Should Apple de-bundle some of the built-in Apps like Android?

[Black Magic]

I'm wondering if Apple should consider de-bundling some of the built-in apps like calendar and such so that they can be updated more frequently with fixes and features? Google did this with Android and it seems to be working very well. Not sure if there are any down sides to doing this.

What are your thoughts?

 

[teknikal90]

I'm wondering if Apple should consider de-bundling some of the built-in apps like calendar and such so that they can be updated more frequently with fixes and features? Google did this with Android and it seems to be working very well. Not sure if there are any down sides to doing this.

What are your thoughts?

nope.

 

[OneMike]

I say yes

Also give the option on not installing apps such as stocks, news stand, compass, etc...

 

[thatgirl87]

Yes. Stocks, calendar, newsstand, and passbook should be downloadable though the App Store. Contacts shouldn't even have a separate app since it can be accessed in the phone app anyway.

 

[blarivee]

Yes. I don't use stocks or weather app and they end up being stuufed into the folder. Contacts was originally not a separate app. Some genius decided to go trigger happy and load up the screen with apps.

 

[Mxbzz]

At the very least there should be an option to hide apps. I don't really mind the few MB these apps take but I'd love being able to hide a few (namely News Stand, Passbook, iTunes, and Contacts). SBSettings has had this feature as long as I could remember, and Android has it built in.

 

[Black Magic]

At the very least there should be an option to hide apps. I don't really mind the few MB these apps take but I'd love being able to hide a few (namely News Stand, Passbook, iTunes, and Contacts). SBSettings has had this feature as long as I could remember, and Android has it built in.

Hiding apps has been requested forever! I gotta believe it should be here by iOS 8. I mean seriously, iOS 8 should be some serious polishing up and feature adds.

 

[charlituna]

I'm wondering if Apple should consider de-bundling some of the built-in apps like calendar and such so that they can be updated more frequently with fixes and features? Google did this with Android and it seems to be working very well. Not sure if there are any down sides to doing this.

What are your thoughts?

I don't think they will. And I'm not sure I agree that they should.

Outside of the utilities like weather, stocks etc. And everything but music, photos, TV, movies on the Apple TV. Those I agree should go 'indie'

And I would love to see more download if you need it stuff like language packs. Plus plug in support for iOS level themes, add ons to apps like pages templates, MathType support for numbers etc

 

[JBaker122586]

Nope.
All of Apple's apps in the App Store follow "the rules" of the App Store. That is, they use the same APIs that every other developer has access to. Most, if not all, of the apps that come installed on the phone use core frameworks that are only available to Apple. That's why your phone can ring without the app open, your appointments show up in notification center, etc.

Plus, if Apple stopped bundling essential apps like Calendar, it would hinder the usability for a lot of people. There are a lot of people that don't post on Internet forums that don't actively seek out the best app for such and such a task. For them, the lack of a calendar on their phone would be confusing and undesirable. Compass or something, I could understand. But not something as important to the functionality of a smartphone as Calendar.

 

[ReanimationN]

Maybe not debundled, but it would be good for them to be able to be updated independently of the OS. That's something Android definitely has right.

 

[Black Magic]

Maybe not debundled, but it would be good for them to be able to be updated independently of the OS. That's something Android definitely has right.

I agree with you 100%.

 

[Nevaborn]

Just no. The appa are fie. i dont even use stocks but am happy to have these apps and want it updated with iOS so we all know where we are.

Hell why we even discussing going down an android upgrade path, havent we learned where that leads. Things work as they are. If you dont want to see these apps just shove them in the back of a folder.

 

[Daveoc64]

I'm wondering if Apple should consider de-bundling some of the built-in apps like calendar and such so that they can be updated more frequently with fixes and features?

Your assumption is that Apple wants to update these things.

I think it's pretty clear that they don't care about changing them. Many of these Apps haven't really changed since the original iPhone, barring updated UI for iOS 7.

----------

Nope.
All of Apple's apps in the App Store follow "the rules" of the App Store.

This isn't true.

We know that iBooks used a private API. I have no doubt that other Apple apps on the App Store do too.

Hell why we even discussing going down an android upgrade path, havent we learned where that leads

A place where you can get frequent, featureful updates?

 

[Parise]

Google Maps has had multiple amazing updates outside of Android being updated.

I think this is a solid idea.

Corollary: I don't get the "wah wah wah someone said Android" mindset that seems to plague this forum. A good implementation is a good implementation.

 

[Curun]

I'm wondering if Apple should consider de-bundling some of the built-in apps like calendar and such so that they can be updated more frequently with fixes and features? Google did this with Android and it seems to be working very well. Not sure if there are any down sides to doing this.

What are your thoughts?

This makes the huge assumption that they have some intention or desire or problem in updating them more frequently.

Unlike Android, Apple seems to have no issue pushing out OS updates.

See 7.0.1, 7.0.2, impending 7.0.3.

----------

Maybe not debundled, but it would be good for them to be able to be updated independently of the OS. That's something Android definitely has right.

For Android, it's a desperate workaround by Google because they foolishly closed themselves out of being able to update users devices.

 

[SakuraSuki]

This makes the huge assumption that they have some intention or desire or problem in updating them more frequently.

Unlike Android, Apple seems to have no issue pushing out OS updates.

See 7.0.1, 7.0.2, impending 7.0.3.

----------

For Android, it's a desperate workaround by Google because they foolishly closed themselves out of being able to update users devices.

Yes... it is Google's work around for slow updates. But that's much to blame on OEMs rather than Android.

However, this issue isn't really unique to Android either. You still get huge number of old iOS devices out there in the wild. Maybe put your stock app on App Store helps people with legacy devices get the latest app update?

 

[Curun]

Yes... it is Google's work around for slow updates. But that's much to blame on OEMs rather than Android.

However, this issue isn't really unique to Android either. You still get huge number of old iOS devices out there in the wild. Maybe put your stock app on App Store helps people with legacy devices get the latest app update?

FYI Google created Android. They created the licensing and marketing system that forfeited their control to push updates.

If Apple wants to update the Stocks app, they will push an OS update. They have that control.

Devices are only supported for a finite amount of time. They do better than most handset manufacturers. They don't want to support legacy devices.

 

[CTHarrryH]

Some of these bundled apps only appear on the phone and not on the pad so I'm not sure what that does to the arguments here.
I'm not interesting in separate fixed but it would be nice to diable and disappear ones that you don't use (like Gamecenter)

 

[SakuraSuki]

FYI Google created Android. They created the licensing and marketing system that forfeited their control to push updates.

If Apple wants to update the Stocks app, they will push an OS update. They have that control.

Devices are only supported for a finite amount of time. They do better than most handset manufacturers. They don't want to support legacy devices.

I understand this perfectly well. However, when they put the sock application up to App Store, legacy devices users will able to download the latest. Apple will update the stock app when they push new OS update, so the why not just put it on the App Store so that everybody can use?

Beside, not everybody use stock application. I am never ever touch some stock apps, like NewStand, PassBook, GameCentre, Calendar, PhotoBooth... And there is no way for me to delete those app. What I ended up is put them in one folder and never touch this folder again,

By putting stock app, people can easily change default app, choice what app they want , delete un-useful app

 

[err404]

In my opinion, no.
Third party developers need to be able to depend upon certain core functionality. For example if an app tries creates a calendar event, it needs to have a predictable method of doing so. The app shouldn't cause an error/warning in the case a user has no calendar app installed.

Also developers should be able to test against an expected version/interface, so there is little opportunity for Apple to quickly rev the functionality of these default apps.



(let’s be honest though. This is really a Trojan horse for the option to NOT install these apps, creating an de-facto requirement that allows for changing default apps. But, that’s a whole different discussion.)

 

[XboxMySocks]

Yes. Stocks, calendar, newsstand, and passbook should be downloadable though the App Store. Contacts shouldn't even have a separate app since it can be accessed in the phone app anyway.

I don't want to have to go through the phone every time I have to access my contacts.

 

[white4s]

I don't use 75% of the built in apps. we should be able to delete them

 

[Parise]

In my opinion, no.
Third party developers need to be able to depend upon certain core functionality. For example if an app tries creates a calendar event, it needs to have a predictable method of doing so. The app shouldn't cause an error/warning in the case a user has no calendar app installed.

Also developers should be able to test against an expected version/interface, so there is little opportunity for Apple to quickly rev the functionality of these default apps.



(let’s be honest though. This is really a Trojan horse for the option to NOT install these apps, creating an de-facto requirement that allows for changing default apps. But, that’s a whole different discussion.)

I'm not sure your reasoning justifies the answer to the question...

 

[ReanimationN]

For Android, it's a desperate workaround by Google because they foolishly closed themselves out of being able to update users devices.

It could still be a decent addition to iOS. For example- say Stocks or whatever stock app was released with a bug Apple didn't catch, and it's enraging everyone who regularly uses that app. If the stock apps could be updated independently of the OS, Apple could push out a quick update to get any major bugs ironed out in that particular app. As it is, if the rest of the next upcoming update isn't ready to be pushed out, the bug in that stock app will sit there until the entire OS-wide update is ready to be released.

 

[err404]

I'm not sure your reasoning justifies the answer to the question...

Sry if I wasn't clear… I feel that systems integrate better when core functionality is consistent across devices. Taking these out of the core OS makes them optional services. This fundamentally changes the nature of leveraging these linked services in your apps.
Sure it could be done, but it really is a deep change to the OS.
These are required core services (calendar/mail/contacts) and they should be part of the OS, not simply items in the App Store.