Are WebApps a "Gatekeeper"-Free Alternative to the iPhone App Store?
TiPb's joked before that Apple may well consider "sweet" WebApps the alternative for developers who want to release iPhone apps outside the App Store and its "gatekeeper" model, but others are starting to take that line of thinking seriously.
Peter-Paul Koch of QuirksBlog thinks so. In a post provocatively titled Apple is not evil. iPhone developers are stupid., Koch states:
In order to release an iPhone application without having to submit it to Apple’s insane App Store process, developers could just use Web technologies and create Web apps instead of native apps.
He believes iPhone Safari is a great mobile browser with excellent support even for hardware-accelerated 3D animation via CSS, and that most of his frequently used iPhone apps could be re-released as WebApps right now
Daring Fireball's John Gruber begs to differ, however:
The argument that you can make iPhone web apps that are “good enough” misses the entire point of iPhone apps — the entire point of the iPhone itself, even — all of the things that drive Twitter users to pay $3, $4, or $5 for apps that do the same things that can be done for free by loading Twitter’s web site in MobileSafari. “Good enough” is not good enough on the iPhone.
His best proof is that Apple itself is writing native apps, not WebApps, and that part of the power of the iPhone platform isn't just the hardware and interface, but the Cocoa Touch frameworks Apple has provided developers as part of the iPhone SDK, and that's a point well taken -- and all too often overlooked.
There's no arguing, however, that for apps that aren't allowed into the App Store, like Google Voice, or for developers philosophically opposed to the App Store in general, like Joe Hewitt of Facebook, WebApps are an interesting alternatives -- that by the way have a high likelihood of running on Google Android, Palm webOS, and upcoming BlackBerry WebKit-based browsers as well.
Editor-in-Chief of iMore, Executive Producer at Mobile Nations, co-host of Iterate and ZEN and TECH, cook, grappler, photon wrangler.
| Tweet |
|
|
Leave a Reply
Note: Comments must be civil, respectful, and on-topic. If a comment does not add to the conversation, if it contains spam advertising, or inappropriate language or content, it will be removed. Insulting the topic, author, staff, site, network, or other commenters will result in the comment being marked as spam and potential prevent future comments from appearing on the site. Do not post as a business or your comment will likely be confused with spam. Comments containing links may be held for moderation. Relax, enjoy, and share in the discussion.
Both make good points. Web Apps do have the benefit of being immediately available to Android and PalmOS users who also have solid browsers. The only question is can they build something compelling enough for a customer to subscribe to, since App Store revenue is not a factor, or to gain enough eyeballs to attract advertisers who would sponsor the site. It's not for all business models but it can be successful with the right product.
Webapps are a nice workaround, but they don't fix everything. Also, constantly talking about google voice working fine as a web app is just not accurate. The beautiful thing about google voice on an android phone is that you can use it directly when you make a call. When you use it as a web app, it has to call your phone, you answer, and then it connects you to the person you're trying to reach. Who wants that?
I understand why apple kept google voice off the iphone, because they didn't want it affecting the phone function in that way. However, it is also the one issue keeping me off the iphone.
Web apps solve issues like a google wave programe just fine. It essentially looks just like a native app on the iphone. However, google voice is not so easily solved in this way. I just don't understand how people misconstrue how google voice works on a phone.
I feel like I could have clarified that better.
Google voice as a web app 1)you go to the app 2)you tell it to dial a number 3)it calls your cell phone 4)you pick up 5)it dials the number you told it to dial 6)call is connected
Google voice on android: 1)you go to the settings and tell the phone to use google voice 2)all calls are exactly the same as they normally would be when using the phone without google voice.
Big difference in convenience and functionality
Web apps are not the answer for things that need to be locally persistent (think your Evernotes notes, offline mail, word documents, etc.) Some stuff needs to actually be on your phone. Web apps may be considered appropriate on the iPhone, however, because Apple refuses to let us, or our apps, have access to the local file system with the exception of Apple apps like mail, photos and iTunes.
Nobody would want a web app if third party apps could use the full capabilities of the iPhone.
I won't go as far as to say that webapps are as good as native apps in many cases, but I will say that there is some great untapped potential in Webapps. Have any of you used Hahlo4 lately? To get the real experience, save it as a homescreen icon. Somehow, when you launch it from your homescreen, it removes the Mobile Safari URL/search bar and behaves almost exactly like a native app!
If more developers looked at Webapps as an alternative to the App Store, I think they would be surprised how much they could really do.
I've developed a couple of web apps for mobile devices. Mainly because I don't have a Mac though so couldn't develop an app even if I wanted to. If I had a Mac I would be more inclined to develop an actual app.
Native apps are a current trend that are only superior to web apps because of their increased access to hardware like the microphone, or light sensor, or GPS in some cases.
There's a free iPhone webapp directory at www dot webappuniverse dot com. They are all free!
NightLifeApp.com is a webapp and native app works great either way. hundreds of promoters use it to post their nightlife events and party goers use it to find those great events.