PDA

View Full Version : Apple Launches WebApps Directory




Sean7512
Oct 11, 2007, 02:08 PM
http://www.apple.com/webapps/?sr=hotnews?sr=hotnews.rss

Pretty cool site...I am definitely bookmarking it now :D

Enjoy!



MacRumors
Oct 11, 2007, 02:13 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Apple has launched (http://www.apple.com/webapps/) a directory of web-based applications designed for the iPhone and iPod Touch at http://www.apple.com/webapps/.

Applications are divided into a number of categories, including Calculate, Entertainment, Games, News, Productivity, Search Tools, Social Networking, Sports, Travel, Utilities, and Weather. Developers are invited (https://adcweb.apple.com/iphone/) to submit their own applications for inclusion in the directory.

Despite rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/11/apple-to-announce-3rd-party-iphone-app-development/) of expanding application development options from Apple, the launch of this directory appears to underscore Apple's commitment to web-based applications.

MacRumors readers can visit mobile.macrumors.com (http://mobile.macrumors.com) for an iPhone/iPod Touch friendly browsing experience.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/11/apple-launches-webapps-directory/)

FreeState
Oct 11, 2007, 02:14 PM
http://www.apple.com/webapps/?sr=hotnews?sr=hotnews.rss

Pretty cool site...I am definitely bookmarking it now :D

Enjoy!

Wow, great sites on it too... 1/2 of them I have never used... bookmarked too:)

Eidorian
Oct 11, 2007, 02:14 PM
Cute but not a SDK.

panoz7
Oct 11, 2007, 02:17 PM
the launch of this directory appears to unscore Apple's commitment to web-based applications.

Unscore? Underscore maybe?

Unspeaked
Oct 11, 2007, 02:17 PM
Sure makes 3rd party apps seem less likely...

mainstreetmark
Oct 11, 2007, 02:19 PM
oh well. I'm going to hang on to some hope that Leopard will expose the ability for more sophisticated apps, and those that are proficient with HTML/jQuery/etc can just go on down this "you gotta be connected to the internet" path.

edit: not even a special version for the iPhone. Has to be the "full" apple page, though I guess that's what they've been promoting.

edit2: the Weatherbug app is an excellent example of a "webapp". Maybe better than WeatherUnderground's??

mcdj
Oct 11, 2007, 02:21 PM
Wish it was more iPhone friendly. And the RSS feed doesn't open the actual apps when you click on one.

bravedeer
Oct 11, 2007, 02:22 PM
Apple seems to have left off the Instant Messaging apps deliberately, I wonder if their contract with AT&T prohibits the iPhone from having an IM app? Otherwise we'd have iChat by now, since it's a fairly easy app to code...

I hope I'm wrong.

smitty97
Oct 11, 2007, 02:25 PM
Wish it was more iPhone friendly. And the RSS feed doesn't open the actual apps when you click on one.

ditto. guess ill stick with appleopolis

Multimedia
Oct 11, 2007, 02:25 PM
Super cool. I love this way of finding stuff.

Sean7512
Oct 11, 2007, 02:25 PM
Apple seems to have left off the Instant Messaging apps deliberately, I wonder if their contract with AT&T prohibits the iPhone from having an IM app? Otherwise we'd have iChat by now, since it's a fairly easy app to code...

I hope I'm wrong.

Or possibly it implies that there is no need for them, since Apple is readying iChat for the iPhone :rolleyes: I could only wish...

andiwm2003
Oct 11, 2007, 02:26 PM
does that mean i have to find a starbucks, pay $10 and log in before i can use a calculator on the iPod touch? and i can't read my notes unless i'm logged in to the internet?

they urgently need to allow this programs to be used offline. you just burn batteries if you use them online. and that is a problem even for the iphone. with the ipod tough you're lucky to have connection at all. i don't like that concept of applications that are ONLY on the web.

aside of that they are cool.

longofest
Oct 11, 2007, 02:27 PM
Cute but not a SDK.

no, it isn't.

Data
Oct 11, 2007, 02:28 PM
Apple seems to have left off the Instant Messaging apps deliberately, I wonder if their contract with AT&T prohibits the iPhone from having an IM app? Otherwise we'd have iChat by now, since it's a fairly easy app to code...

I hope I'm wrong.

Isn't it possible to use webmessenger or the aim exquivalent then on the iphone ?

coolbreeze
Oct 11, 2007, 02:28 PM
So it's a bunch of website addresses? Errr...

Ok, it's a start, but I don't get reception everywhere. Downloadable, installable apps, please. Thank you.

Although weatherbug is pretty cool... :cool:

Daremo
Oct 11, 2007, 02:30 PM
Wow... A list of web apps... BFD.

Manic Mouse
Oct 11, 2007, 02:30 PM
At least it's easier to find iPhone sites now. I wonder if the IM ones are on there or if Apple have really sold out to AT&T.

A Pittarelli
Oct 11, 2007, 02:32 PM
this would be great if you could use the apps offline, but what the point if you HAVE to be connected to the internet???????!

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 02:34 PM
Not bad, keep people going until the SDK has to come out.

Now add a google gears style off-line webapp layer and I might be slightly impressed.

chr1s60
Oct 11, 2007, 02:34 PM
Nothing special IMO. I am curious about why they left off all the IM sites. Why must everything be a secret with Apple?

m4c1nt05h
Oct 11, 2007, 02:35 PM
does that mean i have to find a starbucks, pay $10 and log in before i can use a calculator on the iPod touch? and i can't read my notes unless i'm logged in to the internet?

they urgently need to allow this programs to be used offline. you just burn batteries if you use them online. and that is a problem even for the iphone. with the ipod tough you're lucky to have connection at all. i don't like that concept of applications that are ONLY on the web.

aside of that they are cool.

my sentiments exactly. what's the point of having these "apps" if you can only access them via the web? they're literally useless if you have no EDGE or WiFi connection.

i think many of these web apps are great and they'd be AWESOME if they could actually be installed without hacking the iphone or ipod touch.

although i do have to say it's a step in the right direction to have people developing web apps, but not quite there yet.

if/when a SDK is released, then will most people be happy/satisfied (i think).

nagromme
Oct 11, 2007, 02:36 PM
I'm fine with having all add-on apps be based on HTML/CSS/JavaScript/etc. (hopefully including Flash one day). Look at Dashboard widgets, many of which offer massive functionality based on those same technologies.

BUT:

I would need a way to store those apps locally on the phone, NOT dependent on any network connection.

Preferably accessible separate from Safari, without browser controls.

Then the experience can be complete, and the difference vs. "real" executable apps would be largely academic. Remember, conventional Mac binaries will never run on an iPhone since iPhones use ARM processors instead of Intel or PPC. Until/unless iPhones use an Intel chip, iPhone apps will always be separate from Mac apps--as they should be, since the UI is different.

(I know there will always be some things that a binary executable can do better/faster, but I expect additional Apple-authorized apps to be coming anyway.)

If there are are security/stability benefits to NOT having random 3rd-party binaries on the iPhone (I'm reminded of all the stories of other phones crashing due to bad apps) then I'm OK with Apple choosing this route.

If real binaries and real dev tools can be done well and safely in future, then all the better! But I don't see how that could be possible yet: the iPhone OS is still young and in flux, and presents a moving target that is bound to cause problems for both developers and users. Apple-supported dev tools don't make sense until the platform settles down. Meanwhile, HTML/JavaScript/etc. provide a platform that can be counted on, and is easy to develop for. And which makes use of multitouch scroll and zoom, too.

tothecore
Oct 11, 2007, 02:37 PM
Cute.. but WHERE'S MY FLASH PLAYER!!!!!!!:(

FreeState
Oct 11, 2007, 02:40 PM
this would be great if you could use the apps offline, but what the point if you HAVE to be connected to the internet???????!

98% of the time I have an internet connection - that being said only about 80% of the time is it a good one. Edge is spotty - even here in Southern California.

Places I have had problems with EDGE:

On Planes
Road Trips
Hospitals (not supposed to use phone in exam rooms etc)
Parking Garages
Some older buildings

Im sure there are lots of places that unfortunately make Apple's plan of web apps not 100% feasible.

All that being said Im glad they made the directory - its something I will use and most likely use a lot.

Project
Oct 11, 2007, 02:43 PM
this would be great if you could use the apps offline, but what the point if you HAVE to be connected to the internet???????!

Erm. Hence the name, 'Web app'.

JPark
Oct 11, 2007, 02:43 PM
This time around Apple just doesn't get it. A webapp website is no substitute for an SDK.

afbuckeye
Oct 11, 2007, 02:45 PM
Apple seems to have left off the Instant Messaging apps deliberately, I wonder if their contract with AT&T prohibits the iPhone from having an IM app? Otherwise we'd have iChat by now, since it's a fairly easy app to code...

I hope I'm wrong.

but there is a free sms app... if anything was prohibited by att, you would think it would be something like this... so i would say its not because aim clients are prohibited

psychofreak
Oct 11, 2007, 02:45 PM
This time around Apple just doesn't get it. A webapp website is no substitute for an SDK.

I think Web apps are the future, but Apple have acted on that too soon...

Westside guy
Oct 11, 2007, 02:46 PM
Playing Bejeweled with no sound is just wrong. :D

mainstreetmark
Oct 11, 2007, 02:46 PM
If real binaries and real dev tools can be done well and safely in future, then all the better! But I don't see how that could be possible yet: the iPhone OS is still young and in flux, and presents a moving target that is bound to cause problems for both developers and users. Apple-supported dev tools don't make sense until the platform settles down. Meanwhile, HTML/JavaScript/etc. provide a platform that can be counted on, and is easy to develop for. And which makes use of multitouch scroll and zoom, too.

Fine points, to be sure, but, The Steve made an oddly large deal in January about it running OSX, and as such, ought to wonderfully handle misbehaving or poorly written binaries.

Additionally, we've already seen what happens when apps crash on the iPhone, most notably Safari. It seems to silently pause a bit, and drop you back on the home screen. So, one may suspect that any evil app will simply "stop" and the iPhone will return the user to a useable state, at the home screen.

This WebApp thing is all clever, but I bet 100% of these people are making fixed-width, fixed resolution pages, which means in a year, when there are larger (in resolution) devices, all these webpages will be screwy looking. That ALONE makes me wish Apple would be coming out with at least a Webapp UI guideline. Hardcoding these apps to the current resolution of the current iPhone will create a future mess.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 02:46 PM
not bad, but isn't this just a portal for mobile websites?

cmaier
Oct 11, 2007, 02:46 PM
this would be great if you could use the apps offline, but what the point if you HAVE to be connected to the internet???????!

Many apps can be "used" offline (for example, all of mine listed in that directory), but they need to be loaded into the browser while online. When I fly, I usually load a few games into the browser tabs, then I can continue playing even while in airplane mode.

ipedro
Oct 11, 2007, 02:47 PM
These will work really well with the new Leopard Web Clip Dashboard widget. :)

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 02:48 PM
Erm. Hence the name, 'Web app'.

Bingo. Most (if not all) of these apps need a persistent internet connection to work, anyway, since you're not going to download the entire FaceBook or Fandango dataset to your iPhone (not that it would fit, anyway).

nagromme
Oct 11, 2007, 02:48 PM
I'm impressed with what people come up with using plain old JavaScript--like the Missile Command game. Touch might make that old game fun for the first time :)

http://www.apple.com/webapps/games

This time around Apple just doesn't get it. A webapp website is no substitute for an SDK.

But it could be IF they let you store web apps on the phone itself. (And since a stable, fully-supported SDK isn't possible yet, some substitute is needed and welcome. Apple may "get" the desire for an SDK, but that doesn't make it possible to deliver. I don't think people appreciate just how new the iPhone platform is, and how big the changes may be that Apple will make as they evolve and improve it. I want Apple to be free to make those improvements, rather than freezing the OS "as is" so that developers can have an SDK that's stable.)

These will work really well with the new Leopard Web Clip Dashboard widget. :)

Never thought of that :) Or it would be cool if Apple implemented the reverse:

Make an iPhoneClip of some site, and then upload it to your .Mac or FTP server, or even your own Personal Web Sharing. Bingo--your own custom "iPhone app." (But I'm not sure the original site owners would be happy if you shared the URL! The feature might have to be tied to a single phone to avoid abuse.)

Project
Oct 11, 2007, 02:55 PM
This time around Apple just doesn't get it. A webapp website is no substitute for an SDK.

No offence, but what makes you think that you know better than the hundreds of brilliant engineers at Apple? Are Apple trying to pass off web development as an official iPhone SDK? No, so why are you acting like they are?

sblasl
Oct 11, 2007, 02:56 PM
Here is the link to Apple's WebApp feedback. Maybe everyone should flood it with the comments that have been made in this thread. Let them hear the good, the bad, and whatever.

http://www.apple.com/webapps/feedback/

This is what I sent:

"As an original first day adopter of the iPhone. I am very pleased with the iPhone overall. I have also paid close attention to news regarding the efforts & success of the 3rd party "hackers". I have no intention of compromising my iPhone with their methods to install 3rd party applications.

As has been demonstrated by these individuals it is obvious what can be done on the iPhone without bringing down a portion of AT&T's network. If the network was going to be brought down it would seem to me that would have occurred by now since these individuals had no official documentation on how to develop or install these applications. They basically were shooting into the dark.

It would be much appreciated if these type of applications are allowed to be developed & installed on the iPhone.

Please allow the development of 3rd party applications be brought out of the back alley and have a formal process to follow.

This would be of mutual benefit to all.

Thank you,"

JohnHawkins
Oct 11, 2007, 02:59 PM
Does anyone actually get the feeling that Apple just doesn't get these are WEBPAGES

ThirdEarth
Oct 11, 2007, 03:00 PM
This is rediculous!
I do NOT like the WebApps concept at all!

Its taking forever for the apps to load, and im always having a bad connection with edge!

Very disappointed! :mad:

cavemonkey50
Oct 11, 2007, 03:00 PM
Anyone notice how next to every app is an icon? I wonder if Apple will soon let iPhone/touch users place those icons on the springboard.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:00 PM
engadget
a new WebApps directory unveiled today by Apple is nothing more than a dressed up version of Apple's bookmark list.
gizmodo
with over 200 apps like Bank of America Banking App, Digg App, and a few other "apps" you could run through Safari's real web browser already, but it's useful to find them all in one place.

Programs are sorted by Most Recent, Most Popular, Alphabetical and Staff Picks. The most popular programs are the facebook app, Bejeweled, Sudoku, and a Twitter app called Hahlo. My favorite gem of a program is called "Name Tag" that turns your iPhone into a $400 "Hello My Name is" sticker. Of course, none of these hold a candle to native OS X iPhone apps,

Does anyone actually get the feeling that Apple just doesn't get these are WEBPAGES

no, Im sure apple knows it, it just assumes its users don't know anything about internet.

No offence, but what makes you think that you know better than the hundreds of brilliant engineers at Apple? Are Apple trying to pass off web development as an official iPhone SDK? No, so why are you acting like they are?
don't see anything brilliant from this, maybe those hundreds of engineers are not that brilliant after all.

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 03:02 PM
Does anyone actually get the feeling that Apple just doesn't get these are WEBPAGES...

They're (mostly) "internet applications", so why shouldn't they be accessed and operated through a web page?

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 03:04 PM
No offence, but what makes you think that you know better than the hundreds of brilliant engineers at Apple?

See, the problem with Apple's strategy right now is that those 'brilliant engineers' are engaged firefighting the effort to break into their good work. Even if that is minimal effort it would still be better spent making the iPhone more like the portable computer Jobs sold to everyone at the start of the year. I think the expectation was raised that it would be a nice open platform that could possibly change mobile computing.

If Apple let it be that open platform (let 3rd party apps on and not run as 'root'(!!!)) then it could do that. Simple.

That is why were all discussing this endlessly on this forum.

Telp
Oct 11, 2007, 03:06 PM
not bad. It doesn't seem very iPhone friendly though. It takes awhile just to load the main site. Besides that it is a step in the rght direction. Hopefully they will allow these to go offline onto the phone. That would be awesome. Great start, can't wait to see what leopard brings.


-Telp

FoxyKaye
Oct 11, 2007, 03:10 PM
Cute but not a SDK.
Totally - I'm so, underwhelmed by it all.

imwoblin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:10 PM
My kingdom for some honest to goodness "Useful" smartphone aplications such as cut and paste, mms, flash, save picture or file to iPhone, etc. Cmon Apple, why are you fighting us on this? Why should I have to access a vulnerable web site just to run an application?

neven
Oct 11, 2007, 03:11 PM
I wonder if those complaining about how these are JUST web pages, and how you HAVE to be online to use them (the nerve!) direct the same complaints at Google or Digg or, err, MacRumors.

Project
Oct 11, 2007, 03:12 PM
See, the problem with Apple's strategy right now is that those 'brilliant engineers' are engaged firefighting the effort to break into their good work. Even if that is minimal effort it would still be better spent making the iPhone more like the portable computer Jobs sold to everyone at the start of the year. I think the expectation was raised that it would be a nice open platform that could possibly change mobile computing.

If Apple let it be that open platform (let 3rd party apps on and not run as 'root'(!!!)) then it could do that. Simple.

That is why were all discussing this endlessly on this forum.


No, the problem is you automatically assume that nothing is happening behind closed doors in respect to 3rd party apps. We. Dont. Know. Anything.

Just because Apple is pushing the webapp idea (which probably involves zero of said engineers given that it is just a database), does not mean that they are neglecting work on more interesting stuff.... and vice versa of course.

I just find it amazing that every Mac Rumors forum member thinks they know whats better for the long term success of Apple and the iPhone than Apple themselves..... as if Apple wants the thing to fail.

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 03:13 PM
My kingdom for some honest to goodness "Useful" smartphone aplications such as cut and paste, mms, flash, save picture or file to iPhone, etc. Cmon Apple, why are you fighting us on this? Why should I have to access a vulnerable web site just to run an application?

Yes, they better check these webapps just in case there's any TIFFs in there ;)

CWallace
Oct 11, 2007, 03:14 PM
See, the problem with Apple's strategy right now is that those 'brilliant engineers' are engaged firefighting the effort to break into their good work. Even if that is minimal effort it would still be better spent making the iPhone more like the portable computer Jobs sold to everyone at the start of the year. I think the expectation was raised that it would be a nice open platform that could possibly change mobile computing.

I am reminded of the early days of the Lisa and the Macintosh. Because of the cost and "newness" of the Lisa, Apple wanted to exercise complete control over the system and it's applications for a time to ensure that everything was presented in a consistent way to the user base as it grew.

With the Macintosh, they decided to get the third-party developers to bear the brunt of the application development in the hopes it would draw interest to it.

While the Macintosh was a success and the Lisa was not, Apple's licensing schema did allow companies like Microsoft to learn how the system worked and then develop their own counter - Windows. And then when they (for a time) stopped developing their existing Macintosh software while they ported it over to Windows and enhanced it, that drove a lot of folks (back) into the PC fold.

So an totally open iPhone SDK would bring us many new and cool aps, but one wonders if would also allow Google and those MotoWhatever folks (sorry, the name escapes me - they're porting Linux or something to mobile devices) to leverage all the iPhone's features, make it cheaper and better, and we end up with "deja vu all over again" where a single-digit percentage of us use iPhones while the rest of the world uses something else that used the iPhone as a foundation.

Considering Apple is as much a hardware company now as they were two decades ago (even if content is becoming more and more important), Steve Jobs might not want the iPhone to become the Mac to the gPhone's (or someone else's) Windows...

itcheroni
Oct 11, 2007, 03:16 PM
I wonder if those complaining about how these are JUST web pages, and how you HAVE to be online to use them (the nerve!) direct the same complaints at Google or Digg or, err, MacRumors.

The difference between those websites and the iPhone is the fact that they are websites and nothing else while the iPhone is a physical device that consumers pay for and pay service for.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:20 PM
So an totally open iPhone SDK would bring us many new and cool aps, but one wonders if Google and those MotoWhatever folks (sorry, the name escapes me) porting Linux or something to mobile devices could leverage all the iPhone's features, make it cheaper and better, and we end up with "deja vu all over again"


thats not true, you are assuming apple is the only one out there that can developing revolutionary apps. But truth to be told, google is, linux is, apple is NOT.

There are countless 3rd party apps out there for WM and Palm, what ca apple do on its iPhone/iPT/iNewTon that haven't been done? not very many at all.

Apple is the one borrowed vast amount of code from unix project, not the reverse.

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 03:20 PM
No, the problem is you automatically assume that nothing is happening behind closed doors in respect to 3rd party apps. We. Dont. Know. Anything.

No I don't. I don't say that.

Do I Have to spell it out? I'm saying they will need to release 1.1.2 soon (and sooner than they'd have had to if they hadn't directed hacking attention to it) to prevent random websites gaining root on the device. THis effort would be better spent polishing up that SDK for general release.

That's what I'm saying.


I just find it amazing that every Mac Rumors forum member thinks they know whats better for the long term success of Apple and the iPhone than Apple themselves..... as if Apple wants the thing to fail.

Yeah, because Apple don't get things wrong? All companies get stuff wrong occasionally.

At the moment Apple has a PR problem that they could do with attending to. If they hadn't anticipated this then they need to adapt.

Chupa Chupa
Oct 11, 2007, 03:21 PM
I am reminded of the early days of the Lisa and the Macintosh. Because of the cost and "newness" of the Lisa, Apple wanted to exercise complete control over the system and it's applications for a time to ensure that everything was presented in a consistent way to the user base as it grew.

With the Macintosh, they decided to get the third-party developers to bear the brunt of the application development in the hopes it would draw interest to it.

While the Macintosh was a success and the Lisa was not, Apple's licensing schema did allow companies like Microsoft to learn how the system worked and then develop their own counter - Windows. And then when they (for a time) stopped developing their existing Macintosh software while they ported it over to Windows and enhanced it, that drove a lot of folks (back) into the PC fold.

So an totally open iPhone SDK would bring us many new and cool aps, but one wonders if would also allow Google and those MotoWhatever folks (sorry, the name escapes me - they're porting Linux or something to mobile devices) to leverage all the iPhone's features, make it cheaper and better, and we end up with "deja vu all over again" where a single-digit percentage of us use iPhones while the rest of the world uses something else that used the iPhone as a foundation.

Considering Apple is as much a hardware company now as they were two decades ago (even if content is becoming more and more important), Steve Jobs might not want the iPhone to become the Mac to the gPhone's (or someone else's) Windows...


Maybe but M$ has been trying to duplicate the Mac OS for years without success. Google might build a better (and more open) phone even still. And then where is Apple? If there is a GPhone and it's open will anyone even be interested in developing apps for the iPhone even if an SDK was then released. Probably not.

I understand Apple needed to protect it's franchise but certainly it could start a licensing program like Sony has w/ Playstation, Nintendo has w/ Wii. etc. where Apple licenses the SDK to developers, but only Apple can distribute the app. The iPhone needs apps or it's going to be just another phone soon.

itcheroni
Oct 11, 2007, 03:24 PM
No, the problem is you automatically assume that nothing is happening behind closed doors in respect to 3rd party apps. We. Dont. Know. Anything.

Just because Apple is pushing the webapp idea (which probably involves zero of said engineers given that it is just a database), does not mean that they are neglecting work on more interesting stuff.... and vice versa of course.

I just find it amazing that every Mac Rumors forum member thinks they know whats better for the long term success of Apple and the iPhone than Apple themselves..... as if Apple wants the thing to fail.

Nobody believes that Apple wants anything they do to fail. What people here are simply complaining of is their own personal wants and needs concerning the iPhone. And considering that they're iPhone owners, they're opinions are completely legitimate. Apple takes into account their own goals and the wants and needs of the consumer base. Sometimes, their goals come at the expense of the wants and needs of the consumer base. This happened with AppleTV and consumers rejected it. This, I suspect many consumers fear, is happening with the iPhone. Apple doesn't want to give consumers what they want because of other Apple objectives. But, unlike the AppleTV, the iPhone won't fail. Apple has a lot of leverage until a consumer backlash. But this does not make their position a good one.

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 03:26 PM
Considering Apple is as much a hardware company now as they were two decades ago (even if content is becoming more and more important), Steve Jobs might not want the iPhone to become the Mac to the gPhone's (or someone else's) Windows...

Good point, but the way I see that is that they need to make this a more open platform to counter a more open OS like linux.

It also ignore the closeness (Eric Schmidt is on Apple's board) that Apple and Google have. Even though that closeness isn't explicit....yet.

PBz
Oct 11, 2007, 03:31 PM
Underwhelmed.

Give me native or don't bother.

Trooperof3
Oct 11, 2007, 03:33 PM
Web Apps are a start, but they need just apps. so i don't need to be online. Living in michigan the only place i have wireless is at home & work... and the nearest Starbucks in an hour away.

macphin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:34 PM
Oh damn, Apple are so lazy that they didn't even change display pictures for iPhone and iPod Touch. Now, iPod Touch have AT&T coverage and bluetooth.

http://images.apple.com/webapps/images/webapps_hero20070927.png

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:38 PM
Oh damn, Apple are so lazy that they didn't even change display pictures for iPhone and iPod Touch. Now, iPod Touch have AT&T coverage and bluetooth.

http://images.apple.com/webapps/images/webapps_hero20070927.png

lol, indeed.

siren77
Oct 11, 2007, 03:42 PM
yay, another development for the iphone/ipod.....WHERE'S LEOPARD???

zombitronic
Oct 11, 2007, 03:44 PM
Damn, 204 apps. That's a lot more than I thought there would be. Good stuff. It would be nice if some of these could take advantage of Core Animation.

quigleybc
Oct 11, 2007, 03:46 PM
Cool

More stuff I'll never get to use!!!!!


effing iPhone....

i hate till I own

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:47 PM
Damn, 204 apps. That's a lot more than I thought there would be. Good stuff. It would be nice if some of these could take advantage of Core Animation.

yeah, Im glad My palm PDA can run many of those iPhone webapp too, how nice!

Martin C
Oct 11, 2007, 03:50 PM
Does the absence of a web instant messaging application hint that Apple has their own coming sometime soon in an update?

emotion
Oct 11, 2007, 03:53 PM
yay, another development for the iphone/ipod.....WHERE'S LEOPARD???

It's just a list of web 'apps'. 26th October for Leopard. Don't you read this site? :)

aonflux
Oct 11, 2007, 03:53 PM
it would be cool if they also had an appmanager...kinda like appleopolis.com... so it would be easier to add your favorite app icons to a homepage, rather than having to bookmark each and everyone of them.

psychofreak
Oct 11, 2007, 03:55 PM
it would be cool if they also had an appmanager...kinda like appleopolis.com... so it would be easier to add your favorite app icons to a homepage, rather than having to bookmark each and everyone of them.

There are plenty of things it would be cool if Apple did...releasing an SDK is way above web-bookmarking...

zombitronic
Oct 11, 2007, 03:55 PM
yeah, Im glad My palm PDA can run many of those iPhone webapp too, how nice!

Which is exactly why they need a little extra animation to set them apart. If only these WebApps could use the Dashboard "flip."

Project
Oct 11, 2007, 03:55 PM
Nobody believes that Apple wants anything they do to fail. What people here are simply complaining of is their own personal wants and needs concerning the iPhone. And considering that they're iPhone owners, they're opinions are completely legitimate. Apple takes into account their own goals and the wants and needs of the consumer base. Sometimes, their goals come at the expense of the wants and needs of the consumer base. This happened with AppleTV and consumers rejected it. This, I suspect many consumers fear, is happening with the iPhone. Apple doesn't want to give consumers what they want because of other Apple objectives. But, unlike the AppleTV, the iPhone won't fail. Apple has a lot of leverage until a consumer backlash. But this does not make their position a good one.

Yes, iPhone customers who knew full well that there was no SDK at the time of purchase and none promised further down the line.

budward
Oct 11, 2007, 03:58 PM
I just scrolled all the apps for the iPhone! Laughable and useless!

Apple is going to shoot themselves in the foot soon enough with the iPhone for webdev only. Jobs is really screwing this up.

Seriously, as a sys admin I bought my iphone for all possibilities of creating apps to manage my servers.

This is one case the Apple/Jobs is acting like a total idiot.

Blackberry may not have iTunes WiFi, but seriously other than safari and mail what is the point? Not to mention that I am still pissed about paying $599.00 for it. I remember when Jobs first announced the iPhone prices he had this great lead-up but then price did not wow anyone, in fact it was so out of place that it made no sense in his keynote.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 03:59 PM
Yes, iPhone customers who knew full well that there was no SDK at the time of purchase and none promised further down the line.

on paper, yes, in reality,why do you think so many people turn to hacks?

Anonymous Freak
Oct 11, 2007, 04:02 PM
So it's a bunch of website addresses? Errr...

Ok, it's a start, but I don't get reception everywhere. Downloadable, installable apps, please. Thank you.

Although weatherbug is pretty cool... :cool:

What's really goofy is that the Apple Hot News headline for this new directory is "Web apps for iPhone and iPod touch ready for download" (emphasis mine.) "download"? "Web apps"? The two don't belong in the same sentence, do they?

unclepunk
Oct 11, 2007, 04:04 PM
Steve apparently doesn't use the subway 2 hours a day. :mad:

You have an amazing product and you have to limit it so severely by not allowing apps to be installed directly? I've been waiting for Apple to open the platform up. Unless they do, the "fossil in my pocket" Treo will have to suffice for now. I swore that I wouldn't buy another Treo after my 700P but at this rate, the new Centro is beginning to look good. My killer apps are mybible and Metro (subway app), both installable apps

Markleshark
Oct 11, 2007, 04:04 PM
I'm all for it, but shouldn't it be a more iPhone/iPod touch friendly page? Kind of defeats the object... Or am I missing something?...

aonflux
Oct 11, 2007, 04:11 PM
I'm all for it, but shouldn't it be a more iPhone/iPod touch friendly page? Kind of defeats the object... Or am I missing something?...

exactly what I was saying. it is great that they have done this, but it should have been formatted for the iPhone .. e.g appleopolis.com

TheQuestion
Oct 11, 2007, 04:11 PM
The question is how soon will this be available for general release?

http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/10/11/google.maps.on.ipod.touch/

suneohair
Oct 11, 2007, 04:12 PM
Sorry if this has been said before, but, you think AT&T would want them to have locally stored apps. I say that because, think about how much bandwidth gets used. Especially now that Apple has a listing of webapps. People will go there and try a lot of them.

So with that in mind, you would think AT&T would say, wait a minute, these are unlimited data plans but not that unlimited.

ravenvii
Oct 11, 2007, 04:12 PM
What's really goofy is that the Apple Hot News headline for this new directory is "Web apps for iPhone and iPod touch ready for download" (emphasis mine.) "download"? "Web apps"? The two don't belong in the same sentence, do they?

You are not aware.

You download a webpage every time you visit it. Web apps and downloads do belong in the same sentence.

japanime
Oct 11, 2007, 04:13 PM
does that mean i have to find a starbucks, pay $10 and log in before i can use a calculator on the iPod touch?

The iPod touch has a built-in calculator you can access from the home screen. You don't have to be online to use the calculator.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 04:14 PM
You are not aware.

You download a webpage every time you visit it. Web apps and downloads do belong in the same sentence.

thanks for downloading forums.macrumors.com

lol, you sure can argue its "technically correct", but absolutely misleading. apple does "think different" tho.

ThirdEarth
Oct 11, 2007, 04:14 PM
Damn, 204 apps. That's a lot more than I thought there would be. Good stuff. It would be nice if some of these could take advantage of Core Animation.

204 Apps and i Still can't GROUP or FORWARD a Text! :rolleyes:

suneohair
Oct 11, 2007, 04:16 PM
204 Apps and i Still can't GROUP or FORWARD a Text! :rolleyes:

Sell it and buy something else. Or submit feedback to Apple. You aren't doing much by rolling your eyes.

Virgil-TB2
Oct 11, 2007, 04:19 PM
At least it's easier to find iPhone sites now....I think this is really the point of the exercise.

At least the web-apps have a higher level of visibility now. This will enable some hack from PC World or some such to write one of those pieces where they review the "current state of web-apps," and I wouldn't be surprised if the verdict ended up being "pretty good.".

To those saying that these web-apps "suck" because you have to be connected to the Internet, if you look closely, almost all of them require a connection for a valid reason internal to the program itself.

If you ignore the crappy games, demos, advertisements and joke-apps, almost all of these are apps that require access to a remote database or the network itself. Even if Apple allowed them as local authorised apps, they would still need to have access to the network for data in many cases.

Also, the fact that they *are* mostly networked apps kind of adds a bit of veracity to Apple's claims that these things could ruin your network/phone experience. Think about five crappy restaurant review apps running in the background accessing some website currently experiencing a DOS attack or some such thing. :p

These are in fact excellent solutions and with the (rumoured) future ability to store some data locally a la Gears-like technology, pretty much all anyone would need in most cases.

clevin
Oct 11, 2007, 04:23 PM
Also, the fact that they *are* mostly networked apps kind of adds a bit of veracity to Apple's claims that these things could ruin your network/phone experience. Think about five crappy restaurant review apps running in the background accessing some website currently experiencing a DOS attack or some such thing. :p


you can't be serious about that? what do you say to those people who use treo, wm smartphones? they can do more on their phone, and where is the crash of the networks?

Darkroom
Oct 11, 2007, 04:23 PM
no sdk... but who needs an sdk when we have THE SCRIPTURES on the iPhone/iTouch!

http://readscriptures.com/#_home
:rolleyes:

Darkroom
Oct 11, 2007, 04:27 PM
I'm all for it, but shouldn't it be a more iPhone/iPod touch friendly page? Kind of defeats the object... Or am I missing something?...

totally... write to steve!

Timothy
Oct 11, 2007, 04:30 PM
exactly what I was saying. it is great that they have done this, but it should have been formatted for the iPhone .. e.g appleopolis.com

I completely agree. How wacky is it that they didn't format this for friendly, iPhone viewing?

Hello? Anyone there? That's such an obvious thing to do that I can only wonder in disbelief.

Drumjim85
Oct 11, 2007, 04:30 PM
has anyone noticed that this Bible app has a offline use tab?

http://www.apple.com/webapps/searchtools/bibleforiphone.html

JPark
Oct 11, 2007, 04:39 PM
...I don't think people appreciate just how new the iPhone platform is, and how big the changes may be that Apple will make as they evolve and improve it. I want Apple to be free to make those improvements, rather than freezing the OS "as is" so that developers can have an SDK that's stable.)...

That's the first good argument I've heard for Apple not making an SDK available. I'm not quite convinced yet, but it's definitely plausible.

budward
Oct 11, 2007, 04:39 PM
What's really goofy is that the Apple Hot News headline for this new directory is "Web apps for iPhone and iPod touch ready for download" (emphasis mine.) "download"? "Web apps"? The two don't belong in the same sentence, do they?


Hysterical! I didn't even read the news! Good point.

FreeState
Oct 11, 2007, 04:47 PM
has anyone noticed that this Bible app has a offline use tab?

http://www.apple.com/webapps/searchtools/bibleforiphone.html



Yeah if you click on that it tells you they will email you the Bible so you can read it in your email... for a donation

http://iphone.clearsight.org/Offline.html
"You can now access the iPhone Bible while in a plane, underwater, or in a fallout shelter, through your iPhone, without EDGE or WiFi! I have formatted the text as emails for the iPhone. If you subscribe to the IMAP email account I have made available, you can download the entire Bible to the iPhone for reading whenever, or wherever you are."

Drumjim85
Oct 11, 2007, 04:59 PM
Yeah if you click on that it tells you they will email you the Bible so you can read it in your email... for a donation



Do you think this is how apple will get offline apps to work?? ... seems pretty crappy to me.

mac-convert
Oct 11, 2007, 05:12 PM
I think they gave this the wrong name. It should be something like

http://www.apple.com/websites-for-the-iphone-or-itouch

Sorry - I don't see any "real" apps here, just web sites. I also would much prefer installable apps to the iPhone itself, but I am also not ready to iHack my phone to get them. I'll wait and see what the next release (1.1.2) looks like.

THE JUICEMAN
Oct 11, 2007, 05:18 PM
Playing Bejeweled with no sound is just wrong. :D

Thank you!!! I was hoping I wasn't the only one having a big problem with that too! lol

Telp
Oct 11, 2007, 05:20 PM
I'm all for it, but shouldn't it be a more iPhone/iPod touch friendly page? Kind of defeats the object... Or am I missing something?...

I agree. The page loaded fairly fast with 5 bars, but i dont always have 5 bars. You would think it would just be a much more simpler page that would load better on the EDGE network. Well see, maybe they will change it after seeing that. Also, the lack of IM clients bodes well for there own version coming as a native app making its debut release with leopard ;);) :p:p :D:D :apple::apple::apple::apple: I can help.

levitynyc
Oct 11, 2007, 05:23 PM
Nice job on the directory. I had no idea I could get ESPN Podcasts that way. There are a few other apps that I could use that I had no idea existed.

Excellent job apple!

cmaier
Oct 11, 2007, 05:25 PM
Thank you!!! I was hoping I wasn't the only one having a big problem with that too! lol

I'm used to it; i had the sound off on my treo. :-)

iSoulastro
Oct 11, 2007, 05:26 PM
I tried to access the game Block, and already at first try it froze my iPhone and had to do a reboot. Then I find out that you have to pay $2.99 for Block, and can only access it for 33 days?! No thank you. The website is slow, and ever since I upgraded to 1.1.1, Safari has been crashing at random, so it could quit suddenly in the middle of a game or something, I would not want to put up with the hassle.

Anonymous Freak
Oct 11, 2007, 05:30 PM
You are not aware.

You download a webpage every time you visit it. Web apps and downloads do belong in the same sentence.

I am not "aware"? Yes, technically speaking, a web page is 'downloaded' when you view it. But when referring to web apps, nobody ever uses the term "download", you use "download" when referring to native run apps.

For example:

I installed Microsoft Office (from a CD)
I downloaded OpenOffice.org (from their website,)
I run Google Apps (from their website.)

I do not "download" Google Apps in the same manner that I "download" OpenOffice.org

Bodypainter
Oct 11, 2007, 05:39 PM
ok - the :apple: iphone can not save pictures from a website. you can not make copy & paste and you do not have access to the folders of the phone. it is locked and you can not install new apps. and why? because the phone has to be simple to use, not confuse the poor user etc. when jobs introduced the iphone he said that it is a small os X computer. but what is it really? has anyone EVER let os X software run on it? nope. because it isn't an os X computer. maybe some parts of os graphics routines have been taken from the main OS, but that is as if bill gates would say windows CE is a pocket vista OS. however, back to the web-apps. i have an ipod touch and i was happy to hear about the web-apps. after 30 minutes of wasting my time with them i can say that this is some kind of joke. web-apps are very limited. you have to be online to let them run - even if you want to play a boring game. the graphics capabilities are very limited. you always have to let them run on safari, which means that you see the huge adress-bar on top and the icons on the bottom. if you want to access them, you have to go to your bookmarks etc etc. it is really terrible, the user-interface of these apps is bad (how could they be, they are html-files...), it is difficult to start the apps, they are slow, they are limited in what they can do and you have to be online etc. is this really jobs vision for the magic iphone? :mad: even on my old palm for 129$ i had better apps back in 1999! this is yet another disapointment from apple. this is NOT how an app should be, this is some kind of weak alternative, but nothing more. for me the iphone is currently loosing its magic image. you are too limited with it. you can not even change the position of the icons on the start-screen...

EricBrian
Oct 11, 2007, 05:40 PM
Ok, I am going to say it again,..... Steve, you fracking suck.

minik
Oct 11, 2007, 05:42 PM
I think it's great. Now I don't have to go out and hunt down all these WebApps since it's or gonna be on one place.

Kudo, Apple!

zombitronic
Oct 11, 2007, 05:47 PM
I don't see any "real" apps here, just web sites.

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_application):
Application software is a subclass of computer software that employs the capabilities of a computer directly and thoroughly to a task that the user wishes to perform.

It says nothing about that software having to reside on your machine. Have you ever networked your Macs and opened up an application that was on a machine other than the computer you were working on? Same deal. Just because it's written in html doesn't mean it's not actually software, or executed code.

Hence, WebApps.

lkrupp
Oct 11, 2007, 05:53 PM
Cute but not a SDK.

Get over it, please.:eek:

mac-convert
Oct 11, 2007, 05:54 PM
It says nothing about that software having to reside on your machine. Have you ever networked your Macs and opened up an application that was on a machine other than the computer you were working on? Same deal. Just because it's written in html doesn't mean it's not actually software, or executed code.

Hence, WebApps.

I don't intend to belabor or argue the fine points here, I am just stating that I would much rather have apps ON the device instead of needing to visit a web site to run something. Yes, html and the other code is an app, but I don't think this is exactly what some of us were looking for. Also, some of them are pretty lame. Send me money and you can use this for a while...

ghall
Oct 11, 2007, 05:56 PM
C'mon Apple, you can do it. Just release an iPhone/iPod touch SDK and we'll all be happy.

Seriously though. Apple needs to cut the crap, and release a real SDK. The iPhone can hardly be considered a real smart phone if it doesn't have 3rd party apps.

It's quite annoying, Apple could save a lot of time and effort with this cat-and-mouse game with hackers and release a real SDK. Everyone wins, the iPhone doesn't get hacked, and everyone gets 3rd party apps! :)

phillipjfry
Oct 11, 2007, 06:11 PM
I JUST WANT AN APP THAT LETS ME MAKE A QUICK NOTE ON THE FLY! :mad:

Although sudoku is very nice :)

zombitronic
Oct 11, 2007, 06:16 PM
I don't intend to belabor or argue the fine points here, I am just stating that I would much rather have apps ON the device instead of needing to visit a web site to run something. Yes, html and the other code is an app, but I don't think this is exactly what some of us were looking for. Also, some of them are pretty lame. Send me money and you can use this for a while...


I agree. I'd rather be able to store the apps on my phone and some of these ARE pretty lame. I'm completely fine with WebApps, however. The way I see it, Apple wants these WebApps to eventually be Widgets (http://developer.apple.com/macosx/dashboard.html) for the iPhone.

Dashboard Widgets are created using a mix of HTML, JavaScript, and CSS.

Most apps on the phone seem like Widgets to me, especially Weather, Stocks, and Calculator. That makes me think that the iPhone has something similar to the Dashboard server. It probably does, with the claims of it running a true version of OS X. If these WebApps could be developed according to Widget instance standards, I think we'd have the right kind of secure apps that Apple is hoping for. It would be nice to hear this conformation from Apple, though.

I find it funny that people are already dismissing the possibilities of this less-than-four-month-old phone, based on them not completely opening it up. Hopefully apps will make their way to the phone in the form of Widgets, and hopefully we'll see some kind of a home button in a future iPhone update, maybe even a browser/installer to access these.

mdriftmeyer
Oct 11, 2007, 06:20 PM
You guys are whining about iPhone apps, meanwhile the real meat of the Project [WebKit] is multi-platform with GTK+/Qt packages even in Debian Linux [my distro that is notoriously conservative in bringing in the latest code], is on Windows and so what you have are versions of GNOME Web Browsers using WebKit, KDE obviously moving to the merging WebKit/Qt and with this you will see not only Apple's foundation in the iPhone, but in Linux Phones which will be arriving in part due to Trolltech, Google, Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, etc.

When these new Smartphones are available using WebKit there will be more thin client apps that are not these "webapps" but more Web Services apps that deal with the enterprise markets and consumer markets that use backends warranting such a toolkit.

twoodcc
Oct 11, 2007, 06:20 PM
well this is cool and all.....but bring on apptapp i guess.

kagharaht
Oct 11, 2007, 06:21 PM
http://www.apple.com/webapps/?sr=hotnews?sr=hotnews.rss

Pretty cool site...I am definitely bookmarking it now :D

Enjoy!

I have an iPhone. I just heard about this new page being launched as web apps directory.

All I can say is, that this is the most retarded thing Apple has done so far. These aren't applications. They are websites to look nice on your iPhone. They are not real applications. No WiFi, no EDGE, no web sites. I can't wait for my iPhone to expire. I'll sell it to the next bigger Fanboy than me and get myself a new iPod Touch. They should be double the size by then.

Good job Apple for giving RIM and Palm the ammo they need to kill off the iPhone in the near future.

nickbates
Oct 11, 2007, 06:22 PM
I JUST WANT AN APP THAT LETS ME MAKE A QUICK NOTE ON THE FLY! :mad:


You mean, like the Notes app built into the iPhone?

:rolleyes:

/dev/toaster
Oct 11, 2007, 06:24 PM
I really hope Apple wakes up and realizes webbased apps is *NOT* the solution customers want.

kagharaht
Oct 11, 2007, 06:32 PM
I really hope Apple wakes up and realizes webbased apps is *NOT* the solution customers want.

Oh they will once RIM and Palm get their new stuff out in a few months for 08 launch. These new devices from them have really stepped up since the iPhone launch and will definitely kill off the iPhone if Apple continues this insane direction.

Yankees 4 Life
Oct 11, 2007, 06:33 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3A109a Safari/419.3)

yea that site is pretty cool, I might want to bookmark it soon

/dev/toaster
Oct 11, 2007, 06:36 PM
Oh they will once RIM and Palm get their new stuff out in a few months for 08 launch. These new devices from them have really stepped up since the iPhone launch and will definitely kill off the iPhone if Apple continues this insane direction.

That is what I am beating on. Apple challenged them by raising the bar, now they are going to raise it on Apple.

The iPhone is so close to being a perfect phone. The hardware is there, the UI and flow is perfect ... the number of apps and options for things like ringtones just suck. (Why oh why can't I change the SMS ringtone)

briand05
Oct 11, 2007, 06:37 PM
What a horrible "effort", this isn't even formatted for the iPhone. C'mon Apple. :rolleyes:

chelsel
Oct 11, 2007, 06:45 PM
We will get an SDK, but in classic Apple style it won't be released until there's a need to boost the stock price. Leopard is coming out soon so there isn't a need to excite the investors just yet. If we don't see it by December then it will be in June of next year... guaranteed.

Rot'nApple
Oct 11, 2007, 06:56 PM
I understand Apple needed to protect it's franchise but certainly it could start a licensing program like Sony has w/ Playstation, Nintendo has w/ Wii. etc. where Apple licenses the SDK to developers, but only Apple can distribute the app. The iPhone needs apps or it's going to be just another phone soon.

Is this webapps directory the same thing that was a story in the rumor sites a few days back when talking about the T-Mobile Sidekick way of dealing with phone apps?

If not, where does that t-mobile Sidekick way of things stand?:confused:

Rot'nApple
Oct 11, 2007, 06:59 PM
That is what I am beating on. Apple challenged them by raising the bar, now they are going to raise it on Apple.

You mean "betting on", right?

Unless you want to stick with 'beating on'!:eek:

Roy Hobbs
Oct 11, 2007, 07:16 PM
Web Apps are a start, but they need just apps. so i don't need to be online. Living in michigan the only place i have wireless is at home & work... and the nearest Starbucks in an hour away.

Good Lord, what part of Michigan do you live?
By the end of the year Oakland county will be blanketed in free wireless

Sweetbike40
Oct 11, 2007, 07:26 PM
these webapps are pathetic, boring, and silly.


EDIT: With some patience, there are some neat apps on there.

suneohair
Oct 11, 2007, 07:44 PM
these webapps are pathetic, boring, and silly.

Buy something else!

All this whining about an SDK. Tell you what, you apply to Apple and tell them you can write an SDK in a couple days. :rolleyes:

This stuff takes time folks. Until you hear Apple say, no we aren't doing it, nothing but webapps, whine all you want. You better sell your devices though, no sense in supporting a company who doesn't give you what you want.

Apple never promised anyone native apps. So to whine and cry as if they are doing you a disservice makes you sound like big babies. You knew what you were getting when you bought it. Don't buy something and play the "I bought your product now listen to me" game. It is childish. This idea of being entitled to something is ridiculous. Grow up folks. It is a phone.

MacTheSpoon
Oct 11, 2007, 07:48 PM
That's an impressive amount of apps! They're not a substitute for native third party apps, though. I'm waiting to see how Apple will eventually handle that. Some sort of process where they approve the apps and handle installation via the iTunes store would probably make the most sense, since I imagine they're keen to stop people from using an SDK to make and distribute apps that unlock iPhone SIMs.

Sweetbike40
Oct 11, 2007, 08:18 PM
Buy something else!

All this whining about an SDK. Tell you what, you apply to Apple and tell them you can write an SDK in a couple days. :rolleyes:

This stuff takes time folks. Until you hear Apple say, no we aren't doing it, nothing but webapps, whine all you want. You better sell your devices though, no sense in supporting a company who doesn't give you what you want.

Apple never promised anyone native apps. So to whine and cry as if they are doing you a disservice makes you sound like big babies. You knew what you were getting when you bought it. Don't buy something and play the "I bought your product now listen to me" game. It is childish. This idea of being entitled to something is ridiculous. Grow up folks. It is a phone.



Hey! You are attacking the wrong person. I never said I prefer an sd- whatever that is..... I just simply think those webapps are boring n a waste of energy. I personally have no desire to hack any devices. I am content with just the way they are. If the Touch didn't have wi-fi, I wouldn't have bought it. Of course a few more cool apps on here would be cool even if they were music based only being this is a music device on steroids.

iSoulastro
Oct 11, 2007, 08:23 PM
No one is noticing that these aren't all free apps? Some games are charging $2.99 for 33 days of use, WTF?

spotlight07
Oct 11, 2007, 08:41 PM
...Preferably accessible separate from Safari, without browser controls...


My request for the iPhone "October 2007" :p :D firmware update... a CSS option that moves Safari controls off-screen when the page loads (similar to the one that controls the page load width for iphone) and a requires a Home button press to re-instate the controls. Safari web apps would feel more like real apps.

phytonix
Oct 11, 2007, 10:05 PM
thats not true, you are assuming apple is the only one out there that can developing revolutionary apps. But truth to be told, google is, linux is, apple is NOT.

Please educate me how Linux is revolutionary apps? Or how does Linux develop revolutionary apps?

mashinhead
Oct 11, 2007, 11:28 PM
wow so they made a site that links to other sites. that's pretty amazing. never have a seen a list of bookmarks get so much attention. this doesn't solve installing apps on the phone apple

mac-convert
Oct 11, 2007, 11:37 PM
<snip...>So to whine and cry as if they are doing you a disservice makes you sound like big babies. You knew what you were getting when you bought it. Don't buy something and play the "I bought your product now listen to me" game. It is childish. This idea of being entitled to something is ridiculous. Grow up folks. It is a phone.

I think that it is totally inappropriate to have someone sit back and tell people on this forum to stop their whining and crying. That in itself is a disservice to the members here. We have our opinions, and are simply stating them. We also have our wish lists and are stating them also. The same was done in the development of the MAC OS that we run today. These were listened to, and I have to believe that the community will also be listened to when it comes to native apps on the iPhone. Yes, we bought them knowing what the capabilities were. Yes, we also bought them knowing what Apple is capable of doing. Webapps will make some people happy, they will make some people unhappy, and others will be non-committal - I have seen it all in this thread so far. We have all stated our opinions and our wishes - please do not "slam" us for that. Oh - yes - it is a phone, it works well - but it's much more and will be very much more.

suneohair
Oct 11, 2007, 11:50 PM
I think that it is totally inappropriate to have someone sit back and tell people on this forum to stop their whining and crying. That in itself is a disservice to the members here. We have our opinions, and are simply stating them. We also have our wish lists and are stating them also. The same was done in the development of the MAC OS that we run today. These were listened to, and I have to believe that the community will also be listened to when it comes to native apps on the iPhone. Yes, we bought them knowing what the capabilities were. Yes, we also bought them knowing what Apple is capable of doing. Webapps will make some people happy, they will make some people unhappy, and others will be non-committal - I have seen it all in this thread so far. We have all stated our opinions and our wishes - please do not "slam" us for that. Oh - yes - it is a phone, it works well - but it's much more and will be very much more.

Hey, I want real 3rd party apps as well. But first of all, there is no reason to complain because like I said, we all knew what we were getting.

Do I think Apple will listen? Maybe. But they aren't going to listen to a bunch of whiners. Suing Apple and the likes because there are no 3rd party apps is insane.

There are ways about going about this.
1. An organized and rational appeal to Apple.
2. Don't buy the iPhone. Hit them where it hurts, sales.

My point here is to not cry foul. Apple hasn't done any harm to you by not having native apps. Zero. They didn't lie, they didn't bait and switch you. This is typical of the Apple community. They hype themselves up, hype hype hype. They find out it won't have it. They still hype hype hype, "maybe it will come before it is released." They get the product. It still isn't there. Hype hype hype, "it is coming." Then something solidifies the idea that it won't be, and it is "OMG, screw Apple!," They are so stupid!!!! :mad:"

That is what I am sick of the attitude here. Whining like little babies because you feel entitled to something you were never promised is completely childish. You can't buy a product that clearly excludes a feature and then begin demanding it. You might succeed, however you should really take a look at yourself and how ridiculous you are being. Would you buy a car that only has a speedometer and then demand a tachometer? Even though you had prior knowledge as to what it included? Sure we can make suggestions, but again, you bought the product with foreknowledge of what it was. To get angry and downright idiotic because said company decides not to give it to you shows how detached from reality you are.

We can have opinions, I have one that jives with people here. However, I am not about to cry about it. It was never promised.

So no, what I have said is not a disservice. Quite the contrary, my goal is to raise some rational thinking. Put things in perspective a little. I started this thread with an actual goal and methodology: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=366092

Yet people would rather cry in here. Which do you find more inappropriate?

ECatt
Oct 11, 2007, 11:54 PM
I am getting really confused now about all this complaining regarding the iPhone. Doesn’t the iPhone do all things it was supposed to do when you bought it? You bought a phone that said could only be used with AT&T. Does it not connect to AT&T? You spent over $500 bucks for a gadget that had a certain number of apps. Is any app advertised missing from your iPhone? I believe it was crystal clear when you bought it what it could and wouldn’t do. What is the problem?
You say Apple doesn’t know what it’s doing yet I do not see you produce a phone like the one you say they should do. If you believe you are so much better than Apple, please produce the perfect phone yourself (by the number of complaints I read around you’ll probably be billionaire in just a couple of hours).
Maybe this is the best Apple can do at the moment; which is much more that what many other companies in the same business have done so far. I did not hear you complain about the lack of a real browser on your last phone, or the lack of third party apps for it.
The iPhone is just staring and I think with all its “shortcomings” is quite impressive. Now, if you do not like what the iPhone does, no one is pointing a gun to your head to buy one. Please feel free to buy any other phone you think is better than the iPhone.
I like what I’ve seen so far and I believe we’re just witnessing the beginning of something very, very special.

dAlen
Oct 12, 2007, 01:15 AM
Apple is trying to pave the way to the future - but like the Newton croaked, maybe this concept will to - though you will see, if anything, it will only be forestalled.

Basically Apple looks to be priming people to not 'owning' or keeping content on their devices anymore.
Lets look at the bigger picture. Web offices online from Microsoft, etc., and is there not, at least talks of, Adobe putting their apps online where it frees you of having to have the app on your hard-drive. (Just what I needed, Photoshop on some server somewhere...its already slow as it is, and I cant see this concept of applications being served up via a server really benefiting me...imagine Maya and Final Cut with AfterEffects all coming to you from a server and not being located on your harddrive. Forget the internet connections - again these apps would benefit by being juiced up on some faster machines before they go that route.)

Now that I have ranted about that concept, it seems logical this is what Apple is doing with these Apps, perhaps. It would be the smallest and easiest trial product to start with. Small apps that wont break you if you cant get to them for some reason, to get you used to the concept.
One day you wont have an app on your computer, and you will be charged for every second you use an app. (Thats how greedy the companies are...not enough you buy an app, how can they charge you more.)
Kind of like ringtones. You buy a song, but by no means is it yours to make shorter for a ringtone. Most people seem content with this and say, "yes master...I do not have any right but to listen to the song in the one format you require of me.

I will say, technology is sweet, but if strict - greed center control is placed on it, no one benefits. Not even the greedy, we will not progress nearly as fast as we would with a more open spirit to things.

Think of the no skype, ichat, etc. From one view point AT&T says, "its my network, I can do what I want". There has to be a halfway meeting point on this...and not so tight control on things, or things will go through their fingers, and ultimately be messy for all.

This is a quickly written piece, but I think the main point gets across.
I realize someone, somewhere made the comment that its easier to support a tighter controlled environment. This is fine...no one has said that they need to support every app that is there. As pointed out people can download crap to the computer now and mess up their computer and Apple wont be at fault, so why get buggy about iphone.

I just know that trillion is going to float my way and I will open my own technology company. :D

Peace

dAlen

B. Hunter
Oct 12, 2007, 01:50 AM
I think that it is totally inappropriate to have someone sit back and tell people on this forum to stop their whining and crying. That in itself is a disservice to the members here. We have our opinions, and are simply stating them. We also have our wish lists and are stating them also. The same was done in the development of the MAC OS that we run today. These were listened to, and I have to believe that the community will also be listened to when it comes to native apps on the iPhone. Yes, we bought them knowing what the capabilities were. Yes, we also bought them knowing what Apple is capable of doing. Webapps will make some people happy, they will make some people unhappy, and others will be non-committal - I have seen it all in this thread so far. We have all stated our opinions and our wishes - please do not "slam" us for that. Oh - yes - it is a phone, it works well - but it's much more and will be very much more.

Well chalk one up for the pandering department.
Its a disservice when people carry on with the same complaints. If you want something changed, email Apple. For some of you, email Dr. Phil.

What happened to the days when people would do research before following the Pied Piper to you local Apple store?

Dublo7
Oct 12, 2007, 02:16 AM
When I first read about this, I must have missed the word "Web", because I got really excited. Then when I found out it was just all webapps I'd seen before, my hopes were dashed. I actually thought Apple announced third party app support :(

Anyway, this isn't big news. I could have found all these web apps on Google.

mainstreetmark
Oct 12, 2007, 08:07 AM
These are in fact excellent solutions and with the (rumoured) future ability to store some data locally a la Gears-like technology, pretty much all anyone would need in most cases.

You spend far too much of your computer experience inside a browser. These are "pretty good" solutions, and ones that are in no way novel to the iPhone. Treos and Palms can use most of those. Here's my reply to a similar post in a similar thread


- No motion sensor support (many interesting marble games)
- No iPod support (visualizers, graphers, trackers, and all the stuff I like to do with iTunes data)
- No phone support (to track callers, hook into a planning/business apps)
- No radio support (to make a wifi signal strength grapher, so you don't have to drag a computer around)
- No Speaker support (to make your own sounds)
- No os-level support (to make wide-level things, like Quicksilver)
- No graphic card support (to make custom UI elements, or even custom apps like a Finger Paint)
- No native GUI (so a "webapp" would work more like YouTube.app, instead of a YouTube.com reformatted as a iPhone page)
- No local preference support (cookies?) (so an app can remember, for example, WHICH cities you want to display the weather of)
- No animation support (which goes right into the whole 'games' concept, but also helps for the various transitions and fades that the native iPhone apps do)


It's just so limiting to have to do stuff with high, high level code, like HTML and javascript. The iPhone is a full computer! It even has a jack on the bottom. If you could program the iPhone like a computer, I can already visualize stuff like a portable diagnostics device, which you plug into some airplane or automobile, and it displays diagnostic data, communicates with the central computer and installs firmware updates, or even just displays to the technician what is wrong with the item he's hooked up to. There are numerous examples in industry and commerce where a computer in your pocket (one that happens to have a camera, a speaker, a large multitouch display, a microphone and two types of network connectors) would be beneficial.

You can come back with that ol' "Minority" argument, but so what? People working on these applications are not paid for by you or Apple. They are paid for by the people who truly want a device that can expand to meet the demand of anything, and Apple/ATT benefit from the increased demand. The iPhone is PHYSICALLY capable of handling anything (or soon will be), and for any one of you to say that there should not be a native SDK should instead say "Let there be a Native SDK, and I'll choose not to install those apps on my phone". If Apple remains in control, all we're going to get is the generic stuff (photos, documents) and no one will ever be able to create a solution for a specific need.

I can think of dozens of application examples I want that are not possible, even with extra offline safari-isms. The iPhone is uniquely capable, and I can't wait for that capability to be passed on to us developers so we can get out in the field with something more useful than a notepad.

freediverdude
Oct 12, 2007, 08:38 AM
An idea for something that they could do for now, until they decide on a SDK, is to make a dashboard for the iphone. I think some other posters have hinted at this. Make it so that you either tap on a dashboard icon, or triple tap the home button or something, and a translucent dashboard pops up, just like in Tiger, with icons for the web apps. This would make them much easier to access and use, and seem more like "apps". It would also make the interface seem more like osx, and tie in with macs and leopard. I think it would also spur more development of these web apps, as they would be seen as more useful and an official part of the phone.

MonkeyClaw
Oct 12, 2007, 09:10 AM
So I have thought long and hard (thats what she said) about this issue with webapps and while at first i was just as pissed as the rest of you, I've come to the conclusion that what Apple is doing now is sort of changing the paradigm here; they're thinking outside the box. I mean imagine, with the iPhone, we have a device that is constantly (well almost constantly) connected to the internet. So why not have the apps web based? Its like ondemand movies except in application form. Instead of having to write a dedicated app to go on your device, Apple has designed this to function in a manner so that when you need an app, go to that site or your bookmarks and grab it there, no install, just use and you're done.

I find this interesting and rather exciting now because while its implementation is a bit off IMO right now (having to run through safari, etc), the concept is really neat. I think if Apple down the road gives the option of having shortcut icons on your iPhone/iPod Touch for these apps and makes it so that they don't have to run through the browser, they can keep it web based but still have the convience of a dedicated app.

There will always be a place for both, and I think apple will design a true SDK and delivery system for dedicated apps, but lets face it, with the power of web 2.0, we will see a shift down the road to apps like these (more sophisticated though) and a decrease in your dedicated apps. Apple is just trying to push the bar a bit while (at least I believe) it works on a method to maintain security and stability yet offering the ability to make your own dedicated apps.

Either way, this directory is hardly a bad thing, it makes this concept one step closer to actually really working well in the real world.

PS, I love the idea of a dashboard-esq web app launcher that freediverdude suggested.

wPod
Oct 12, 2007, 09:36 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3A109a Safari/419.3)

Isn't the point of having Safari on the iPhone to allow people to view full size web pages and not have to revert to special iPhone only web sites? Apple just needs to allow normal app development for the iPhone :-/

clevin
Oct 12, 2007, 09:43 AM
check out my webapps lists :D
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=367641

lawcomic
Oct 12, 2007, 10:08 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3A109a Safari/419.3)

Isn't the point of having Safari on the iPhone to allow people to view full size web pages and not have to revert to special iPhone only web sites? Apple just needs to allow normal app development for the iPhone :-/

I disagree with part of this. Having iPhone maximized Apps is far better than having to go to regular web sites. While it's great to have the ability to do so (well, would be if Flash were added...but I digress), sites designed for the phone look better and load faster.

This is good.

jblodgett
Oct 12, 2007, 10:15 AM
There are some nice webapps--- but the whole loading process is SLOW. Even via wifi, the loading process is not as quick or rapid as it could be if the applications were native. Then if you switch to an EDGE connection- you're multiplying the load time delay exponentially.

I think it is good to have lots of web based apps, and it is good that they are being developed. But until the loading speed can be addressed they are really just a bandaid, not a cure.

mmulin
Oct 12, 2007, 10:20 AM
just want to read my .mac mail on the iPt. safari on it does a pretty bad job. can't access the folders, when sending it just flips back to the application screen, etc. com'on apple doesn't work with apple? now just hope for the future left. waited 2 years for the iPt. patience is a virtue but recent develpments just result in growing doubt..

mainstreetmark
Oct 12, 2007, 02:27 PM
just want to read my .mac mail on the iPt. safari on it does a pretty bad job. can't access the folders, when sending it just flips back to the application screen, etc. com'on apple doesn't work with apple? now just hope for the future left. waited 2 years for the iPt. patience is a virtue but recent develpments just result in growing doubt..

You may have to do a bit of research here, but I think:

1. You can connect to other pop accounts with gmail
2. There's a mobile version of gmail.

kagharaht
Oct 12, 2007, 02:32 PM
Hey, I want real 3rd party apps as well. But first of all, there is no reason to complain because like I said, we all knew what we were getting.

Do I think Apple will listen? Maybe. But they aren't going to listen to a bunch of whiners. Suing Apple and the likes because there are no 3rd party apps is insane.

There are ways about going about this.
1. An organized and rational appeal to Apple.
2. Don't buy the iPhone. Hit them where it hurts, sales.

My point here is to not cry foul. Apple hasn't done any harm to you by not having native apps. Zero. They didn't lie, they didn't bait and switch you. This is typical of the Apple community. They hype themselves up, hype hype hype. They find out it won't have it. They still hype hype hype, "maybe it will come before it is released." They get the product. It still isn't there. Hype hype hype, "it is coming." Then something solidifies the idea that it won't be, and it is "OMG, screw Apple!," They are so stupid!!!! :mad:"

That is what I am sick of the attitude here. Whining like little babies because you feel entitled to something you were never promised is completely childish. You can't buy a product that clearly excludes a feature and then begin demanding it. You might succeed, however you should really take a look at yourself and how ridiculous you are being. Would you buy a car that only has a speedometer and then demand a tachometer? Even though you had prior knowledge as to what it included? Sure we can make suggestions, but again, you bought the product with foreknowledge of what it was. To get angry and downright idiotic because said company decides not to give it to you shows how detached from reality you are.

We can have opinions, I have one that jives with people here. However, I am not about to cry about it. It was never promised.

So no, what I have said is not a disservice. Quite the contrary, my goal is to raise some rational thinking. Put things in perspective a little. I started this thread with an actual goal and methodology: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=366092

Yet people would rather cry in here. Which do you find more inappropriate?

I agree about not buying another iPhone when my contract runs out. I'm actually tempted to just sell it off and buy a BB, Palm or Nokia. Their new phones coming out in 08 are simply going to blow the iPhone out of the water. If Apple continues with this stupid web based "apps" push.

The competition are going all out next year and wow, they are looking really good. UI touch and hopefully jettison windows mobile or update it so that touch UI will be from top to bottom like Apple.

It's too bad, Apple did push the future of hardware and UI design on the mobile device to bring us to the 22nd century. But as far as functionality goes, they completely blew it. So many other cheaper smart phones can run circles around the iPhone when it comes to real applications and features for both work and play.

Too bad. I'm sure the iPod Touch will still be around. Now thats the one I will get to replace my iPhone for entertainment purposes.

HairyPotter
Oct 12, 2007, 10:15 PM
http://www.apple.com/webapps/?sr=hotnews?sr=hotnews.rss

Pretty cool site...I am definitely bookmarking it now :D

Enjoy!

AddFone has almost 1,000 applications on the database. Five times more than Apple's directory and includes native apps.... and is growing faster each day.
http://addfone.com