As expected, Apple used WWDC as the stage to announce a third-party development solution for the iPhone, putting to rest fears that the handset would be a closed (
read: non-smartphone) platform. Calling it a "sweet solution" for allowing devs to get their wares onto iPhones across the globe without sacrificing stability or security, Apple is using its full Safari-based browser to let folks code up true, Web 2.0-compatible apps that can be accessed and updated on developers' own servers. Though any apps that third-party developers put together will run under Safari, they'll be totally customizable and maintain the platform's unique look and feel. Better yet, they won't require any special SDK -- Jobs claims that a working knowledge of modern web standards is all we'll need to code up custom iPhone goodies to our hearts' content.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
craig @ Jun 11th 2007 2:47PM
Way to open up the iPhone, Steve. We can all write web apps without an SDK and deploy them on our servers. Thank go we have those geniuses at Apple to solve the hard problems for us. AJAX was just what we were hoping for!
I can look up google maps in my server app? Really? Gosh, thanks.
I'm sure that call dialing will work really great when I'm using that 2G data service that's incompatible with voice. I guess it's work for the infintessimal percentage of users who are always connected via WiFi.
If this solution is so good, why don't all iPhone apps use it? Afraid of a little competition, Steve?
craig @ Jun 11th 2007 2:57PM
Incidently, those aren't just fears that the handset is closed, the handset IS closed. It always was closed and this does nothing to change that. AJAX web apps and native iPhone apps are two different things. Remember that next time your app downloaded over EDGE has to compete with Apple's native app that has access to all of the machine, not just the parts it Apple wants you to have.
Jerry @ Jun 11th 2007 3:08PM
I hear the sound of yet another nail being pounded into that coffin....
carlo @ Jun 11th 2007 3:27PM
Hahaha, oh man. EngadgetMobile readers are ROUGH!!! I love it.
The Safari App idea was a desperate reach for something to offer, we'll see how it goes. I'm still getting one, and I'll sell it (quite easily I'm sure) when a better version comes out.
I do like what they've done with Leopard though.
Jim Smothers @ Jun 11th 2007 3:57PM
So...
This is a complete reversal from his earlier statement that the iPhone would support third party applications. When he said that, we thought he meant "COMPILED" applications. Guess what: NOPE!
We already knew the iPhone supported web applications. How is this something new? How is it it any way "Sweet"?
Sounds like they had to think fast on the best way to collect all the beans that Jobs spilled a few weeks ago.
James @ Jun 11th 2007 4:09PM
Ok, if I am reading this right. If the apps can be used THROUGH Safari then it begs the question. How many instances of Safari can you have open? If it's just one, then the app closes as soon as you have to navigate to a new page.
Am I reading this right? That seems pretty stupid to me.
Jason @ Jun 11th 2007 6:27PM
This could be truly useful if Apple allowed Google to port Google Gears to the iPhone, thus providing these apps offline storage and caching.
kiligan @ Jun 11th 2007 8:14PM
I just want to create a Pros and Cons list for this device. I don't consider myself an expert on Smartphone, but I have owned a couple Smartphones, so I do have some knowledge regarding these devices. I will list several pros and cons with a critique for each.
Lets start with the Pros:
1) "Reinventing the Phone". So Apple has a glorified way of making phone calls. Is it really the "killer app" he claims what plagues all mobile phones (Smartphones in particular) today? Well, my Cingular 8525 does not look spiffy when placing a call, but it does get the job done. I'm not sure how iPhones new way of housing contacts and such is any different from any current contacting software in today's mobile phones.
2) The "Multi-touch" technology. Again, I have not done super extensive research on all phones and such, but I have not seen a mobile phone (any mobile device rather) with this type of precision control. This is one of the revolutionary features Apple hopes will place the phone on the map. Will it really?
3) "Real web Browser via Safari". Now all the mobile web browsing experience I have had with my Smartphone have always ended up as a , "well it kind of looks like a web page". I can only hope that the page I am visiting has a "mobile" or "go" version so that I can view it properly. Networking connectivity speeds aside, it sounds like a promising feature. While capped at only EDGE speeds, will it really deliver however? I know MS is working on a way of doing the same thing, but viewing the web pages as bit maps. Maybe Windows Mobile has something up there sleeve coming the next Windows Mobile 6, or soon after.
4) "It's a touchable widescreen iPod video". I don't know about you, but I'm sure if Apple only made this an iPod and dropped the price to around $300 - $400, people would buy it left and right. How much was the original iPod video, around $250-$300? But then again, this device can only house up to 8gig storage. Perhaps if they were going to just make it into an iPod, they would probably just add a hard disk. So why dont they now? I think it has to do with power consumption, and that Apple wants this thing to last as long as reasonably possible. After all, it is a phone with a cool iPod built into it. My only question is, what is the primary usage of this device? A phone, or an iPod? Are you going to buy it because it is a phone that also happens to be a iPod, or a touchable iPod that can also make phone calls?
And now the Cons:
1) Versatility. The iPhone is not versatile. That has always been the case with all of Apples products. The ability to change in a whim to meet the customers needs. However, what good is the ability to change into something you want, that cant deliver a reasonable functional product. That seems to have been Microsofts plague. Since I got my Cingular 8525, I have had a lot system crashes (ahem, a mobile phone having system crashes), freezes and just some weird stuff. Granted, this is not a day by day thing, however it leads to one curious conclusion as to how stable is this thing? Do I really want to keep adding to this thing more and more gadgets, apps, whatever to a flakey system? I understand that Cingular 8525 is really Pocket PC with a WinMO 5 stamped on it, but doesnt that sound just sound lazy? I dont know, maybe I just want a system that was built from the ground up and can do what it is supposed to do well. Is that too much to ask for? Get a blackberry you say? I was tempted to, but I would miss all the features from the 8525.
2) WiFi + EDGE Networking. Ok, so this version of the iPhone will not have 3G. Ok, what difference will I (as the customer) see? That is really hard to tell without an actual model to play with. So the phone will not have the fancy 3G fireball thing right next to it. I just care about what I will actually see. My previous phone was only a GPRS phone, not even EDGE, and I thought it was adequate at looking at whatever mobile web pages I could find. I pretty much just used my data connection phone for e-mail and looking at CNET (oh, and the occasional movie time look up).
According to WikiPedia:
EDGE can carry data speeds up to 236.8 kbit/s for 4 timeslots (theoretical maximum is 473.6 kbit/s for 8 timeslots) in packet mode and will therefore meet the International Telecommunications Union's requirement for a 3G network, and has been accepted by the ITU as part of the IMT-2000 family of 3G standards. It also enhances the circuit data mode called HSCSD, increasing the data rate of this service.
The iPhone cannot be called a 3G mobile device because EDGE is not classified as a 3G technology, that is why they call it 2.5G or even 2.75 G, but does that mean we wont see speeds that can approach 3G speeds? It is known that Apple is working very closely to AT&T. Perhaps they can find a way to bend the rules as it were. An unconventional phone using a conventional technology unconventionally? Who knows.
3) Qwerty touch screen keyboard. I was not sure whether to place this on the pro or con. Apple says it is a huge Pro, while others (including Engadget) say that it is Con. For consistency, Ill place it on the Con. So I kind of imagined myself typing in a screen with the same dimensions as the iPhone to sort of determine if I like it better or not. One point that Steve says is the fact that it is not always there. With most PDA/smartphones out there, almost half the device is the keyboard. Prime examples would be the Moto Q and Blackjack. My Cingular 8525, however, has a hidden keyboard that does not really impede on the screen. However I have to constantly open it when I want to type in something, and that has been a hassle. Not to mention sometimes it would crash the PDA if I do it too often (why?).
A reason why consumers may not like the QWERTY keyboard is because there will be no tactile feedback. Personally, Im not too sure about this one. I kind of like not have a feedback while typing, it makes typing feel more free. There is no way to really know until it is played when the iPhone is released.
Conclusion
There are many more features, or lack thereof to write about, however I have to attend to my RL duties. The base question is is this a good purchase? and Who is the consumer base for this product?. At $600, it better deliver what was promised. I believe the iPod of the iPhone will deliver, and I have no doubt that it will be spectacular. I would gauge the iPod of this phone to be around $350, so now there is the other $250. It is a very pretty, and user-friendly phone. With phones like the Motorola RAZR selling for around $500 ($300 with contract)during its initial release, it is easy to say that the iPhone may be worth buying. With the iPhone, you get this very slick phone (perhaps not as slick as the RAZR, but close ), and with many of the bells & whistles as all the other hip modern phones.
One important note that I must clarify. THIS IS NOT A SMARTPHONE, AND NEVER WAS SUPPOSED TO REPLACE ONE!! I dont understand how people saw this thing as replacing smartphones/PDAphones. Yes, Steve Jobs did compare the two to show the iPhones QWERTY keyboard and large screen, but that was it! I dont claim to have read every single official article from Apple relating to this device, but I doubt any of it states this device to compete with smartphones directly.
lassi @ Jun 13th 2007 5:02PM
*The iPhone cannot be called a 3G mobile device because EDGE is not classified as a 3G technology, that is why they call it 2.5G or even 2.75 G, but does that mean we wont see speeds that can approach 3G speeds? It is known that Apple is working very closely to AT&T. Perhaps they can find a way to bend the rules as it were. An unconventional phone using a conventional technology unconventionally? Who knows.*
there's things like theoretical maximum and reality. you'll get ~12kbyte/s with edge.
meanwhile i got hsdpa in my phone right now.. unlimited.
also, don't talk about pricing without mentioning 2 year contract lock in and the fees that come with it.
was not supposed to replace a smartphone? it should. i got a smartphone in my pocket. am i supposed to carry the iphone in addition to that? of course it's meant to replace it... thats what steve wants. too bad he's disconnected from reality.
iphone really seems like a web tablet(like nokia 770, only inferior) that got the phone chip tacked on at very late in design, hence it's missing standard phone stuff like j2me and mms...
kiligan @ Jun 13th 2007 5:47PM
"there's things like theoretical maximum and reality. you'll get ~12kbyte/s with edge.
meanwhile i got hsdpa in my phone right now.. unlimited."
At what cost? I too have the GMS 3G on my 8525, but I really don't see the difference as compared to my older GPRS smartphone. MS live does work well with it, however I still find it painfull to even find other "compatible" websites that I can view enjoyably. So when you watch the same page on a smartphone with 3G VS the same phone with only EDGE, you will be viewing that page 100x+ faster? The phone will recieve the data at 3G speeds, but that does not mean you will see the page at the same rate.
I'm paying $40+ for my "unlimited" date plan, while the typical plan is only $19.99. Cingular calls it the PDA phone plan. I just find it curious that the blackjack is also on this plan and it is not a PDA.
Unless you always stream video onto your phone, I don't think the difference will be worth paying 2x+ more. The only thing that really concerns customers is what they "see", not the numbers behind the claims. Yes the whole EDGE approuching 3G is hopefull and theoretical, but it is doubtful.
The iPhone connectivity will not compare to any true 3G standard, that much is already clear. However, I'm sure iPhone users can still enjoy EDGE speeds on any other html decent website. 3G is just ridicuously overrated and overpriced.
I'm just curious what the datarate will be for the iPhone. I don't think it should be above $25, $30 max.
djpablog @ Jun 14th 2007 11:12PM
Does this mean that someone will be able to write a messaging app to allow MSN/AIM to connect to their servers?
Kevin Kralicek @ Jun 15th 2007 12:14PM
$25 to $30 data plan for this thing? Not a chance! I think AT&T's logic is going to be, "If they've got $600 to shell out for it, they can afford a $49.99 data package!"
I, for one, am going to duct tape an iPod to the back of my Motorola E815 for less than 5 bucks. Or go get a Nokia N-series and still save a ton of money. What can I say, those kooky Finns know how to make a smartphone!