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

iPhone IM App In Development

F

FunFred2007

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Mar 8, 2007
11
0
Ok. So I have no real evidence, but here is my reasoning.

Look at all of the categories on Apple's list of Webapps. Do you see one IM app? No.

Now, of all the different categories, this one possibly has more entrants than any other.

Don't you think that's a little weird? Perhaps Apple is purposefully keeping IM apps off so that people will be very excited when they release a native app?
 
honestly. i think it has more to do with battery life.

when i had apollo im installed the battery was taxed by checking every 'x' seconds for an incoming chat.
 
Apple endorsing a text messaging web app might be seen by ATT as endorsing an app that lures iPhone owners away from using ATT's sms system.


I'm not saying I agree with this statement. It is what it is.
 
boss1 said:
Apple endorsing a text messaging web app might be seen by ATT as endorsing an app that lures iPhone owners away from using ATT's sms system.


I'm not saying I agree with this statement. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Everyone always says this, but it cannot be true. There are plenty of phones offered by AT&T that include IM (including the Blackberry). It's a fun theory, but I think it's wrong. An IM client will come for the iPhone.

--DotComCTO
 
DotComCTO said:
Everyone always says this, but it cannot be true. There are plenty of phones offered by AT&T that include IM (including the Blackberry). It's a fun theory, but I think it's wrong. An IM client will come for the iPhone.

--DotComCTO
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100% .. however until an IM client comes out for the iPhone I like reference certain explanations like the one I posted, it keeps the world logical and normal for me... so that I don't drive myself insane getting frustrated on why my friends "last decade" phone can do this so easily and my revolutionary iPhone can't :)

Edit: When this explanation doesn't work I usually refer to battery life. I have a few others also, they explain a bunch...i should make a list.
 
boss1 said:
Apple endorsing a text messaging web app might be seen by ATT as endorsing an app that lures iPhone owners away from using ATT's sms system.


I'm not saying I agree with this statement. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Then why would Apple advertise other Free SMS WebApps on the new WebApps page? The ones where you can send IMs over the internet.
 
JonHimself said:
Then why would Apple advertise other Free SMS WebApps on the new WebApps page? The ones where you can send IMs over the internet.
Click to expand...

Good point...and point taken.

thankfully I can still fall back on the "battery life" explanation for the sake of my sanity :D
 
boss1 said:
I agree with you 100% .. however until an IM client comes out for the iPhone I like reference certain explanations like the one I posted, it keeps the world logical and normal for me... so that I don't drive myself insane getting frustrated on why my friends "last decade" phone can do this so easily and my revolutionary iPhone can't :)

Edit: When this explanation doesn't work I usually refer to battery life. I have a few others also, they explain a bunch...i should make a list.
Click to expand...

My 'conspiracy' theory is that Apple was rushed to market with the iPhone (e.g., the paint was still wet) so the app selection was limited to keep things simple. Now Apple sees the iPhone getting hacked and they are working to plug the holes. I think they are holding new apps back and using them as an incentive to get users to upgrade to the latest firmware (while plugging security holes and cutting off unofficial 3rd party apps).

How 'bout that for a theory?

:D

--DotComCTO
 
You know, I don't think AT&T would loose much SMS if there were an IM client. I SMS alot, and would love IM, but the only time I would use IM is to maybe chat with my wife when she is at home on the computer. I still would have to SMS everyone else that is never home or does not have IM. My boss, my mom, my friend, co-workers. Sending SMS to a phone is just too convenient because everyone has one and they are usually carrying it most of the time.

- James
 
I done like that one. I prefer to use flickIM but I think it would be nicer if they made an iChat app right in the phone. Sidekick does it. For a lot if sidekick owners thats the reason no iPhone for them. Oh well.
 
The Beejive.com web app for iPhone is SPECTACULAR. It actually works on EDGE for those of us that have T-Mobile.

Apollo and MobileChat have implemented libpurple which does NOT work for those of us using internet2.voicestream.com
 
DotComCTO said:
Everyone always says this, but it cannot be true. There are plenty of phones offered by AT&T that include IM (including the Blackberry).
Click to expand...

Yeah, but AT&T treats IMs like SMS. You still get one message used from your plan (or charged 10¢ each if you don't have one) when you send an IM. That's how it's always worked for me.
 
Why wouldn't AT&T want an IM app on the iPhone? You still get charged for each IM you send. Atleast that's how it is on my phone. Obviously, a web app for an IM client won't cost any money.
 
IM and SMS are not mutually exclusive. I have countless IM contacts with whom I do not exchange SMS messages.

boss1 said:
Apple endorsing a text messaging web app might be seen by ATT as endorsing an app that lures iPhone owners away from using ATT's sms system.
Click to expand...
 
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