WWDC: iPhone Release Time, Developer Access

[4nNtt]

I am not demanding an end to criticism (for starters, it's not my forum), because criticism and discussion are healthy. But when the discourse is uninformed and pedantic, it becomes nothing more than a heap of empty complaints. For instance there are now dozens upon dozens of messages questioniong Apple's decision to not include an SDK and dozens upon dozens more criticising the Web 2.0/AJAX directive. While you have every right to criticise the decision, I have seen almost no information suggesting what apps I could get based on an SDK vs what apps I will get based on Web 2.0/AJAX. (I haven't read all of the posts so please enlighten me if there are concrete suggestions). I have seen folks say I had something in mind, but everyone is keeping their ideas close to the vest - so as far as I am concerned, I have heard no suggestions.

Actually, I thought the Web 2.0/AJAX support and iphone extentions are very cool. It is basically web applications on steroids. I hope 37signals picks them up for their apps. Maybe salesforce.com too.

However, I think trying to trump up AJAX as developer api is wrong. Most of the developers at WWDC are not interested in building web apps. Web applications really can't do anything other then display some data from a database. If you want to do _anything_ else a real api is required. There are some applications that AJAX could be used for, but would be better and more intuitive if cocoa could be used. I just hope that eventually apple sends those of us that really love cocoa some iphone love.

Others may add to this list. Here are somethings you could do with AJAX on iphone:
Check your bank account or transfer money.
Create an ebay auction.
Salesforce or Highrise type application.
Simple distributed editor.
Simple Games. (Like board games)

Some things that you could not do:
Action games.
Cool core animation stuff.
Storing private data you don't trust on a web site (such as bank account numbers).
Using the built in camera as a bar code scanner (Delicious Library).
Photo editor.
Using special protocols that a third party cannot or should not access. (Like financial protocols: OFX, ebXML, etc...)

Those are just a few examples off the top of my head... It would be cool to see some more discussion on this.

 

[TouchButters]

I was hoping for iPhone/Widget integration. Many folks don't have the cash on hand to run a server, nor truely need one to set-up for their program/widget to function properly. Because of that fact, I am very surprise that Apple did not introduce a basic custom widget support on their iPhone. I think it pretty great that they offer web 2.0 apps; but I think custom widget support would just seal the deal on many potential iPhone purchasers.

 

[dicklacara]

I have to admit that I, too, was very underwhelmed with the keynote. In fact I think it was quite telling in some respects. I wonder if Leopard is that far behind in the development that they had to just re-hash a lot of what we've seen before.

In fact, it makes me think that the iPhone has been a LOT more troublesome than they anticipated even when diverting resources away from Leopard.

I mean, not only was the Leopard demo underwhelming, but not even a TINY mention of a new iLife, let alone iWork??

Ouch. Methinks that we better be hearing about another similar announcement and keynote VERY soon from Steve.

I still want an iPhone though. I wonder when it will make it's way up here to Canada?

Oh, and hi! Long time reader, first time poster.

In a way it was underwelming... but it set a marker for OS X (supposedly the main purpose for the Apple WWDC).

If you look to the future, Apple could make a significant hardware, software or services announcement, every couple of weeks until the end of the year (and beyond)... things like:

-ZFS
-iTMS Movie rentals
-iMac upgrade/replacement
-new Gen iPods
-mega .mac upgrade replacement
-tablet/ultra-portable
-iphone SDK
-iLife 07
-hardware h264 encode/decode
-new iServes
-iWork 07 (pages/numbers/data/preso)
-iRaid
-true 64-bit Pro Apps
-AppleTV enhanced remote control (including iPhone & next-gen iPod)
-Purchases of other Tech Companies

...yadda, yadda, yadda...

...there are lots of opportunities in the next 6 months to keep the prospests, customers, developers, investors (and, yes competitors) focused on Apple...

...I suspect that we'll get like: "Alright, Apple... what is it this week?"

 

[jmeyoung]

Can someone (and I know I'm going to get bombed for this one) please give me examples of things which could and should be done with an SDK that couldn't due to limitations of the Ajax / web tool set?

SSH access to a remote server



Actually that can prolly be done w/ java stuck on a web page somewhere, but it sure would be cooler to fire up terminal on the iPhone. SSH into whatever work server needs your immediate attention, do whatever, signout, call your boss, tell him the problem is fixed, then continue your walk down the beach or wherever you are other than work.

 

[jmeyoung]

Anyone seen any docs on how we make a js call to dial a phone number, fire up the Google Maps app, etc?

The keynote lead me to believe we could code now, test in safari, and be ready to deploy very soon after iPhone was released. (since Safari can't dial a number)

I haven't seen any documentation on how to do some of the more integrated features that were demoed as possible by 3rd party developers.

 

[Earendil]

Nothing worse than whiners whining about whiners.

Some of us did contribute your holiness.
P6
Edit: Incase you didn't read, I think AJAX is a poor choice.

If you contributed in a half way intelligent way, then I'm not addressing you, am I? No need to be a smartalick

 

[Ha ze]

I'm not a developer, and i know nothing about writing code or anything, but from an end user standpoint, i think having all my mobile app be web based it a lousy idea.

Example: I'm in the subway, no gsm, no wifi... there goes using my nice apps.
Example: Server crashed.. guess all you iPhone users wont be using this for now

I'd assume Apple will be adding more items over time, but won't that cause confusion between "is this a phone based app or a web based?" It would be SO much easier if there were shortcuts on your home menu, but doesn't look like thats going to happen.

I'm sure i'll still be getting one cause I HATE my moto L6 and this has a on it, but i'm not nearly as excited about this as i was back in january

 

[MacinDoc]

I'm not a developer, and i know nothing about writing code or anything, but from an end user standpoint, i think having all my mobile app be web based it a lousy idea.

Example: I'm in the subway, no gsm, no wifi... there goes using my nice apps.
Example: Server crashed.. guess all you iPhone users wont be using this for now

I'd assume Apple will be adding more items over time, but won't that cause confusion between "is this a phone based app or a web based?" It would be SO much easier if there were shortcuts on your home menu, but doesn't look like thats going to happen.

I'm sure i'll still be getting one cause I HATE my moto L6 and this has a on it, but i'm not nearly as excited about this as i was back in january

Just because apps will run in Safari does not mean that you need web access to run them. True, you can't browse the web without access, but you can open the application.

 

[jkbuster]

is it just me or is Jobs pulling our legs on the 6pm thing? I know I haven't followed product releases much in the past but how he says it in the keynote makes me wonder.

Just a thought
JKB

 

[damacus]

Just because apps will run in Safari does not mean that you need web access to run them. True, you can't browse the web without access, but you can open the application.

I was wondering about this, however I noticed that they never created seperate launchers for the programs. In fact, it looked like they launched "custom apps" via the phone's safari bookmarks!

As for the hooks to make a call, map an address, update address book, etc, those are likely just safari pattern recognition macros.

Note that they said nothing about firing the camera from a AJAX/Web 2.0 application.

BTW, long time reader, first time poster. Hi.

 

[123]

Just because apps will run in Safari does not mean that you need web access to run them. True, you can't browse the web without access, but you can open the application.

AJAX without a server is not AJAX. Neither is it a web 2 app.

Of course you can try to write consumer apps entirely in javascript but that will be even more painful to develop (and limiting). Plus it must be possible to access files that are locally stored.

 

[DrFrankTM]

Offline mode with something like Google Gears?

Just because apps will run in Safari does not mean that you need web access to run them. True, you can't browse the web without access, but you can open the application.

I'm kind of surprised it took 8 pages for that to be mentioned. I know nothing about programming, but I'm looking forward to seeing Google Gears run on Safari and work with Gmail. For me, an iPhone with a Gmail that can be used offline (with stuff updated on your online account the next time you connect) would be the perfect GTD device.

Oh! well... I'll wait until the 29th to see what kind of plan Apple wants to lock us in with the iPhone, but I think I might go with some Remember the Milk and a PDA of some kind instead (plus a phone that's just a phone). The iPhone will probably make more sense for me when it reaches Rev. B. We'll see...

 

[aria505]

Hi, I'm Steve Jobs!

Hello Everyone! So we've been working really hard to bring 3rd party application support to the iPhone, and we have "come up" with a great solution that will allow you to make beautiful and powerful applications for the iPhone!

[listens to the wonderful applause from the happy developers and savors it]

Um...So here is how it works. This is really awesome!!!...

You create a webpage... and then you browse to it over the internet on the iPhone using Safari... and then you tell everyone it is an "iPhone Application"!!!

Isn't that Wonderful!!! We are really excited to see the beautiful "websites"... I mean "applications", you all will be making with this amazing technology!!!!

[listens to the crickets]

Oh and the great part is that there doesn't need to be an SDK!!! We don't even need to write up a "white paper" describing size standards or iPhone functionality integration code. You all can just figure that out through trial and error.

[listens to more crickets]

And don't worry about not being able to use these applications without an internet connection because you will always be able to get to the internet by using those groove 2 year data plans from AT&T.

Oh and ONE MORE THING....

You can download Safari for Windows now!!!...... Oh, you don't care because you are using a Mac at a Mac Developers Conference?..... Opppss, Sucks for you.

Well....... Hmmmmmmm...... Did I mention that the iPhone runs "OS X"?!?!

 

[DTphonehome]

Hello Everyone! So we've been working really hard to bring 3rd party application support to the iPhone, and we have "come up" with a great solution that will allow you to make beautiful and powerful applications for the iPhone!

[listens to the wonderful applause from the happy developers and savors it]

Um...So here is how it works. This is really awesome!!!...

You create a webpage... and then you browse to it over the internet on the iPhone using Safari... and then you tell everyone it is an "iPhone Application"!!!

Isn't that Wonderful!!! We are really excited to see the beautiful "websites"... I mean "applications", you all will be making with this amazing technology!!!!

[listens to the crickets]

Oh and the great part is that there doesn't need to be an SDK!!! We don't even need to write up a "white paper" describing size standards or iPhone functionality integration code. You all can just figure that out through trial and error.

[listens to more crickets]

And don't worry about not being able to use these applications without an internet connection because you will always be able to get to the internet by using those groove 2 year data plans from AT&T.

Oh and ONE MORE THING....

You can download Safari for Windows now!!!...... Oh, you don't care because you are using a Mac at a Mac Developers Conference?..... Opppss, Sucks for you.

Well....... Hmmmmmmm...... Did I mention that the iPhone runs "OS X"?!?!

lol!

 

[bross00]

Web 2.0 + AJAX apps???? Steve, I ***** hate you, I'm down $12k today because the market is obviously very unimpressed with this half-assed (nay, quarter-assed) third-party development option.

12k?! So - apple closed 3.47% down. You have 12000//3.47% = ~340k invested in Apple. I hope with that much money invested in one stock you realize there will be risk, fluctuations, etc. Hate Steve; but you're the one who put so many eggs in one basket.

 

[winterspan]

Top 10 reasons the AJAX/web 2.0 application model will fail on the Iphone

1) Web apps require server access via the internet to operate. AJAX is not AJAX without a server doing most of the processing. You could write an application *entirely* in javascript, but that would not only be a horrendously painful experience for the developer, but it would severly limit an apps potential by a) requiring all processing to be done on the client in
javascript and b) being unable to access/store data (assuming the javascript API has no access to local storage aka Google Gears which I would imagine will NOT be implemented on the iphone), and you still wouldnt be able to start the application without an internet connection (that is unless the Iphone safari allows you to open local html files).

2) NO 3G UTMS/HSDPA. The reason 'web 2.0' applications exist on the desktop it because most people are using them on fast broadband. You'd need to be under quite good conditions even with 3G/HSDPA to have a quality, responsive application. Not only is EDGE much slower in throughput, but more importantly is that it has *much* greater latency than 3G/HSDPA.
Coupled with the uncertainies of cellular data connections (spotty coverage, network load, interference) I'd say it would be might frustrating outside a wifi cafe.
Note: I have attempted this already myself with a Treo 650. I didn't want to learn the PalmOS APIs, so I instead proceeded to craft a few small applications in ASP.NET. I even attempted some simple javascipt/ajax functionality, but found the responsiveness to be absolutely horrendous with the latency, especially outside of 3G/EV-DO coverage when the phone resorts back to 2G/1xRTT (basically dialup speeds). It just isn't the same as a native application or even a !@#%$& Java application.

3) Reduced developer Incentive. Many of you have alluded to this problem already and I just wanted to rehash. Many small/independent developers will find it hard to provide the server capacity and bandwidth to handle a popular Iphone application. I imagine it would be difficult to apply the usual advertising-supported model with the small interface of the Iphone, nor do I believe you could convince users to put up with that. The only alternative is paying directly/donations... And what happens when your 'perfect web app' suddenly disappears off the face of the earth. or the developer abandons the project. You will have no recourse whatsoever. I enjoy the thought that the applications I OWN on my treo are MINE and will always be there. Just like SJ says, "nobody wants to RENT their music and have it all disappear when they quit paying the bill".

4) PalmOS, Windows Mobile, Blackberry's OS, Symbian, and nearly every cellphone OS via JAVA can run 3rd-party applications. They have thriving communities and are the LIFE BLOOD of smart phones. Now granted, there is alot of JUNK that is created and allowing unrestricted 3rd party access is like opening up pandora's box, but I think there is a good balance to be found between Iphone security/stability and developer freedom. Whether they need to allow restricted access to OSX's cocoa APIs, or create some type of managed/sandboxed layer between the OS and a 3rd-party developer software that provides restricted access to iphone features and local storage, I dont know. I am not a systems engineer, but I know there has got to be a way to do this, much as can be done with a on PalmOS Garnet or Windows Mobile with the mobile .NET framework or even using a JVM.

5) IT RUNS OSX . For god sakes, what better reason can there be to allow the talented and creative OSX dev community access to this platform? Indeed, the Ipod functionality and photo/video/email capabilities are better than anything on the market, but what a tradedy it would be to see all of that advanced potential locked away.

6) Multi-touch. Speaking of advanced potential locked away. Again, I can only imagine what talented devs people would come up with --I know I have some ideas. To have such a truly revolutionary interface with near limitless potential be locked down as well is just sad. (acknowledging of course that Apple is the master of UI innovation)

7) No FLASH support. The only consolation I was holding in my mind was the fact that I saw the NYtimes displayed on the iphone commercial and I thought of Flash. I thought with the good processor/graphics of the Iphone, you could actually make some killer applications AND run them offline. (well at least you could start them online then continue after you lose wifi/cell coverage). And with the open-sourcing' of adobe FLEX, that would offer a decent object model for devs like myself who aren't exactly fond of Flash's timeline model. BUT NO - NO FLASH PLUGIN even though its the 'REAL' Internet on REAL Safari and REAL OSX.

8) No self-contained Widgets? or shortcuts to web apps from the main menu?

9) Hackers/Crackers Finally, whether Apple swims with or against the tide, this platform WILL be opened up and there WILL be 3rd-party applications on this phone. Its literally is only a matter of time after it is released. Has anyone seen what they have done with the Apple TV??? I think its imperative Apple create legitimate access to the platform to insure the very security and stability they are attempting to maintain by NOT opening it up. note: I'm not necessarily against this at all, Im love the DIY crowd and participate in it when i can, Im just looking at this from Apple's perspective.

10) still thinking.. maybe one of you can help

No but seriously, did anyone else actually feel insulted when they were proclaiming their great new 'strategy' for 3rd party app development? I mean did they actually think a majority of us hadn't already figured out Iphone + Safari = web apps?

Uh.. This has NOT been a positive day so far..

</rant>

 

[centauratlas]

This is a good, common-sense, way to look at the Web 2.0/AJAX solution to iPhone app development:
...snip...

I agree. This does not have to be an either/or situation. Obviously many people would like more features 6 months ago, but this is a start and we're not even sure what kind of access we'll have via WebKit when it ships.

 

[centauratlas]

Anyone seen any docs on how we make a js call to dial a phone number, fire up the Google Maps app, etc?

The keynote lead me to believe we could code now, test in safari, and be ready to deploy very soon after iPhone was released. (since Safari can't dial a number)

I haven't seen any documentation on how to do some of the more integrated features that were demoed as possible by 3rd party developers.

I've been looking for that too. As I noted previously, I saw two dev sessions that looked as if they might cover related items so i am hoping we'll get some info from them either on the next DVD or on-line.

 

[centauratlas]

AJAX without a server is not AJAX. Neither is it a web 2 app.
Of course you can try to write consumer apps entirely in javascript but that will be even more painful to develop (and limiting). Plus it must be possible to access files that are locally stored.

It is also worthwhile to note that the iPhone *could* be running a minimal web server locally. Not Apache, but something requiring fewer resources such as thttpd or a java based http server. Obviously that would not be useful if web access were required for the application, but for an application that doesn't need web access (e.g. if someone implemented the Classic 'Puzzle' game) it would suffice.

 

[sishaw]

Yes, you're missing something. The developer now needs a running application server + bandwidth for any app. The user needs to be connected permanently. And AJAX sucks.

Yes, I get it now!! (You're about the 20th person to point this out.) Thanks.

 

[aria505]

No but seriously, did anyone else actually feel insulted when they were proclaiming their great new 'strategy' for 3rd party app development? I mean did they actually think a majority of us hadn't already figured out Iphone + Safari = web apps?

YEP. I'm pretty sure an entire room of developers were insulted. Especially since Apple was acting like they did something to create this "new incredible solution".

The iPhone has the potential be so amazing. The UI is incredible and the multi-touch is wonderful, but the iPhone is lacking so so so many features that it negates the positives. It just isn't there yet, but I guess its much like the original iPod. It will grow.

 

[mpw]

I just lost a couple of grand on Apple today.

the Keynote was completely under-whelming.

WTF happened?!

Jesus. Really...I am disappointed.

You must've known that risk when you bought yesterday?

 

[mudaudio]

1) Web apps require server access via the internet to operate. AJAX is not AJAX without a server doing most of the processing. You could write an application *entirely* in javascript, but that would not only be a horrendously painful experience for the developer, but it would severly limit an apps potential by a) requiring all processing to be done on the client in
javascript and b) being unable to access/store data (assuming the javascript API has no access to local storage aka Google Gears which I would imagine will NOT be implemented on the iphone), and you still wouldnt be able to start the application without an internet connection (that is unless the Iphone safari allows you to open local html files).

I'm sure you are right with some of your points, and I empathise with the plight of the developer... Sure, the SDK, built in apps approach would be cool and it would incentivise innovation. (oh and it would be nice to have shortcuts on the desktop etc)..

However, I cant see any reason why Google Gears wouldn't be implemented... http://gears.google.com/

To me is seems like the very thing which is going to enable this technology, comprehensively, without selling out to the mobile carrier. It would be a major dissapointment if Google Gears doesn't work for iPhone.

I dont know the tech, but would sure like to hear from people that do!

 

[rainydays]

Javascript applications isn't all that bad, you can do a lot of sweet apps that way. But like others have said having to go into Safari to launch them isn't a very good solution.
They have the Safari engine in there, so why don't they just make a container for the apps to run in that doesn't have the Safari interface?
The user could download a package containing the app, an icon and possibly some metadata describing the application, then it would show up like any other iPhone app. You could easily access it offline. Updates would still be very simple, just check for a new version whenever you have internet access, then download and replace the package.

I wonder how they expect developers to sell their apps with the current solution? Having to log into the app isn't a very nice solution.

 

[aria505]

I'm sure you are right with some of your points, and I empathise with the plight of the developer... Sure, the SDK, built in apps approach would be cool and it would incentivise innovation. (oh and it would be nice to have shortcuts on the desktop etc)..

However, I cant see any reason why Google Gears wouldn't be implemented... http://gears.google.com/

To me is seems like the very thing which is going to enable this technology, comprehensively, without selling out to the mobile carrier. It would be a major dissapointment if Google Gears doesn't work for iPhone.

I dont know the tech, but would sure like to hear from people that do!

Google Gears couldn't work directly with the iPhone because it requires software to be installed that handles keeping the application files organized and creating a local database that is synced with the live data on the internet. And since we don't have a way of installing anything to the iPhone yet then it wouldn't work.

If Google created an iPhone version of this that Apple blessed, and gave us a way to install it through itunes then it would be perfect.