[FRIAM] The new evil empire

Douglas Roberts doug at parrot-farm.net
Mon May 31 23:52:39 EDT 2010


AppleSoft is the answer.

What was the question?

--Doug

On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Owen Densmore <owen at backspaces.net> wrote:

> I think an interesting question is "why are apps better than web-apps?".
>  In other words, we were all on the bus that felt the browser was the new
> OS, and that web-apps were the new replacement for "old fashioned" desktop
> apps.  But now we find we were wrong, folks preferred apps after all.
>
> Why?  What is the evolution we're seeing?  After all, wasn't last month's
> discussion about Flash vs HTML/CSS/JavaScript standards?  Where in heck did
> these puny little apps (not web-apps) come from?
>
> Is the browser not the OS of the future?  Are apps back?  Have we lost
> platform-independence?
>
> What's going on?!   :)
>
>     -- Owen
>
>
> On May 31, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Saul Caganoff wrote:
>
> The paragraph before your quote is pretty interesting too. Interesting
> tension between developers who want to monetize their apps and consumers who
> want everything free. Perhaps the App Store model is a good compromise where
> $2.99 is close enough to free to suit everyone.
>
> Apple prefers the app model for two big reasons. First, it makes their
> products stickier, since you’re not just buying an iPad, you’re buying
> Apple’s whole system for delivering stuff onto the iPad. Second, it seems
> that people are willing to pay for apps while they are unwilling to pay for
> anything through a browser. So people will pay $1.99 for an app that plays
> some game when you can already play the same game for free on a web site
> somewhere. Maybe people think of apps as standalone objects that have some
> value and that they can buy, while they see web sites just as destinations
> that they go to and that should be free. But as long as people will pay for
> apps, that means that Apple can make money by selling them to you — and by
> preventing developers from selling them to you directly.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 01/06/2010, at 5:59 AM, Russ Abbott <russ.abbott at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From:
> <http://baselinescenario.com/2010/05/30/personal-computing-apple-google-2/>
> http://baselinescenario.com/2010/05/30/personal-computing-apple-google-2/
>
> - Sent using Google Toolbar
>
> Apple wants to be the new Microsoft. It wants you to buy applications that
> run locally on your computer iPad, and it sees its competitive advantage
> as having the most developers and the most applications (hence all those
> “there’s an app for that” ads). As Microsoft showed, if you can get a lead
> and become the developers’ platform of choice, you can benefit from network
> effects. ...
>
> In April, Apple changed the terms<http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler>of the iPhone developer agreement to prevent developers from using
> cross-compilers to create iPhone apps. A cross-compiler is a tool that
> allows you to take an application you wrote for one platform, push a button,
> and repackage the application for another platform (in this case, iPhone
> OS). The immediate target of this was Adobe, which was developing a tool
> that would enable developers to take Flash apps, push a button, and make
> them into iPhone apps. This simplest explanation for this is that Apple, as
> the market leader, wants to make it* harder* for people to develop for
> multiple platforms at the same time. “Write once, run anywhere” — the slogan
> of Java, but also the essence of developing for the web — is *bad* for
> Apple, and they want to make it as hard as possible. (John Gruber<http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/why_apple_changed_section_331>makes a different argument that Apple wants control over their platform and
> doesn’t want cross-compilers between it and the developers, but that
> interpretation is not inconsistent with mine.) In other words, if you’re
> number one, then openness just helps the competition, because if developers
> have to choose just one platform, they’re going to choose yours.
>
> So Apple is competitive; we knew that already. And they don’t want to
> repeat the mistakes of the 1980s and 1990s; we knew that already, too. But I
> think the important point is that they are promoting a model of personal
> computing where most of the developers write for the iPhone OS, and if you
> want to use their applications you have to buy an Apple hardware product.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20100531/fbff09f8/attachment.html>


More information about the Friam mailing list