[A friend of mine] writes: Tim Bray is now a paid cheerleader for google/android so you may take his comments as just marketing speak. I found them interesting though. Apple’s approach to software on the ipad is something I find preposterous. I arrived at that conclusion on my own, but it’s now interesting to see that there are others who are similarly leery of a rather full fledged computer which so brazenly serves the needs of its maker over those of its owner.
Hmm…
David, it seems more and more to me like you are not really thinking about these issues. It is harder and harder for me to have an open discussion with you because, well, you are acting more like a religious fanatic than a studious researcher trying to figure out the best way to get something done.
John Gruber writes: What’s interesting here is that the iPhone is a better system for HTML5 mobile apps than Android. For all the attention Apple is getting regarding the tight control it maintains over native iPhone apps, I think what they’ve done to enable native-like mobile web apps — with no control — is mostly ignored.
Look, I can not defend bad decisions by Apple. I get that they are making it difficult for Open Source folks to publish their NATIVE apps on the iPhone. But you have to be very clear about what Apple is limiting. It is ONLY limiting what is sold in the App Store that Apple runs. If you want to sell things through Apple’s store, you have to follow Apple’s rules. I get that you do not like this and see few benefits. I do not like it but see loads of good things coming out of this decision. You and I need to agree to disagree.
Apple is the first company to pass the ACID2 test for its browser. It has pushed HTML5 compliance long before Google and M$ (and most people feel that they do a better job at it). Their contributions to WedKit are stellar and, guess what, now (because of Apple!!), non-M$ mobile devices ALL USE WebKit-based browsers. Nokia has taken Apple’s code and ported it to their Symbian browsers! Hell, Chrome uses WebKit.
Tim Bray is barking up the wrong tree. If he thinks web apps are the future, then he should have no issue with anything Apple is doing. Just the opposite, he should be singing Apple’s praises because it is Apple who pushed WebKit forward in a way that made it the best engine for mobile browsers. It was only after Apple did its magic that the JavaScript engine really took off (SquirrelFish is the fastest/best in the world). While not complete, the CSS implementation is far better than any mobile alternative. I simply LOVE the way the iPhone renders CSS and wish IE/Firefox on M$ PC’s were as good.
For further reading, check out iui which was orginaly written by the brilliant Joe Hewitt. (PS: Joe has a lot to say on this subject. I agree with almost all of it.
Tim Bray writes: The iPhone vision of the mobile Internet’s future omits controversy, sex, and freedom, but includes strict limits on who can know what and who can say what.
If you want to know, it is bullsh** like this that ends my interest in having a real discussion.
This link has a much more balanced take on the whole thing. I suggest you read it.
Look, I am not saying you are wrong. I am simply saying that if you want to make a case against Apple, you need to stick to the facts and look clearly at the trade-offs. I plan to release all of YVOD’s iPhone/iPad work Open Source because I believe Open Source is the future. Apple allows me to legally do this.