Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Allows 3rd Party Web Browsers in App Store

Bernie-Mac said:
Yeah but Google isnt Apple and yet they have Maps that gets updated with each firmware. Youtube isnt apple and they have control over that. How do you know they wont work with Mozilla to make a Firefox app that they can control with updates, etc..?
Click to expand...


Maps and Youtube and things Apple doesn't have in-house. They decided they needed them and found a place to get them.

Why would Apple need another web browser? Name a reason you like those browsers better and they'll say "we can make Safari do that." I mean, answer why Apple (not you) would want another browser to compete with their own.

I can't think of a reason. It's not impossible, but no reason = not likely.
 
Small White Car said:
Maps and Youtube and things Apple doesn't have in-house. They decided they needed them and found a place to get them.

Why would Apple need another web browser? Name a reason you like those browsers better and they'll say "we can make Safari do that." I mean, answer why Apple (not you) would want another browser to compete with their own.

I can't think of a reason. It's not impossible, but no reason = not likely.
Click to expand...

Hmm...you have a point. "We can make Safari do that." is something Apple definitely would say. While Apple and Mozilla could have like a joint app project if they wanted to so Apple could have control over it, like you said, they could easily enough just upgrade safari. I guess we can only hope then.
 
Bernie-Mac said:
Hmm...you have a point. "We can make Safari do that." is something Apple definitely would say. I guess we can only hope then.
Click to expand...

Yes, remember, I'm not talking about what I hope for or want.

I'm just predicting what Apple is going to do. You have to remember that guessing what people want is not the best way to play that game! It doesn't always work out that way.
 
I'm going to have to agree with small white car on this one. I don't think we will be seeing FF/Opera on the iPhone anytime soon. IT would compromise Apple's release timetables.

Don
 
Small White Car said:
Since the iPhone came out nearly 2 years ago they have made absolute certain that they control all the technology that runs it. This means they can update the software and hardware whenever they want. (Unlike with Macs where they often have to wait for 3rd parties to catch up. Remember how many people held off on Intel Macs until a native Photoshop came out? They've made sure that nothing like that can hold up a new iPhone. Everything that 3rd parties make is controlled in safe little sandboxes that Apple runs and is free update around the apps whenever they want.)

They have done NOTHING to compromise that ideology yet. Allowing these "Safari Skins" doesn't do that. Allowing 'fart' app doesn't do that. Coming out with the SDK didn't do it. None of the changes they've made betray that original plan.

Allowing flash or different browser engines WOULD compromise that goal.

So no, I don't work for Apple, but when they go way out of their way to do something for almost 2 years then yes, I feel safe saying that they'll continue to do that. If you think they're going to suddenly change their minds with no warning then it is up to you to explain why you think they'll suddenly do that. Because they've given no clue that they will. Do YOU work for Apple?
Click to expand...

Except the biggest flaw in your logic (this makes every point you made invalid and you completely wrong) is that most, if not all apps needed to be updated in order to run on 2.2

So what's the difference between waiting for a native photoshop and waiting for a working Pandora app?
 
damnyooneek said:
webOS is going to stomp mobile osx if apple doesnt loosen things up
Click to expand...

It's doing it already according to Rubinstein. Six months is not enough time to play catch up to the Palm Pre. This may look like a desperate attempt from Apple to Palms superior browser experience.
 
This is eggcellent news. Hopefully this signals a new attitude at Apple that will spread to computers and increased choices regarding new models and options.
 
Nice! Can't wait for Internet Explorer! :rolleyes:


and btw, Why can't flash happen in a browser developed for the iPhone??
 
This is good news, even though it exactly new news. But, any change in Apple's current philosophy can only lead to better things. However, having alternative browsers on the iPhone isn't novel, so I don't think this is a reaction to the Pre - that's just not Apple's style. Alternative browsers have already been a part of Google Mobile, iDownload, Folders, and iStorage (and there are probably more). However, this still is a change (at least in Apple's eyes) since these apps have been previosuly held up in the approval process (for what reason, Apple only knows).
 
iParis said:
Because Steve Jobs says so.
Click to expand...

good answer. however technically it is possible yes?




edit... what I'm trying to get at is that if it is technically possible then where does apple draw the line? in terms of browsers with desktop plugin functionality that would allow specific types of video, flash, animation, to display in a browser. Does Apple say yes to all just not flash? I think eventually Apple will leave it up to the consumer to decide whether they want to drain their battery or not. Or at least they should let the consumer choose.
 
slapppy said:
It's doing it already according to Rubinstein. Six months is not enough time to play catch up to the Palm Pre. This may look like a desperate attempt from Apple to Palms superior browser experience.
Click to expand...

Your quoting a palm exec? I expect that he would say that. You have no idea of what apple has been planning for os 3.0 just like you didn't know with palm. Apple will have a year since 2.0 to build 3.0. Let's see what they have in store especially when they get the same processsors as the pre with the engineering help of pa semi. You act as if the product has been released when it's just vaporware.
 
boss1 said:
good answer. however technically it is possible yes?




edit... what I'm trying to get at is that if it is technically possible then where does apple draw the line? in terms of browsers with desktop plugin functionality that would allow specific types of video, flash, animation, to display in a browser. Does Apple say yes to all just not flash? I think eventually Apple will leave it up to the consumer to decide whether they want to drain their battery or not. Or at least they should let the consumer choose.
Click to expand...

If they impliment it we will most likely be able to turn it on and off. And it will probably be made to where it doesn't kill the battery as much.
 
I wonder if this means that MailWrangler would be allowed? It was originally denied for being too much like Mail, but surely the developer could just rebrand it as a browser with support for different "identities". I could really use an app like that.
 
str1f3 said:
Your quoting a palm exec? I expect that he would say that. You have no idea of what apple has been planning for os 3.0 just like you didn't know with palm. Apple will have a year since 2.0 to build 3.0. Let's see what they have in store especially when they get the same processsors as the pre with the engineering help of pa semi. You act as if the product has been released when it's just vaporware.
Click to expand...

Rubinstein is not just your typical Palm exec. What he's saying has some serious weight to it. All this talk of 3.0 seems more of vaporware than the Palm Pre. Apple can't even get push out in time and we are to believe 3.0 is going to catch up to the Pre or existing smartphones that has the basics already available? Well probably get feautures to help increase purchases for iTunes content.
 
hdm42 said:
Impossible, given the current limitations of the SDK. Well, at least, impossible through iTunes. I suppose Mozilla could implement some kind of internet-based sync, ala MobileMe. But Webkit is infinitely superior to Gecko anyway, so.... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

1Password mobile syncs with the desktop app through a wireless network. I don't see why FF couldn't do the same.
 
Beric said:
Java AND Flash - I need both.
Click to expand...

You're out of luck.

Java and Flash require non-Apple interpreters (JVM & ActiveScript). Apple doesn't allow non-Apple interpreters in networked iPhone apps. All these recent new web browser apps (including potentially Chrome!) use WebKit, which is already built-in to the iPhone OS, thus OK.

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back