Re:Will Apple Embrace the Web? No.
by bradleyland on Tuesday June 01, 2010 @11:26AM
(#1395259)
'The question you need to ask, "Is there any fundamental reason why a 'Web app' can't do everything a native app can?" The answer is no.'
I'm not sure that "no" is as clear as it seems. There are lots of things that are technically possible, but don't gain any traction in the market because of their inherent shortcomings. It depends upon which "fundamentals" you're looking at. Are we talking technology fundamentals or experience fundamentals. From the experience perspective, I feel inclined to side with Steve Jobs on the notion that cross-platform software represents a lowest common denominator approach to UX.
For all the flack that SJ is taking over his stance on Flash, his open letter on the topic re-solidified his software philosophy. SJ -- and by proxy, Apple -- believe that in order to deliver the best software experience possible, one must control the software ecosystem from end-to-end. However, there is a dichotomy within Apple that few people have come to terms with. When it comes to the web, Apple is "open". It's about the only place that they could truly be called such, but they are, none the less. Jobs' comments in his open letter spell it out in words, and their continued commitment to WebKit shows it in action.
The problem with discussing experience fundamentals is that objectivity remains out of reach. Some people prefer a tiled, line-mode display to a bitmap GUI. I'm fine with that. Why wouldn't I be? What's aggravating is when any one individual foists their preferences upon the masses. I prefer the experience that Apple has managed to deliver, and that means giving up some ground on things like software freedom. That's my choice to make, and the author here is bending over backwards to paint a false picture of Apple, Safari, and the web in general, just so we can all bite our nails over some Apple-controlled future. It's just ridiculous.
I'm not sure that "no" is as clear as it seems. There are lots of things that are technically possible, but don't gain any traction in the market because of their inherent shortcomings. It depends upon which "fundamentals" you're looking at. Are we talking technology fundamentals or experience fundamentals. From the experience perspective, I feel inclined to side with Steve Jobs on the notion that cross-platform software represents a lowest common denominator approach to UX.
For all the flack that SJ is taking over his stance on Flash, his open letter on the topic re-solidified his software philosophy. SJ -- and by proxy, Apple -- believe that in order to deliver the best software experience possible, one must control the software ecosystem from end-to-end. However, there is a dichotomy within Apple that few people have come to terms with. When it comes to the web, Apple is "open". It's about the only place that they could truly be called such, but they are, none the less. Jobs' comments in his open letter spell it out in words, and their continued commitment to WebKit shows it in action.
The problem with discussing experience fundamentals is that objectivity remains out of reach. Some people prefer a tiled, line-mode display to a bitmap GUI. I'm fine with that. Why wouldn't I be? What's aggravating is when any one individual foists their preferences upon the masses. I prefer the experience that Apple has managed to deliver, and that means giving up some ground on things like software freedom. That's my choice to make, and the author here is bending over backwards to paint a false picture of Apple, Safari, and the web in general, just so we can all bite our nails over some Apple-controlled future. It's just ridiculous.