it's like the products are made for Jobs, not the general public. That's a mistake that might cost them dearly in the future, as it did already in the past.
you know what, do you really think apple doesnt have the manpower and capacity to develop and support alot more apps? for whatever reason jobs decided to put this on the back burner. but instead of coming out with a dev kit he prefers to find ways, almost witch hunt style, to go after anybody not 'obeying' his rules. btw, where are updates for the apple tv???? mine still forgets the password overnight (wireless setup) most of the time!
Actually, I do think that. Apple is burning on all cylinders, running more efficiently than most tech companies in the world. They are turning out ground-breaking products (hardware and software) every few months. They are their own best competitors. Name one other tech company that continues to redefine their own products rather than just releasing lackluster mediocre upgrades.
Apple has clearly stated, in public, that AppleTV is a "hobby" right now. That's confirmation that they are working on it, but not devoting all of their resources to it.
I'd say they've been pretty busy with the iPhone, new iPods, new Macs, new OS X (and Server), new iLife, new iWork, new professional apps.
I don't think a minor inconvenience with your AppleTV somehow defines their overall efforts across all of their product lines. They aim for and achieve amazing execution better than most companies can even dream of. That stands on its own as a measure of their commitment to quality and your enjoyment of their products.