Slashdot Mirror
Apple Allows Lotus On iPhone (After Banning Competitor)
ImNotAtWork writes "Apple is allowing IBM's Lotus
to be installed on iPhones. Recently it killed a developer-submitted program that was deemed competitive with Apple's product."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Or maybe it's because it's not a product being sold in the iPhone App Store, it's just a web application they point Safari at.
Advanced users are users too!
Lotus Notes for iPhone is just a plain old Web app. You can't stop the web.
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
Lotus notes is not the same as using Mail and iCal on the iPhone. The program that was denied by Apple usurped those apps into its own app. To my knowledge Mail or iCal have no Lotus syncing features.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Did the poster even read this article before posting it? It clearly says that it's a web based application that will run through the Safari browser. Nothing gets installed on the iPhone. Try reading it next time before posting, that way the headline you choose might make sense.
IBM has more influence with Apple than Joe Random Developer. What a surprise ...
[Insert pithy quote here]
The IBM system is just a web app i.e. a web page with AJAX, viewed via Safari on the iphone. Of course Apple can't ban it, anymore than they can ban you from visiting gmail with an iphone.
The whole AppStore NDA issue is important, and worthy of discussion, but can we at least avoid FUD ridden straw men like this one.
1-2-3?
it could also be that Lotus sucks, so Apple's app has no real competition. (yes, i HAVE to use lotus at work)
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Gah. That's what I get for believing a Slashdot summary. :^P
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
As anyone who has been forced to use Notes will tell you.
Lotus is a brand, not a product. As far as I know, the product IBM Lotus is releasing for the iPhone is iNotes, the webmail interface to a Lotus Domino mail server. This isn't a Notes client for the iPhone.
As many others have already noted, this is just a web app, and the parallels drawn to app banning are misguided on a number of fronts). What's surprising is that IBM got completely shut-out on the enterprise side of things. At the 3G release keynote, "enterprise" basically was taken to mean "Exchange," and IBM was left twiddling their thumbs. There's an IBM exec's blog that I found amusing to read (http://edbrill.com). If you thumb through the back archives and read between the lines, you can see the s*t-storm of "Why aren't you guys on iPhone" that he had to deal with, followed by a series of petulant "we didn't want to be on the iPhone in the first place" and "look how un-secure the iPhone is" posts.
I cannot understand the reason why the parent is a troll. The "application" in this case is a web application, not a native installed application.
The post, states clearly:
"Apple is allowing IBM's Lotus to be installed on iPhones. Recently it killed a developer submitted program that was deemed competitive with Apple's product."
Which is wrong. I cannot see that the parent is a "troll". IT could even be argued the actual Slashdot post is a troll (patent lie, followed by a heated "angle" to start a flamewar)
Have a nice day!
Waterboarding and rope burn.
Or maybe it's because it's not a product being sold in the iPhone App Store, it's just a web application they point Safari at
Hence, it's entirely out of Apple's control, hence this is entirely non-news (just incase anyone was curious what the significance of this is).
The inherent reason to allow lotus notes on the i-evil-phone is to penetrate into the corporate IT infrastructure to replace the crackberry. As most of the readers here know, IBM's Lotus Notes still hold a chunky size of enterprise messaging market, to the dismay of Redmond. By allowing Lotus notes, they are making the inroads.
Also whoever thinks Lotus notes has a better UI than any mail app, is insane in my opinion. People use Lotus notes because they have to by corporate policy. When they add it to their i-phones, it is not going to replace the use of mailapp by no means, with the exception of 3 masochistic i-phone owners. Whereas the addition of a better functioning maill front end, might force Apple to revisit theor own mail app, which means money out of Steve the conman's pocket. It is intolerable...
__________
The more I know people, the more I love animals
Sorry to say this but I don't think Lotus Notes should be considered a viable e-mail client.
I know this sounds like a troll, but I have to use it every day, and honestly trying to get raw e-mail source is a chore that no one should have to ever do.
This decision for Apple however does contradict the position for the so called small developer that had their app banned for competing.
Regards,
Ryan Pritchard
Fun Extends All Basic Life Expectancies
That means I can get my nice shiny super slick iPhone running a cluncky UI from the early 90's. Where's the install button?
Just hope they didn't forget the "Internet-Style Forward" option.
I think its incredible that they wont let people download their own email client. The vendor of the phone shouldnt even have this power. Email clients are basic functionality. Installing your own doesnt hurt Apple in any way. Typical Apple: run by short-sighted MBAs. Im so glad I didnt give in to the iphone madness. WM isnt sexy but it runs everything.
So you think IBM which is in size of a country would get same treatment as that poor freeware coder?
A single bug in Safari for iPhone can prevent it from running and all Apple has to say is "oops". As it doesn't even allow other browsers like Opera, you will be in big trouble.
iPhone is not a business device as long as it is run by a fascistic policy. I pity the businesses who buys Apple's claims with 2-3 poster child apps and I _run_ everything on OS X/XServe.
There is no grounds for comparing the app that was banned (essentially a Gmail front end as an app) and "allowing" iNotes ultralite that is actually a web page on your Notes/Domino server. This is just bad journalism on behalf of NY Times and seconded here.
Also - apple "allows" gmail web front end on iphone just exactly the same way it "allows" iNotes ultralite.
I'm definitely switching to Linux now...
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
There is no grounds for comparing the app that was banned (essentially a Gmail front end as an app) and "allowing" iNotes ultralite that is actually a web page on your Notes/Domino server. This is just bad journalism on behalf of NY Times and seconded here.
Also - apple "allows" gmail web front end on iphone just exactly the same way it "allows" iNotes ultralite.
Did you hear? I just found out that they are also allowing slashdot and digg! This is great!
Actually, the NYT article says nothing about "Apple allowing Lotus on iPhone (after banning competitor)". In fact, it makes no mention at all of Mail.app. The article is only about IBM making a mobile Safari friendly version of Lotus.
That's not what I read at Ed Brill's site...
What I read was lots of iPhone fanboys screaming that there was no enterprise sync with Domino/Notes, and that this would single-handedly kill the product as Corporate America spent the next month doing nothing but throwing out all phones for iPhones, and all mail systems for Exchange.
(That's why I call them fanboys - their reasoned analysis and reaction identifies them as such to me.)
IBM's response was (and had to be) "Apple didn't approach us about it, and we can't do it on our own as the SDK as shipped doesn't have the appropriate APIs exposed".
Basically, Apple chose to work with Microsoft only when it came to synching with Enterprise systems, and IBM has little control over that.
Now, IBM had _already_ been developing the iNotes Lite system that the NY Times article refers to.
The full iNotes webmail system is pretty good, but it's also a pretty complicated web application which only ran on a couple of supported browsing platforms - all desktop. (For example, until recently, it was actually IE only, with ActiveX components.)
To give people access to the basics no matter what the (modern) browser someone was using, iNotes Lite was developed. (The betas have been shown to work on the Opera browser of a Nintendo Wii, amongst other things.)
So this wasn't even really developed specifically for the iPhone. It's just the first thing that IBM have shipped which can work on an iPhone.
IBM may or may not be working with Apple to get more native integration working on the iPhone. But given how open and public Apple are, we likely wouldn't know until it ships.
But let's be clear - the real blocker is the lack of support from Apple. This isn't specific to IBM - my understanding is that if you wanted to write something that used SyncML to synchronise an iPhone and a Funambol server, you couldn't do it either. The SDK has no documented ways of doing access to the mail/calender/to-do application storage that would allow integration, so unless you can work with Apple directly you're stuck.
What's really interesting is that IBM's marketing is now spinning it as "The iPhone wasn't secure, this is".
That could be IBM giving up on Apple and just going with what they've got. Or it could be IBM toning their public reaction down from "Apple are crap and don't want to work with us" because they are working with Apple now.
Only time will tell.
I feel pretty sorry for IBM on this whole affair. The sheer hype around the iPhone makes this somehow a major story, when in the grand scheme of things - even within the computing world - it's actually rather a non-event...
Let me check my business for non published interfaces: Lotus notes, check; MS office, check; MS Windows, check; Cisco phone system, check; non standards VPN, check;
Seriously it is possible to run stuff on the Iphone, that's enough to make my company cringe. Let alone if it was open (ie friendly) to develop other tools for it.
Lotus notes may have a great database or whatever, and some nice features like integrated calendars and meeting notes... but the interface sucks donkey nuts. Rotten, maggoty, herpes-infected donkey nuts.
Keyboard shortcuts and terminology are completely different from every other program out there. I mean, F5 is the standard refresh key in Windows and every other program I've used... but in Notes, F5 is the "lock interface" key. F9 refreshes. And selecting multiple items with control or shift doesn't work; you need to use the little check column. WTF, IBM?
Instead of all the options being in one place, different options and configuration screens are accessed through completely different menus, with no logic as to which option is available in which menu. WTF, IBM?
Notes insists on putting that stupid email header with a picture and scroll boxes on every fracking email. I guess it's designed to look like stationery, or like a formal memo. But that fancy header takes 800 bytes. And when you replicate that over a chain of emails with quoted history, it starts taking up a good bit of space. WTF, IBM?
And speaking of quoting emails... trimming quoted emails is a major pain in the ass. Say you want to trim the ten quoted emails down to two, because your idiot coworkers don't... if you accidentally move the mouse just a little bit, and highlight beyond the magical invisible point in the quoted text, it selects all of the quoted material, and there's no way to back up other than starting over. WTF, IBM?
There's no way to just delete the attachment on emails in your inbox, so they sit there cluttering up space. I know you can download the attachment, but you can't save the email in with the rest of them. I want to be able to delete the attachment and keep the email in my inbox. And please delete the attachment automatically with replies... I'm tired of seeing the 3mb file I emailed out turning up in every one of the seven replies. Is that too much to ask?
The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
And you honestly expect every business to write something as vital and complex as a Notes/GroupWise/Citadel/... client on their own, when they can just buy another hanset (like a BlackBerry) that handles them out of the box? Especially for such a petty reason as "duplicating built-in functionality"?
"I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
"Or maybe it's because it's not a product being sold in the iPhone App Store, it's just a web application they point Safari at." Ok, now that you've made all comments redundant or irrelevant, let me ask you, dear leader: if the facebook app includes messaging functionality, doesn't it confuse users as much as the rejected gmail app?
What a dumb, misleading title for an article. Well, welcome to the anti-Apple bandwagon /.
Seems funny that this "story" is being presented the way that it is. Lotus Notes on an iPhone is a web app through the browser, this has absolutely nothing to do with the App Store, as is implied by the twit writing the story about the article. Apple has nothing to do with allowing or disallowing Lotus Notes to run since it's not an app in the app store.
More fucking hate...
Notes is a great platform for corporate apps. But any corp worth their salt is running their remote users through a VPN tunnel of some kind. So you'd need to run that tunnel or VPN dialer or tokenized app on the iPhone as well.
UP how people who talk about Lotus products just say "Lotus", and say it as if ONLY Lotus 1-2-3 is Lotus' only product. These same types of people do the SAME thing with Notes. Even though IBM/Lotus has a very diminutive place in the market, there (according to IBM) still are some 10 millions licensed clients of SmartSuite out there. That alone means these submitters and these moderator/admins need to get it in their heads that it would really be helpful to correct summaries.
RESEARCH the SUMMARY content to ensure that there is not any ambiguity. Why? Well, I'm someone who is ALWAYS on the lookout for new word about Lotus Smart Suite being updated, made Open Source/GPL-friendly or ported/rebuilt for Linux native running. I KNOW the Lotus car won't be on the iPhone. But it's plausible that Symphony (the SmartSuite wannabe that has a long way to go to catch up to the comfort and feel of SmartSuite as we S/S users would like it to be...) could be released for iPhone use. Pessimists could feel "Lotus on iPhone? Oh, then *probably* mean Notes". But, why can't the admins (who are vaunted/revered but subject to being reviled) just stop or filter the trash-ass summaries and story titles? Is it laziness, or is it for sensationalism? Or, is it both?
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
There are 5-6 competing third party and official apps exist on Symbian for things you mention. They update and enhance even monthly since there is a huge, healthy competition where you can show the finger to Nokia's own mail client and use a third party client as default.
If I tell you there are 3-4 different titles (recently that famous windows one) to display PDF from free to commercial, you can easily guess the competition.
I am all for competition and freedom unless it dangers my security. Symbian and sadly Windows mobile provides it. iPhone doesn't. You can't even get more secure on iPhone since antivirus or firewall is practically impossible. Nobody will spare millions to develop a security solution which customer will have to hack their device to install it. Thanks to Apple for the absurdity in my previous sentence :)