
PPK: "Apple is not evil. iPhone developers are stupid." - samstokes
http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/11/apple_is_not_ev.html
======
patio11
_Fuck [iPhone developers] those condescending, ignorant, self-important,
stupid, blind, fearful pricks. Fuck them real hard. Where it hurts.

And fucking them real hard where it hurts is exactly what Apple is doing right
now._

We choose the world we want to live in, and I don't want to live in a world
where writing like this is unremarkable. It adds nothing to the overall
argument and coarsens us to no purpose.

I am sympathetic to the general gist of "developers would be better off
working without a gatekeeper", and have said much the same myself this
weekend, but those who Apple chooses to win _do benefit_ enormously from a
built-in, captive audience who is exposed to Apple's annointed developers.
There is no comparable method of exposure for mobile web application
developers.

There is also the non-trivial benefit of _actually getting paid money_ to
consider. You can certainly make money on the wide-open Internet, but the
tactics you use for it and the apps you make are wholly different from what
works on the iPhone. (What I wouldn't give for my customers being able to buy
my software in two clicks, but alas...)

~~~
steveklabnik
Your attribution is wrong.

He's not talking about iPhone developers, he's talking about the people in the
sentence before it:

 _After ten years I am fucking tired of the “Web development is not real
programming” bullshit that the arrogant bastards in “real programming” are
spouting because they’re too frightened to learn something new._

Now, the Venn diagram may have some overlap, but still.

~~~
potatolicious
The author seems to be suffering from a lot of insecurity and anger issues -
and I mean that in the most non-judgmental way possible. I think it's pretty
clear that most of HN works on web technologies, and personally I haven't
really seen this condescending divide between 'web programming' and 'real
programming' - which at the end of the day seems to be about the same thing
really.

I do however object to his calling the entire iPhone developer community out
as stupid and arrogant. How arrogant is it to presume that everyone of the
_many_ iPhone developers who have complaints about the current approval system
is, in his words, stupid? If anything the author is the arrogant, misinformed,
and dare I say, stupid one here.

I'm torn about whether or not to flag this. While this has generated some good
discussion on HN, I don't think we should really cater to troll material like
this. If you cannot communicate your opinions in an intelligent, civil way,
and cannot deal with your fellow developers with some decorum, then please
don't say anything at all.

~~~
steveklabnik
I've certainly seen "web programming" vs "real programming" thing before. Must
just be different scenes.

------
ulf
While he basically raises some valid points, he ignores two critical ones:

1) With the appstore being the one authority to get apps on your iPhone, you
will automatically get much less traction using the web

2) The appstore makes it VERY easy for the devs to actually get paid. If you
launch your app web-only, you have to incorporate the whole payment process
yourself, which sucks.

Catch 22...

~~~
edd
Your first point is so valid. Having created a webapp for the iPhone myself
there really are few places I can go to put my webapp on a stage that anyone
cares about. If someone knows of any I honestly would love to know where they
are.

~~~
microkid
Why not create an iPhone app, which is simply a WebKit view dedicated to your
web app?

The client see's it as a "iPhone app" you can host/sell it in the store, but
it's really just a web app.

(Maybe there's a restriction on this, but I can't see why there would be...)

~~~
st3fan
Same restrictions apply: the web view has a limited set of functionality and
there is no way to communicate between the native cocoa part of the app and
the javascript part running in the web view.

~~~
Ionic_Walrus
simply untrue - its easy to communicate between javascript and native cocoa
code. Take a look at the UIWebView and UIWebViewDelegate documentations here -
[http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi...](http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebView_Class/Reference/Reference.html)
and here
[http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKi...](http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/UIKit/Reference/UIWebViewDelegate_Protocol/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/occ/intf/UIWebViewDelegate)

------
jfager
I know this is really only applicable for a few cities, but speaking for
myself: as a consumer, I don't want webapps right now. AT&T's network sucks
hard in NYC, and even if it didn't, a very large portion of the time I spend
with apps on my phone is when I'm killing time on the subway. Offline is
important, and while we're starting to solve that with some of the browser
tech he pointed to, it really isn't there yet in a form that's competitive
with native apps.

~~~
Padraig
Offline works perfectly on Mobile Safari.

[http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/iPho...](http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/SafariJSDatabaseGuide/OfflineApplicationCache/OfflineApplicationCache.html)

~~~
jfager
I mean offline as an experience, not as a caching problem, which in my case
means games and other apps that rely on the full capabilities of the hardware.
I thought that would be obvious from the context as a native app that needs
online access isn't much better on the subway than a webapp.

------
wouterinho
PPK is an idealist. Applications need to make money. Web applications on the
iPhone are slow and have less functionality so they make less money.

------
c1sc0
The essence of the AppStore hovers around marketing & distribution, not
technology. Apple set up a great distribution channel, making it super-easy
for developers to get paid & they are throwing in some free promotion to boot.
In the end, it's about money: can you afford the opportunity cost of _not_
being present on the AppStore & make money _right now_? What's the cost of
promoting your WebKit app going to be? Apple convinced people that it is ok to
pay a little money for simple apps that run on their mobile phone. _That_ was
Apple's genius move, not the technology that makes iPhone apps tick. If you
simply follow the money the whole AppStore debacle becomes a lot clearer.

------
BigZaphod
_But instead, iPhone developers are eagerly bending over begging Apple for
more because of their myopic obsession with bad APIs, the twin geekgasms of
both objecty stuff and C, bloated SDKs, impossible layout mechanisms, and all
the rest of the archaic nonsense we’re going to have to rid the mobile Web of
in the next few years._

It's pretty clear he's never developed with Objective-C, Cocoa/UIKit, etc. if
he's calling it a bloated and bad API. UIKit in particular is fresh, clean,
and very nice overall, IMO. (I spent years in Javascript/HTML/CSS, moved to
the iPhone for awhile and worked on some major projects, and recently started
developing an app on Cocoa for OSX - which is a lot more crusty than the
iPhone.)

I also find it somewhat ironic that he talks about "impossible layout
mechanisms" whereas almost every time I've been involved with a webapp I've
hit upon some tricky layout requirement that is a pain in the ass because of
CSS' builtin assumptions.

This part reads like satire...

------
pc
Worthless linkbait, and misses the point entirely. Namely: how many iPhone
developers are making decent revenue from a web app?

Mobile Safari could be the most powerful web experience in the world, but
without a simple, trusted payment mechanism, it'll be largely ignored by
"stupid" iPhone developers.

------
asciilifeform
> developers could just use Web technologies and create Web apps instead of
> native apps

Audio. QED

(Not to mention the iPod Touch, often used out of wireless range.)

------
storborg
This article could be written much less offensively as, "The appcache in
iPhone OS > 2.1 means web apps don't have to be second-class citizens." As it
is, it makes some strong assertions but fails to actually educate developers.

That said, I agree with most of the points in this article, but I think the
biggest reason why the App Store will continue to be the authority for iPhone
apps is simple: it's a total pain to enter credit card payment information on
your phone.

Until someone changes that, nobody will want to pay $0.99 for even a
spectacularly good web app. Perhaps the solution is to use a more common
payment system, like Amazon or Paypal credentials.

------
pvandehaar
Summary: "Webapps are almost as good as Native Apps in many ways."

The author reveals no advantages of webapps over a good AppStore that allows
3rd-party software sources. He is simply angry that he doesn't get enough
attention as a web developer, not especially different from the complaint of a
three year old child, though with the language of a nine year old.

~~~
gord
We can criticize the delivery.. but given the popularity of the thread, I
think the OP is making a valid point.

I have written location-aware iPhone native apps, and if I had an open-source
alternative to Big5 then, I probably would have used that.

In my case it would have saved me quite a lot of overhead in terms of moving
from Linux to a full mac development platform. Not having to learn a new
syntax and api for iPhone might have been handy... and then I would have
avoided having to jump through the code-signing hoops that tend to break when
you upgrade software versions.

So.. that's quite a bit of overhead for an app which only uses the geo-
location feature of the hardware.

I do enjoy the Mac platform, XCode etc. I'm not apple bashing here, but making
a comparison.

------
jbc25
What a ridiculous article. The downsides of web apps on the iPhone are
painfully obvious and have been pointed out by the other commenters. Anyone
who has tried to use web apps on the iPhone knows they are not ideal.

~~~
tjogin
Yeah, obvious trolling. Had this come from someone unknown it wouldn't had
gotten any attention.

------
jcl
_"It also supports JavaScript geolocation, which is (I hope) only the first
step towards true device APIs that will give JavaScript developers access to
phone functionality such as the camera, text messaging, the address book, and
more. I’m assuming Apple is working on all that because it’s the next logical
step."_

One could also argue that Apple benefits most in the short term by crippling
web apps, since the App Store represents a revenue stream and is the main
selling point of all their recent advertising.

~~~
clawrencewenham
I'm gonna call bullshit on the general conspiracy theory, here. Mobile Safari
is the best mobile browser, period. And WebKit is the engine for the next
best.

Adding camera, accelerometer, address-book integration etc. needs to wait for
W3C standards to emerge and stabilize before they can be put into Mobile
Safari.

What might prove interesting is if a standard for payment mechanisms emerges,
so that a web app can take payments mediated through the iTMS.

------
shykes
The app store is a huge distribution channel for developers. Making a web app
solves the technical aspects of distribution, but then it's up to you to put
your app under the nose of several million people.

------
clawrencewenham
iPhone developers are part of the problem: specifically the ones who create a
zillion "shovelware" apps, some so pointless that Apple has got to the point
of banning entire developers.

Apple intended the review process to be basic third-party QA--something that
the commercial software industry needs in general--but the noisy, trivial
slush like "Dial Girlfriend" and apps that show a few P.D. pictures lifted off
Google Images are tying up Apple's resources and making it a chore for users
to find anything good.

~~~
orangecat
That's the inevitable result of the approval process. Make a sophisticated app
with lots of functionality, and there's a greatly increased chance that Apple
will find something wrong with it. On the other hand a one button fart app
will go right through.

------
Tawheed
Sounds like there is an incredible market opportunity here for someone to
create the "App Store Platform" for the Web.

------
natch
A native app with a web UI can present content even when there is no network
connection...

My respect for quirksmode just fell, a lot. The willful ignorance he shows in
his article is staggering.

And the rude delivery doesn't help either.

~~~
Padraig
Wilful ignorance indeed!

You don't need a native web app to present content without a network
connection. You just need to use the HTML 5 offline application cache thats
been in Mobile Safari since iPhone OS 2.1

~~~
natch
Heh, thanks for the well-deserved and well-delivered smackdown. I'll concede
that point, but obviously there are others that have been mentioned.

------
wallflower
> After ten years I am f*ing tired of the "Web development is not real
> programming" bullshit that the arrogant bastards in "real programming" are
> spouting because they’re too frightened to learn something new.

As someone who tinkered with browser-specific Javascript in the ugly, pre-
jQuery early days of DHTML and failed to see where Javascript and HTML and CSS
were headed (retreating into the safe world of Java for years - completely
missing the ascendance of XHTML/jQuery/CSS - rendering my web skills of the
Netscape 4.x era), I agree.

------
mitko
At least the correct way to refer to Steve Jobs is "He", not "he".

------
tcarnell
We're almost there, one step removed and we'll have it.

Let's replace 'stupid' for 'greedy'.

Then --> more fool the iPhone users that are paying billions of dollars for
average/poor applications that could be replaced by FREE, high quality web
apps.

Apple have found a way to make a forture selling what is already freely
available - a neat trick.

Isn't it incredible that anybody would pay for a 'dictionary application'
these days - whatever the platform?

------
khangtoh
Payment should be easily taken care of, paypalx, etc...

The only shortcoming is just the speed compared to native apps and of course
the missing features that you can't really access through safari.

------
pohl
Let's say that I want to implement a swipe-to-delete feature like the one in
the Mail app. What JavaScript event should I listen for?

~~~
rmaccloy
touchmove, apparently: [http://www.sitepen.com/blog/2008/07/10/touching-and-
gesturin...](http://www.sitepen.com/blog/2008/07/10/touching-and-gesturing-on-
the-iphone/)

------
gojomo
_It also supports JavaScript geolocation, which is (I hope) only the first
step towards true device APIs that will give JavaScript developers access to
phone functionality such as the camera, text messaging, the address book, and
more. I’m assuming Apple is working on all that because it’s the next logical
step._

I was sympathetic to Apple's original line about iPhone apps -- that web apps
_were_ iPhone apps -- under this same assumption, that over time MobileSafari
would get all these capabilities and more.

But those have been slow to materialize, and now Apple is making a bunch of
money via the App Store. Why add things to MobileSafari that remove Apple's
cut of sales? Or otherwise splinter the billing/in-app-purchasing system? Or
confusingly 'duplicate functionality'? The assumption that Apple is a "true
believer" in web apps becoming as capable as App Store apps may no longer be
safe.

Going strictly by Apple's self-interest, it would be equally valid to predict
that Apple may, over time, add various kinds of policy or remote-driven
cripple-switches to MobileSafari -- so the web isn't a back-door offering
'inappropriate content' or otherwise competing with the App Store.

Of course Google is a "true believer" in web apps. Any bets on when we'll see
a Chrome browser for the iPhone?

------
joe_the_user
Wow,

It seems like _everyone_ looks stupid now. Apple for the annoying process of
the app store and developers for wanting 99 cents/each for a "silly puzzle
game that would have to be free on the web".

Now, what would happen if you had a big walled-garden where each user paid a
fixed-fee for unlimited access to everything and each developer was paid per-
use and by rating?

Sooner or later, this model (all-you can eat content for a fixed fee with some
of the fee going to content developers) will replace the "free" web and app-
store models. The web is close to this already but the fees aren't shunted
quite enough to content developers.

~~~
clawrencewenham
And this worked so well for music subscriptions too, didn't it?

------
Tichy
I flagged this without even looking at the article. Is that bad?

~~~
Deestan
Not really, the title was pretty linkbait.

