Google Latitude Arrives For the iPhone — As a Web App

An anonymous reader writes "After months of waiting, the Google Latitude social maps service finally arrived for the iPhone ... but thanks to an Apple rejection of the natively developed app, it's a web app. Says Google on their blog, 'We worked closely with Apple to bring Latitude to the iPhone in a way Apple thought would be best for iPhone users. After we developed a Latitude application for the iPhone, Apple requested we release Latitude as a web application in order to avoid confusion with Maps on the iPhone.' But it gets worse for iPhone users: 'Unfortunately, since there is no mechanism for applications to run in the background on iPhone (which applies to browser-based web apps as well), we're not able to provide continuous background location updates in the same way that we can for Latitude users on Android, BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile.' Latitude has been sprouting new features lately and is an interesting take on social networking, but it looks like Apple is determined to ensure its users only get a seriously crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions. PC World put it less politely than Google did, saying, 'Google's new Latitude Web app for iPhone is so hamstrung that Apple customers may be wishing they had a BlackBerry or Android handset instead.'"

Comments

First

[Anonymous Coward]

Bleh, Apple should loosen their requirements.

Re:First

[wampus]

Nah, fanbois will be on to tell you why worse is better soon.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly! Google Latitude is just an inferior (and potentially confusing) version of the maps app. Sure the maps app might actually use Google Maps but it's the Apple extensions that really put the shine on it. It's absolutely right that this be limited to a web-app. Furthermore, who would want to allow an application to continuously run in the background? It opens up all sorts of angles of attack, it's dangerous, resource intensive, and Apple is right to disallow it. Apple know what's best for it's customers. They shound't, and they won't allow the likes of Google to undermine their customers' experience with the iPhone using shoddy, poorly designed applications.

Re:First

[wampus]

Whoops, there's one now.

Re:First

[evilad]

6/10. Lost me at "shound't".

Re:First

[ScrewMaster]

Apple know what's best for it's customers. They shound't, and they won't allow the likes of Google to undermine their customers' experience with the iPhone using shoddy, poorly designed applications.

You, sir, are the biggest idiot I have ever met online.

Satire.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you met yourself yet? Also, WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH.

Re:First

[ubrgeek]

Trust the computer! The computer is your friend.

Why wait for Apple?

[Ed Avis]

Google should just put the app on their website along with instructions on how to jailbreak your iPhone and install it.

Re:Why wait for Apple?

[jez9999]

Yup. Can't see any legal ramifications there.

Re:Why wait for Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are absolutely correct. There are absolutely no legal ramifications there. Feels great to live in a FREE country :)

Re:Why wait for Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

BWAHAHAHA! Thanks, I needed the laugh.

Re:Why wait for Apple?

[agrif]

or, Google could release the source code to the app. This would give a great example for other developers to create other apps for Latitude: open social networks always work well (see Twitter). It would also prevent any legal issues with Apple, as there are many open-source apps out there right now, and Google has a good history with open source. If someone wants it, they can compile it themselves or (more likely) get it from someone else who has already compiled it.

As an added bonus, a non-jailed application can do background updates.

Re:Link to source...

[lord_rob the only on]

Don't click !!! GNAA Troll !!!!

Look into the crystal ball

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Anyone who thinks Apple is going to sit on their laurels while Android eats its lunch simply doesn't know Steve Jobs. First, compare the quality of user experience between the iPhone and all of its rivals. The iPhone is so far ahead of anything currently on the market that Apple has the luxury of rejecting apps that would otherwise be useful for their customers.

But despite this insurmountable lead in the UI, Apple is still developing their next version of the iPhone. There can be no doubt that they are going to take the best ideas of the current iPhone, the current competition, and the huge set of iPhone apps. So we can look forward to applications which run in the background like Latitude. We can expect to find better copy/paste support. All signs point to an even better keyboard experience. And more than anything, the connectivity between iPhones will be much better.

The competition will, as always, be one step behind. Following the leader is a losing game. Google is doing a great job in trying to change the rules with Android, but unlike Apple, OEMs using Android simply don't understand the user as well as Apple does.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Yetihehe]

The competition will, as always, be one step behind. Following the leader is a losing game. Google is doing a great job in trying to change the rules with Android, but unlike Apple, OEMs using Android simply don't understand the user as well as Apple does.

Yeah, because users don't really like recording video or sending mms. Or running IM in background. I know for all current smartphone users having only screen keyboard is the best possible thing, but I'll never buy an iPhone, just because it's keyboard is good only for lolcats. Even on numeric keypad inputting one long number without error (required in some teleaudio systems or when registering one program through phone) is hard, I've tried 3 times unsuccessfully until one coworker read numbers from screen and I was occupied only with entering them, otherwise there is too many errors. Text keyboard is even smaller. Nokia 6822 (my current phone) has probably the best idea for qwerty keyboard.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Chyeld]

And this relates to Apple limiting their own customers from being able to do things that the other 'big' phones can do how? Sounds like the one a step behind is Apple. This IS about features that are being rolled out for other phones that Apple refuses to allow on the iPhone, the only one playing catchup is Apple here and from the article it's less catchup and more sit on your ass and take a nap.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[TooMuchToDo]

Right, which is why Apple can't run apps in the background. Someone at Apple was asleep at the switch with that decision.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Methinks you haven't touched android recently. The Iphone 3gs is just now getting features that Android phones have had for a year. The UI is close to apples but fixed a lot of problems like it had cut & paste when apple couldn't figure it out. Being open-source and in the phone market where companies invest millions into development of a platform, and also with the backing of major developers that do understand customers, the android is poised to eat apples lunch by leapfrogging them. I'd also say google understands their customers pretty well and have a history of innovation.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Psychopath]

Anyone who thinks Apple is going to sit on their laurels while Android eats its lunch simply doesn't know Steve Jobs. First, compare the quality of user experience between the iPhone and all of its rivals. The iPhone is so far ahead of anything currently on the market that Apple has the luxury of rejecting apps that would otherwise be useful for their customers.

This is certainly open to debate. The iPhone is a fantastic consumer device and I think is in a leadership position in that segment. However, as a business tool it doesn't hold up well compared to some of the more mature offerings available. Apple understands the consumer customer and marketplace very well but the enterprise market has them stumped (fanbois will say "uninterested"). I don't think Android is there yet, either, but I think I'm starting to understand what they're going towards and the next few years will certainly be interesting. Blackberry is dominate in this market segment for a reason; they don't make the best devices but they do make the best business tool.

I also want to point out that Apple had better be more than just one man's personality. Steve Jobs won't be around forever and if he's the only way they can introduce innovative products, they're gonna be screwed in a few years.

This post was typed on a Macbook Pro. It's possible to own and use Apple products without joining the cult. They make good products, but they have shitty policies about how those products are used.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhone UI looks and feels like a Palm OS 3.0 UI with multitouch and colour added. The lack of multitasking eerily adds to that feeling.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple does run apps in the background, just not apps that suck battery power. If every app you download wants to continuously run in the background then you're phone only runs for 3 hours, everybody complains what a piece of crap the iPhone is due to its bad battery life (which is rather low as it is, without actually trying to use all the apps apple displays on every commercial). They allow the ipod to run in the background as well as the clock, but those are two very low power programs. One reason they don't want IM apps in the background (before their push service) was the constant need to have the 3g/wifi antenna running all the time to poll for messages. Beside the display, the connectivity sucks the most juice.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't the antenna have to run all the time to listen for, oh I don't know, SMS messages or phone calls? Perhaps I just don't understand the way these things work, but I thought they had to be in communication with the tower nearly all the time.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Yetihehe]

- Yeah, after two years, in it's third version... After every decent phone has it already. - Ok, 2009-08-14, Olsztyn, Poland. Referee: first one from street who will agree. - Yeah, some function does not exists on iphone = bunch of crap, no real apple follower would want it. Not every program must automatically drain batteries, typically background processes sleep most of the time and do something only when new data comes.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[geekboy642]

The antenna used to listen for incoming calls or texts takes just a tiny bit of current. Running an active TCP session for an IM client constantly would light up much more of the iPhone's hardware, and drain the battery that much faster.

Personally, I'd pay $100 more for an iPhone if somebody made it twice as thick and used all the extra space for a bigger fucking battery. If I even use the thing, the battery lasts about half of a day.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[kimvette]

OEMs using Android simply don't understand the user as well as Apple does.

Really?

How many generations did it take for Apple to concede that Copy&Paste is a necessity on a PDA? THREE genertions of the iPhone?

They also don't value openness, hence jailbreak opening up the phone to give a TON more functionality, including bash, ssh, and so forth.

How long did it take Apple to admit that turn-by-turn GPS is a necessity? It has existed from day one on Windows Mobile, but did Apple allow turn-by-turn GPS? Oh no, of course not.

One drawback it has is no background apps - apps are suspended when calls come in. I don't know about you, but when I am driving I want the GPS to remain in the foreground, and I want voice-prompted turn-by-turn directions. I'll be buying TomTom for the iPhonewhen it makes its way to iTunes, but I will be hanging on to my Windows Mobile devices until Apple fixes that annoyance. The phone can

I finally bought an iPhone, and I love it, but I'm not blind to its glaring problems - which mostly stem from Apple's closed nature, which in turn is almost a form of arrogance.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[sabertiger]

There are battery extenders that double the battery life and size of the iphone for $100.
http://www.amazon.com/Mophie-Juice-Rechargeable-Battery-iPhone/dp/B001E42QBW

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[dunkelfalke]

How do Windows Mobile and Android manage running background apps perfectly fine? Does Apple have some inferiour programmers who cannot implement a proper scheduler?

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[adolf]

Oh, neat.

A "battery extender" that, in addition to being non-integral, gets its power stuffed through at least a couple of DC-DC converters within the phone itself, all while the internal battery charger leeches current and generates heat (ie: wastes even more energy).

Just what I want on a mobile device -- more complexity!

Thanks for the tip!

(Before the mods mark this down as "troll," please understand the following: I like the iPhone. I also like my iPod Touch. And if I didn't get a free Verizon phone from work, I'd probably carry an iPhone instead. But my iPod Touch has positively dismal battery life -- one of my favorite uses for it is to sit in the back yard streaming Pandora over WiFi into a set of battery-operated speakers, but it's only good for a couple of hours of this before the battery goes flat. It saddens me that it's actually more convenient to pull the car around and use its stereo, than to use my gee-whiz iPod. I can't imagine that the iPhone's battery life is much better at this task, with the phone also sucking down juice. I think it's inexcusable, these days, that so many manufacturers products don't have removable and/or expandable internal batteries. The fact that it's an Apple product doesn't somehow excuse them from this idiocy. But, hey -- at least they finally figured out how to do cut-and-paste with it.)

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[adolf]

The iPhone is just a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is based on FreeBSD. It, therefore, has a very good scheduler (one of FreeBSD's best features is that the system stays usable and responsive, seemingly no matter how high the load on the CPU is).

Apple's own software multitasks just fine, where it is useful to do so. They just don't let third-party apps run in the background.

My jailbroke iPod Touch (same hardware, more or less) works just fine as a multiuser Unix box, background apps and all. There's no compelling reason why I couldn't install Apache, Postfix, and BIND on it, and make a silly little Internet-facing WiFi-connected server (with a built-in UPS!) out of it, except for the fact that I'd rather do that on real hardware if I had a need to do so.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[sucati]

My iphone is going on ebay once I see an android phone come to market with decent hardware. My #1 gripe with the iphone is I can't develop apps and put them on just my phone, without paying 99/year. I'm just not interested in the app store. Android lets developers install apps on their phone for free. Though I suspect apple will loosen it's grip as android/pre/blackberry gain traction and maybe we'll see background apps and other features.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[icebike]

Running an active TCP session for an IM client constantly would light up much more of the iPhone's hardware, and drain the battery that much faster.

Well, not exactly....

An active TCP session is EXACTLY what Apple's Push Notification Service uses.

Its an extended version of ActivSync, Licensed from Microsoft.

It works like this:

You open a TCP connection with an Apple Notification server, and shutdown the radio, leaving the connection open, by never explicitly closing it. With the radio down, the phone is Saving power.

Periodically, you wake up the radio, check if the TCP socket is readable. If so, you read it, and notify the user, and optionally launch that application that the notification was destined for.

If the socket failed, (timed out, network dropped, etc) you reestablish the socket.

Since TCP timeout is usually on the order of 12 minutes or longer, this happens only about 5 times an hour.

Checking socket readability takes just a tiny bit of power for a very very short time. So your radio is on for a few seconds every hour. (Which it is anyway, listening for incoming calls).

Apple's push notification leverages this single socket connection to an unlimited number of applications in the iPhone, by having a single daemon watching the socket, signaling the target app, and notifying the user.

It operates similar to InetD in Linux, other than instead of waiting for new connections, it is watching existing ones. In fact, there is some discussion as to whether ActiveSync is even patentable because it is so obvious.

And to be perfectly pedantic, Antennas do not consume any power when receiving.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[dunkelfalke]

So if the scheduler works fine, why everyone assumes that the battery life would be about three hours if Apple would allow multitasking for third party apps?

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[mdwh2]

The iPhone is so far ahead of anything currently on the market

Yet here we are, with yet another article about something that's already been on other phones for ages (at least for once this is mentioned in TFS).

So I'll bite - give me several features that the Iphone has, that no other phone has?

And please, none of this subjective vague "It does it better it just does". Especially considering that having to jailbreak your phone to get it running the apps that Apple haven't approved hardly constitutes "just working".

So we can look forward to applications which run in the background like Latitude. We can expect to find better copy/paste support

Crumbs, welcome to five years ago.

The competition will, as always, be one step behind.

What? With ancient features like that? One step behind on the hype, maybe.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[geekboy642]

I have been educated. I suppose I can safely assume that it's only the walled-garden aspect to the iPhone that prevents every otherwise-background app from using that particular framework.

Also, to answer your pedantry with more of the same: The antenna doesn't consume power, but the processor to interpret the data received by the antenna does, so nyeah.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

uhm. The Iphone is the leader?

I have had e-mail on my Blackbery since about 1999. Before the iphone even existed.

I been tethering my Blackberry for an internet connection since 2002. You STILL can't tether and iphone.

The iphone can't run background apps and every other smart phone on the market can. The Iphone is the new kid on the block here. Its about time it caught up with the competition.

As a business tool the iphone is still a toy. Its great for people who don't know any better and way to play with a smart phone but for a real mobile professional its junk. I can get off of a plane in any country and buy a prepaid Sim and have a local telephone number within minutes.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[zuperduperman]

> We can expect to find better copy/paste support.

The fact you quote something that has been a rudimentary feature of every computing experience since about 1989 as an exciting up and coming feature of the iPhone is hilarious.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately I have been banned from travel to Olsztyn, Poland, after an unfortunate misunderstanding regarding the statute of limitations on a small criminal matter of no great import. Or I would certainly accept your thrown gauntlet.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[relaxinparadise]

All hail jobs. How do you like your kool-aid? Mine tastes kind of funny.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[psychokitten]

As someone who has to charge her phone multiple times a day I can say that something as simple as leaving an IM client running in the background takes a HUGE hit on the G1's already pathetic battery, if nothing else.

That is, assuming Android's brain dead memory manager keeps the program running in the first place, and doesn't decide to just kill it off for some reason.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[mjwx]

Anyone who thinks Apple is going to sit on their laurels while Android eats its lunch

First swing with the cluebat.

Google and Apple share three board members. This is the biggest reason that has kept multitouch (for all its uselessness) out of the main Android builds. Of course it was hacked in about two weeks after the release of Android 1.0 and is included in every major community ROM (JesusFreke, Cyanogen and so on).

Second swing with the cluebat.

Android and Iphone aren't competing. Android is not going after the ooh shiny crowd which Apple has captured, Android is after the much larger smartphone audience, those who want their phone to do something. Android is not trying to compete with Iphone, Android is trying to compete with WinMo and Blackberry. After using the Cyanogen ROM Android is far superior to WinMo and Blackberry. All that is needed is for the mainstream builds to pick up a few things (like the automatic processor clock changes in Cyanogen) but this is the whole point of Open Sourcing Android.

Apple has captured the audience which does not use smartphones. These are the people who have traditionally used the latest Motorola RAZR, LG Shine or Samsung Omnia, phones that are light on functions and almost entirely designed for aesthetics. This is a fickle and ultimately self defeating market, as time wears on and trends change the iphone will become passe and once this happens the technical flaws which the "ooh shiny" crowd ignores for the sake of aesthetics will come to light.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[smash]

And please, none of this subjective vague "It does it better it just does". Especially considering that having to jailbreak your phone to get it running the apps that Apple haven't approved hardly constitutes "just working".

As an iphone user of about a year, this is exactly why it is an awesome device. If you haven't used one for any real amount of time, its not surprising that you just don't "get it".

Does it have faults? Yes. but what it does, it does extremely well. I jailbroke my iphone to see what the big deal with running apps apple hasn't allowed was. You know what I found?

90% of them are shitware, and the remaining 10% have about 5 minutes of novelty value. About the only things I missed when running on 2.2 firmware were universal search (in 3.0) and tethering (also in 3.0). Cut/paste - sure its nice, and in 3.0, but I can't say I missed it. No keyboard? Sure, its a drawback, but its also one less thing to break. The iphones we've deployed have been surprisingly durable, and I believe its a large part due to having zero moving parts, zero latches, covers (for removable batteries, memory cards), etc.

I went back to a non-jailbroken firmware simply because there was no value to me in what wasn't available as a certified app from the app store.

If you're running an iphone and actually using it, $99 is not much to pay to have a legit development environment and ability to upload apps to it - it will pale in comparison to your plan's data fees, handset repayment, etc.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[schon]

Google and Apple share three board members. This is the biggest reason that has kept multitouch (for all its uselessness) out of the main Android builds.

Ahh, thank you - I wasn't aware of that! I was always under the impression that Google didn't want to get into a patent war over it (which didn't make much sense to me, in light of Bliski.) Your explanation certainly makes more sense to me. :)

Apple has captured the audience which does not use smartphones. These are the people who have traditionally used the latest Motorola RAZR, LG Shine or Samsung Omnia, phones

.. and post on /. talking about how much farther ahead Apple is over Android. :)

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

So far ahead? In marketing maybe. I just about choked on my food when my daughter told me how excited she was that the new update would let her cut and paste across apps.

Perhaps Apple know THEIR customers, but when I compare my Android to my friends iPhone I become even happier with my decision.

The biggest disappointment for me is that iBird explorer only works on iPod and WinMo. :( I will hope for an Android port soon.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[floodo1]

Some call it catchup and others don't care. That is that most iPhone users are willing to accept some measure of freedom loss in order to gain a consistently high level of user experience. It gets so old to hear people whine about what Apple won't give them. It's obvious by now that what they give you is sufficient for a really significant number of people. We get it, it's not for you. I could sit here and complain about how GM doesn't make any cars I want, but if GM has happy customers and is doing well then I'm just being a troll.

More importantly stop and consider the large number of apple purchasers who are relatively ignorant about technology and rely on Apple to control things for them. These people need someone to limit them and Apple is VERY VERY concerned with not providing them enough rope to hang themselves with. The reason is that these people hold Apple liable for even the most minor of problems. Not only do they exercise this through future purchases but also through Apple support. Just go into an Apple store and look at the sorts of support issues that a large percentage of people are in there...essentially they're there for things that you and I (and all of slashdot) already know about. The last thing that Apple needs is for even more people to show up going "I tried to find XXX on google maps and all I found was some YYYY (strange content)" because they think the new google app is something that it's not.

Simply put do not underestimate the ignorance of a lot of Apple's customers, and the level of support (time, money) that Apple puts into supporting these people. THAT is the reason they can charge so much and why they're bastards about user experience. Yes it's slightly nefarious, but more importantly it's good business as it makes them profitable and it makes most of their customers really happy, happy enough to keep buying lots of stuff. Fortunately they manage to provide for all of those people and to a lesser extent for the rest of us, enough to satisfy a significant number of non-ignorant people.

Personally I'd prefer if they catered more towards people like myself, but oh well.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, excuse me, but the Palm Pre is viewed by many as having a UI that starts where the iPhone left off and makes significant improvements on it, not the least of which is the way it handles running multiple applications simultaneously. I own both the iPhone and the Pre, and while I like the iPhone hardware better, the ability to get real work done (as opposed to playing games) on a Pre simply blows the iPhone out of the water.

The Apple philosophy that users don't need multitasking on the iPhone reminds me of the early critics of Windows who asked why anyone would want to run more than one application at a time. They were wrong back then, and Apple is wrong now.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[floodo1]

Except that what you call a necessity isn't what other people call a necessity. Just look at the number of 1st and 2nd gen iPhones that were sold. EVERY single one of those purchasers did NOT consider those features necessities.

Just like you state later on "I don't know about you, but I...." Not everyone is like you. You're priorities simply aren't the priorities of other people.

Apple's closed nature is simply a function of a significant group of people that don't mind "closed" systems. Those people prefer to pay lots of money, accepting (in the case of the iPhone) a "closed" or "limited" device and in return be able to call Apple or goto an Apple store and basically never hear "that is unsupported" (unless they ran out of warranty, or obvious situations like spilling water on your phone).

Love it or hate it you've got to admit that a lot of people really like the experience that Apple provides. It's not crack, and it's not inherently some sort of moral evil (like crack is (due to it's ridiculously addictive nature and proven record of ruining lives but I digress)).

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[mjwx]

Google and Apple share three board members.

Ahh, thank you - I wasn't aware of that!

There's a reasons there is a lot of latitude given to Google by Apple, why else is Gmail the only third party mail client permitted on the iphone. No Y (Yahoo) or MS Live (MS and Apple aren't competing either despite what the fanboys on both sides think).

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[kamatsu]

What you have offered is a paltry defence and not an answer to the parent's reasonable question.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[RR]

The iPhone is just a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is based on FreeBSD. It, therefore, has a very good scheduler.

The iPhone is a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is not based on FreeBSD, but Mach with a bunch of modifications and a BSD runtime layer on top. In fact, MacOS X has a pretty poor scheduler, as Anand et al have benchmarked and anybody's personal experience should corroborate.

Which has little to do with Apple's decision to forbid third-party background processes.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[icebike]

So if the scheduler works fine, why everyone assumes that the battery life would be about three hours if Apple would allow multitasking for third party apps?

Because if you Jailbreak your iPhone, you can run background apps. There is real world data to base this on.

If you choose your backgrounded app carefully, it won't totally kill your battery. But if you run several, and they do not play nice, and if they keep the radios on all the time your battery will not last long. (Although 3 hours seems a bit short to me).

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[dunkelfalke]

Then the scheduler on the iPhone is does suck because I extensively use multitasking on my Windows Mobile device (HTC Touch HD) and the battery life is descent.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[MindStalker]

I think for the most part Apple was right. 99% of the application that might want to be run in the background don't really need it. The Push service works just fine for IM or other applications that need to check for updates periodically.
There are a handful of applications like Latitude that really need background access. Apple needs to do something about this while still discouraging most of the apps who don't need it from using background due to lazyness.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Kazin]

That $99 is still something I shouldn't have to pay to work on apps for *my own device*.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Pollardito]

I think everyone knows they're hamstringing themselves by not allowing background apps, but just because Apple is saying things like "background apps are bad, no one needs those" that doesn't mean that they're not working out whatever issue they have with them to make them happen. Flash back two years ago and "we don't need native apps, everything should be a web app" was the message, but they were working on that problem just the same.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[FictionPimp]

They better do a job so well on the next iphone that it blows my mind. I'm a current iphone 3GS user, my wife has a iphone 3G (my old phone). When I first got the phone it was heaven. The best thing I had ever used.

Before the iPhone I had never had a "smart phone" before. I never used my phone for anything but phone calls. Now it handles calendar, mail, web, gaming, etc. However, I'm hitting limitations and noticing my friends with other phones do not have these limitations. The only thing keeping me from switching is the lack of good 3g in my area by anyone but att. If any other carrier gets their act together and releases a good 3g network, the iphone (and att) may lose my business. If att picks up a google phone or something similar then apple alone may lose my business.

I migrated from linux to OSX because of my iphone. I bought a nice setup of macbook pro and a apple monitor (the new 24inch one). I like the UI and I like the feel of the OS. But there is nothing so great I couldn't go back to linux. The main reason I have this computer is for iPhone development. If I'm not using an iphone, then I my next PC upgrade will not be an apple.

In closing, I want a phone that lets me run the applications I want to run, to write the applications I want to write, and to have a sleek interface. If I want to run apps in the background and slow my device down, that should be my decision. If I want to replace the browser with a different one, again my decision. I like the idea of an app store to protect non-power users. But for people with intelligence to know what they want, they should be able to just install anything. These rules put in place for idiots should be easily bypassed.

Oh well, I'm not due for a new phone for a year or two, we will see what happens then.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[FictionPimp]

Honestly, the push method works great for IM. I see no need to run that in the background. But there are apps I wish could be ran in the background. For example, I would like the ability to swap back and forth between browser and twitter without waiting for the browser to load every time I click a link, then waiting for twitter to load every time I go back. Some twitter clients now have built in browsers, but none of them work "right".

Things like google latitude is another thing I would like to play with, but is worthless in it's current webapp implementation.

But it's my phone, and if I want 3 hours of battery life that should be my decision. They could even make an app for predicting an applications effect on battery life. Maybe I don't want to lose the level of my game because I got a phone call, or maybe I just want to look at google maps for a new route and leave mapmyrun open.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Lars T.]

Yeah, I guess the people who switched hardware to interrupts instead of using the good old active polling were also asleep at the switch.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I guess the people who switched hardware to interrupts instead of using the good old active polling were also asleep at the switch.

Right - because that was a comparable step back in functionality (you fucking idiot).

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Lars T.]

Yeah, I guess the people who switched hardware to interrupts instead of using the good old active polling were also asleep at the switch.

Right - because that was a comparable step back in functionality (you fucking idiot).

I bet you said the same thing about active polling. Thanks for proving my point.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Smurf]

Well, the iPod touch does have a short battery life when using WiFi actively. But if you listen to music from the iPod library, then you can expect the battery to last 8-10 times longer.

Yes, I know, I know. There's a reason why you use Pandora: so that you can listen to music that you don't currently have. But still, if your library isn't too small, maybe you can use the iPod again as you wanted.

Re:Look into the crystal ball

[Smurf]

Then the scheduler on the iPhone is does suck [sic] because I extensively use multitasking on my Windows Mobile device (HTC Touch HD) and the battery life is descent.

Or, as the parent post said, you use a combination of programs that happen to play nicely and not use battery intensive resources when not needed.

Other people run background apps all the time in jailborken iPhones just fine. On the other hand, some people on other phones complain of abysmal battery life and blame the manufacturer when the real culprit is a 3rd party app run amok. Well, guess what, the fruit company doesn't want anyone to blame them for the failures of inexpert programmers outside of Apple.

Apple will allow for the app

[CrackedButter]

Apple always have something cooking, maybe an update for maps is around the corner taking in this functionality. I wouldn't discount it especially when they want to be at the forefront for mobile applications.

Re:Apple will allow for the app

[Pollardito]

I believe the Maps app on the iPhone is made by Google, so if there was an update around the corner that added this functionality I would think that Google would be aware of it

Apple needs to re-think some things

[schnikies79]

Happy iPhone user here.

Although I couldn't give less of a crap about this particular application (it's pretty worthless overall, in my opinion). They do need to open up the API a bit or they are going to be passed by.

Frankly, I think they will. Steve Jobs isn't one to be outdone by competition.

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[moon3]

Steve Jobs had lots of misses too. I don't think Apple is invincible.

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[jellomizer]

There is a real balance out there. The reason for the tight control is to prevent damaging software, which is a good thing. However Apple needs to lay off on apps that compete with the phones defaults. Sure their stuff is good but it doesn't always quite feet the need where a new app could.

I personally think their process should just check to insure the app doesn't kill the phone or slow it down way to much. And that it is age related. But besides that, let the honest companies make software without worry that they will get denied just because of some app approver with a God complex.

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[nick_davison]

MobileMe: $99/year/customer for Apple. The main selling point for a great many prospective users isn't any of the other junk they don't care about, it's being able to essentially LoJack their phones - something all the more critical as there aren't the usual insurance plans for the expensive piece of hardware that you have to pay $600 to replace.

Latitude: $0/year/customer for Apple. In many ways would provide the same service.

I'd suggest that, whilst you may see the app as pretty worthless, Apple sees it as worth, ooh, about $99/year/customer. Which, just possibly, might be why they're hamstringing their competition... uh... "reducing confusion".

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[FreudianNightmare]

If there's one thing Apple are known for it's *not* opening up their kit to outside influences. Apples game plan is (and always has been) about rather more strict control of what happens when you use a bit of their kit then, for instance, MS. If you like the way Apple does things then that's all good. If you don't, its not. In any case, Apple and Google are doing different things. Google are trying to establish their mobile device operating system, Apple are trying to establish their physical device that happens to carry a unique operating system. As long as iPhone OS is unavailable on any other device, it cannot become the dominant mobile device operating system because, plain fact, most people don't spend that much cash on a phone. Now, in terms of revenue (the 'success' criteria for the businesses), I don't pretend to know which is going to work out better in the long run. But, in terms of cold, hard, world domination experience, I'm going to go with Google. After all, for all the success Apple have had over the years, they've never verbed their brand. (with all credit to Calvin and Hobbes for the term 'verbed').

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[drinkypoo]

This is a pretty clear case of anticompetitive behavior, and whether it's illegal or not, it's bad for the customer.

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[indiechild]

Very insightfully said. If Steve Jobs perceives Apple to be falling behind compared to the competition, then he'll open it up. But no sooner.
(happy iPhone and Mac user here as well)

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[giorgist]

Where is my second mouse button dammitt ?!?!?!

Re:Apple needs to re-think some things

[floodo1]

Really? what if the customer doesn't care? What if the customer implicitly wants Apple to be a gatekeeper for them? I mean that certainly seems to be the case considering all the missing apps / features / etc combined with great sales numbers.

Oh woe is me, Rob Malda

[Anonymous Coward]

Less Latitude features than a Blackberry. No background applications like an Android. Lame.

Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[erroneus]

Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position. People who disagree with the Apple position will always see things as they do as well. Neither side will win the other over. And if it did, Apple would just kill the iPhone project completely.

I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view. I remember some faint complaints about the change to OSX but those didn't last long. The "classic" mode also raised a bit of ire and frustration as I recall. But is Apple "simply perfect?" Can Apple do no wrong?

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't like the way your Motorola Razr organizes contacts, or displays menu items, what can you do? Answer: nothing

If you don't like the fact your LG lacks a photo sync feature, what can you do? Answer: nothing

If you don't like the fact that your Blackberry Storm is still quite a bit buggy and desperately needs a firmware update, what can you do? Answer: wait and hope

If you don't like the way the iPhone does X, what can you do? Answer: jailbreak. Takes about 3 minutes. You can unjailbreak at any time. You can still buy and use iTunes store apps. It's all still there for you, but now you can download apps, and springboard managers, and whatever the hell else you want for the phone.

Jesus, what is it with the Apple haters? 100% freedom is about 5 mouseclicks away for any iPhone user, yet somehow "the man" is holding all iPhone users down, and you haters are here to tell us all about it, over and over, ad nauseum every fucking day. Get bent.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[wampus]

You just blew my mind, man.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position... I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about?

You're committing the no true scotsman fallacy here. You define Apple fans as people who will support anything Apple does and then question if Apple fans will ever complain or disagree. There are plenty of people who like a lot of what Apple does, but still are happy to complain about what Apple does that they don't like. If someone is complaining about Apple here, how do you know if they're an Apple fan on other topics?

Apple has restrictive and problematic policies that make it difficult or impossible for some applications to work properly. This is certainly a problem. At the same time, those same policies are preventing the iPhone experience form being overrun with a million really crappy applications that degrade the normal user's experience and present huge security and performance problems. Those people complaining that Apple is not competitive when you look at a laundry list of features other smartphones have are completely missing the point. That's not why Apple products become successful. Apple is good at creating a good user experience for normal people and providing only the subset of features they can do well and which contribute to making the overall experience better. Apple wants long battery life, apps sandboxed from one another for security, and apps quality and security checked through a single pipeline. So far a lot of normal users really like that. When they can do other things well enough they'll add those, but they aren't going to rush to add new things just because other phones have them, if Apple doesn't think it will be an overall benefit. If you don't like that, you're probably not their target market.

P.S. I don't have an iPhone and am not really their target market either. I can just appreciate the value of what they do for normal users.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[amiga3D]

Apple does things their way. It works for them. It works for their users. The ones doing all the bitching are mostly just people that love to hate apple. I personally don't own an iPhone. I don't need a phone that's also a computer. I like seperate devices. But the people that I know that have an iPhone absolutely adore them. It's kind of disgusting. :)

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[maxume]

My impression was that the appstore is already a morass of crap anyway (the crap in the store might not present resource or security problems, but that doesn't mean it is useful).

I agree with your assessment that Apple tries to sell a good experience, but from what I can tell, the Appstore suffers from the same plight as pretty much every freeware review site, inclusiveness is favored over editorial opinion (they sort of have to do this is they are going to sell the phones in a state that is locked to their store, but there really wouldn't be any big ramifications to letting Google offer their own store).

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Wyatt Earp]

Apple fan since '91 here, and yea, I have some complaints.

No MMS on the iPhone. Video I don't give a rip about, but the lack of MMS is annoying.
The USB keyboards have always been too damned small.
The USB mice have always sucked from Apple, the ADB mice rocked though.
Moving power to the side of the MacBooks/Powerbooks also sucked.

Documentation has lacked for a decade or so too.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[bytesex]

Another Apple user here (Macbook this time); I agree with your post and newsletter etc: I'm overall happy with my Mac, but I think Apple is doing certain things that invoke the wrath of us geeks because they are /too/ dumbed down (and cannot be smartened up). Something we used to acuse Microsoft of as well, ironically enough. Another 'feature' is the binary lock-in (which resonates with the subject at hand here); I always hold my breath when doing a software update. Not only do they require reboots too often (but that's just a sidenote), and I have no fear of Apple's apps working afterwards, but as for the installations of truecrypt, firefox, VLC, Virtualbox etc; it's usually shit-your-pants time. The third part of my beef with his Steve-ness is the fact that certain features of Mac OS are just stupid or immature. But on the whole I'm a happy Mac-user, who still likes to reserve the right to complain about those things that he considers downsides.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[commodoresloat]

It's true, this is a known fallacy. A true Scotsman would have figured this out.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Red Marker]

Honestly, I, like most most Mac users who aren't fanatics, steer clear of discussions like this. I have no need to evangelize, and Apple doesn't need me to defend it, so there's little for me to say. That leaves forums like this at the mercy of Apple lovers and haters, who don't place much value in reasoned discussion.

Obviously Apple can do wrong. For me, I don't think the iPhone is worth an AT&T contract. I can't imagine wanting an AppleTV. Besides the big three of Mac OS X, iTunes and Safari, their (non-professional) software is really spotty. iPhoto is bloated and painful, iWork is mostly useless (albeit less aggravating than Microsoft Office), and to pick on a minor example that really really irks me, Grapher is an appalling, atrocious wart on Mac OS X, and the best current example of how even Apple can distribute pathetic software now and then. (They had a much better graphing calculator that they ditched when they bought this crap to include with OS X 10.4.) More broadly, they've had plenty of commercial failures, safety recalls, security flaws, etc, just like any other successful tech company.

What makes Apple different is that they are the only computer maker that can charge a premium for their products. Critics hate that there's nothing in their hardware (iPhone, MacBook, whatever) that isn't in cheaper products. Fans love the OS, reliability, and aesthetic. But those are really the same argument: Apple adds some value, partially tangible and partially intangible, to their products, and they charge more for them. My MacBook is amazingly physically sturdy, and I don't want to spend time maintaining the OS on my computer or learning how things work. A good GUI works how a user naively assumes it should, and Apple does a good job there. And yes, ugliness bothers me, so they earn a few more points there. You may feel differently about the value of those differences, but unlike companies that depend on volume of sales to make up for narrow profit margins, they don't need to sell everyone a computer, so they don't care if you can build your own computer and compile your own Linux distribution on it. Most of their customers don't have the time or inclination to spend doing that.

I don't understand the animosity between the camps. I don't care what computer you use, or what you think about mine. There's gotta be more interesting stuff to talk about.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[m.ducharme]

On the off chance that you're asking an honest question, I'll give you an honest answer. I am an Apple fan, I own an iPod Touch, a Macbook, a G5 iMac, and a G4 iBook. I guess I qualify. Thinks I don't like about Apple products? iTunes, for one. Since iPhoto got upgraded in Leopard, iTunes is the shittiest piece of software that Apple has let out of Cupertino. I hate it. The only reason I haven't switched away from it is that I haven't found anything better for the Mac to manage a music collection. I also am wary of the fact that iTunes has grown from a shitty music manager to a central control system for multiple devices. That makes me nervous. There are a few other things, but those are the biggies. Oh, and iProduct pisses me off no end.

I still buy Apple products because they do interfaces brilliantly. The OS itself is beautiful to use, doesn't crash on me, paying for an update of an OS usually is beneficial to me and not just a cash grab (just put Leopard on the G5, it actually runs faster than Tiger). The hardware looks beautiful, and is generally high-quality as well, particularly the computers.

In short, there are things about Apple products that I hate, but there are more things that I love, and those things that I love are more important to me. If too many of those things change for the worse, I'll stop buying Apple products.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Moldiver]

What exactly is mostly useless at iWork? I'm quite fond on the package and often leave InDesign behind because Pages is nicer to work with and gives good enough results.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[konohitowa]

The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position. The Apple haters will always blindly attack the Apple position.

There, FTFY. You had a minor consistency error.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[ArAgost]

No MMS on the iPhone. Video I don't give a rip about, but the lack of MMS is annoying.

Well, MMS support has been available for more than a month now, you can be annoyed only towards yourself for not upgrading the firmware.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Semantics...
You probably own a microwave, car, and TV set that also contain computers.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Moridineas]

Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position

Do you really see a lot of people who are "blindly support[ing]" Apple here? I've read through a lot of the comments and I don't see much (if any at all) of that...

Agreed that this is a geek-emotion battle and neither side is ever going to convince the other with arguments.

I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view.

I'm going to put the onus on you -- where are these Apple fans who claim that apple can do no wrong and is perfect in every way?

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Moridineas]

Do the USB mice really suck? I thought the mighty mouse with the scroll bar is pretty nice (though the be fair I don't use one on a daily basis). Of course anything is an improvement after the hockey puck...

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Archimonde]

MMS isn't implemented on 1st gen iphone even the hardware is fully capable for such a simple feature. So this is a nice fuck you from apple to all their first customers of the iphone brand.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Wyatt Earp]

Not on AT&T.

So there we have Apple being annoying for 1. Not doing it from the start, 2. Not partnering with a "good" telecom, 3. Not pressuring AT&T to have it work at OS 3.0 launch.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Wyatt Earp]

They got better when the Mighty Mouse came out, the other Apple USB mice were awful and have mightly short cables.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[mdwh2]

I don't like the Iphone's lack of copy/paste/Java/MMS/etc - can jailbreaking fix this?

Of course not. Some phones have flaws or missing features. The Iphone has plenty. Jailbreaking won't fix any of this. Jailbreaking is something that you have to do in addition, to get functionality that on other phones Just Works.

Jesus, what is it with the Apple haters?

Ah yes - anyone who doesn't worship the Iphone, or criticises Apple, must be a "hater". You can't comprehend that people might have some rational reasons for not loving your beloved product, so you hand-wave it away as an irrational hatred.

100% freedom is about 5 mouseclicks away for any iPhone user

I use a phone with 100% freedom Out Of The Box. It "Just Works".

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[mdwh2]

MMS on the Iphone? But wait - whenever people pointed out the lack of MMS before, there was no end of people crawling out the woodwork to tell us that not only was MMS not needed, but that the Iphone was better for it. It made the device simpler to use, or something like that (I never did quite follow the logic).

So does this mean the Iphone is worse, due to including MMS? Or do they concede that their logic was wrong?

you can be annoyed only towards yourself for not upgrading the firmware.

Upgrade the firmware? I prefer a phone where MMS Just Works, Out Of The Box.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[erroneus]

I don't hate Apple computers or the OS. Professionally, I support Mac OS 9, Mac OS X and a wide variety of apps that run on them... along with Windows clients and servers, apps... and Linux. I have no use for an iPod or an iPhone, however. I just get tired of the discussion and would like to hear some middle-ground once in a while. Fortunately, I did get a couple of responders who are more centerist and that was more or less what I was after. But I have to say that since I am on the geek side and like to make things work in interesting, unexpected, novel or unusual ways, the iPhone is the "anti-geek" technology and I feel it's safe to say that is probably the most offensive aspect of the iPhone though there are plenty of others such as the requirement to use AT&T and on and on... (yes, it does not need to be repeated that there is X and Y that people can do. We all know this. But there is something about Apple's policies and practices that are more than just dismissable by the average geek -- it is simply beyond that into the realm of offensive.

Every time a vendor tells us what we cannot do with the stuff we own, or even attempts to, we are offended. This is not unique to Apple. We get riled up when someone says we can't tune our cars the way we want as well. I find the Taliban offensive as well and it's not enough to say "well? don't go to Afghanistan!" Some things simply shouldn't happen, and vendors telling users what it can and can't, should or shouldn't do is just offensive.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[ArAgost]

I prefer a phone where MMS Just Works, Out Of The Box.

Yeah, let's bash Apple for issuing firmware upgrades that are more than just bugfixes, and including feature the public asked for. And if someone said he didn't need MMS... he must have been a fanboi or otherwise under Jobs' RDF.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[dissy]

I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view. I remember some faint complaints about the change to OSX but those didn't last long. The "classic" mode also raised a bit of ire and frustration as I recall. But is Apple "simply perfect?" Can Apple do no wrong?

Well played troll sir! Well played!
Lets play fetch first, then I'll give you a treat!

I am an apple fan. This choice, and those like it relating to rejecting apps from the store for very stupid reasons does indeed piss me off.

So your entire argument is now moot, as 'all' apple fans do not follow your description.
(Remember, it only takes 1 person out of all of them to make the filter 'all' answer as false)

While this is not why I jail broke my phone, it is one more advantage to doing so.
My guess is that apple truly believes these decisions are somehow a good thing to their business, and that is why they are doing them. I also know I am far from the only person to complain directly to apple about it, so they can't possibly think "Wow, so many of our customers are complaining about this, we MUST be doing a great job at making the full user experience excellent!"

This means there is either something we don't know, and it really is being a benefit to their business despite all the harm to their public image and frustration they are causing their customers (Some of which went to apple specifically to avoid this type of crap at other companies)
or, and the most likely answer, is this clearly is a mistake and a bad choice on their part. ("This" being their real accept/reject policy. The one their staff uses right now to choose if an app should be rejected or not. Even if 'this' happens to be 'whatever the will of the person checking at that moment is', it is still a mistake on their part no matter What the process (or lack of) is.)
We can't very well as point out to apple (or anyone) what needs to be made better and how, if one can't admit there is currently something that is not perfect and needs improvement. In fact that is exactly the process to achieve perfection.

The only two types of posts one will see on slashdot, are people like myself, who have no issues telling others that this is bullshit, and obvious trolls who are doing what trolls do, which is saying whatever it takes to get a kneejerk reaction. Trolls do not believe what they say. Their goal isn't to gain trust/respect, but to get the reaction from you that you just gave :P So the truth is not needed, and most often detrimental to their goals. A troll knows apple is not perfect, despite saying apple is perfect.

That makes pretty much nobody whom you can say honestly believe apple does no wrong and is perfect.

Hopefully that answers your question

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Red Marker]

I should have made it clear that I meant iWork was mostly useless for me, not that I thought it useless for everyone. I bought a copy a few years ago and haven't really used it since. I think it's a bit bloated: there are lots of templates that few people will use, and it often feels unresponsive. Numbers especialy struggles when lots of cells have formulas, so its useful only if your documents aren't too large. I don't make presentations so I don't need Keynote, though I'm told its quite nice. Pages just doesn't fit any of my needs. Basic text editing, even simple Word documents, can be handled by TextEdit, and TextEdit has far less overhead. If I need something to look nice, I use LaTeX, which I admit isn't an option for most people. If I really need to make something look nice and it's moderately complicated, I use Illustrator, which isn't cheap. I recall finding Pages a bit restrictive when I wanted to play with the typography (kerning, maybe?) and a bit sluggish when documents were too large. But its been a while. I think Pages, like the rest of iWork, was designed for the casual home user, and I bet it works well for most of them. It isn't a replacement for Office for a business user. I do think iWork is a huge improvement over AppleWorks.

I actually admire Apple's approach with iWork and iLife: they try to make software that allows their customers to use a Mac without making them learn how it works. They are smart ideas for applications for most casual users. They're not for everyone, but they don't have to be.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Moldiver]

Thx for the clarification. Yes iWork is not for heavy business-usage but can go a long way. I'll use Pages currently for the layout of a complete eBook with lots of tables and art. And it behaves quiet nice on my box - But it may be that smaller systems have more problems with it.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[indiechild]

Very well thought out reply to an OP who seems to have brain switched off.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[dissy]

I don't like the Iphone's lack of copy/paste/Java/MMS/etc - can jailbreaking fix this?

Of course not. Some phones have flaws or missing features. The Iphone has plenty. Jailbreaking won't fix any of this. Jailbreaking is something that you have to do in addition, to get functionality that on other phones Just Works.

I am not defending apple not including such basic features 'out of the box' like they should have... But there are some factual inaccuracies in your post I thought I would kindly point out.

Jailbreaking (Pre os 3.0 at least) will fix the lack of copy/paste. There are a couple tools one can use for that, one standalone, and others built into various replacement management apps like bossprefs or sbsettings apps.
Needless to say, in 3.0 there is copy/paste built in like it should have been from the start, so nothing needs fixing.

And to be fair with SMS, those blocks are actually in place by AT&T.
There are other SMS apps you can install after jail breaking, which give you full SMS functionality, but only if you are not using AT&T. For some silly reason, there is actually filters in place on their end, to simply drop any SMS with attachments. So even if apples SMS app had support for them, the messages would still be blocked silently long before reaching the phone.
Now why this is, and why apple hasn't made more effort to persuade AT&T to stop being asshats, is another story.

As for java, flash, and other interpreted languages. I can definitely see how apples decision is consistent with their vision for their platform, at least the vision they are always going on about in public.

With that said, I too disagree with that 'vision' and think they are going WAY over the top with the whole 'it just works' closed system.
That might be a nice argument, if it actually just worked. You are correct too in that jail breaking is an extra additional step, arguably one that should not be needed.

However just as it is your choice to purchase the phone you want, and get one that is more open, free, featured, and closer to what you see as perfection, there is no need to insult those of us who purchased an iPhone willingly and knowingly of its limitations as dictated by apple, and whom choose to exploit the hardware we own to its full potential despite apple.
I purchased an iPhone specifically to run jail broken, and accepting those consequences.
One of those features however is alternate installation repositories, and not having to rely on apple.
It is the same hacker ethic as modding an xbox to run Linux, despite being a closed DRMed platform made by another evil company.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[dissy]

Upgrade the firmware? I prefer a phone where MMS Just Works, Out Of The Box.

Well, I suppose you can just throw your old phone in the trash and purchase a brand new one every few months instead of just downloading the free updates over the internet. The new phone will be loaded with the newest firmware out of the box already after all.

I am curious, you never apply patches or updates to your current phone?

Using that logic, if you can't apply SP1 to Windows Vista, then it is safe to say, even now after multiple service packs, that Vista should only be judged on how it worked on first release, out of the box, pre-SP?

And one of the strengths of Linux is many eyes on the source code, looking for and reporting security bugs, so they can get patched before the day is out. I guess you consider remote root exploits "correct" since it was a feature out of the box only to be corrected by an update you don't want to install?

Well, at least you are on the right forum for logic like that...

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate it. The only reason I haven't switched away from it is that I haven't found anything better

LOL!

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[smash]

In the days of phones using proper email, why the fuck use MMS? Seriously, I've had MMS on every phone bar the iphone in the past 6-7 years, and you know how many times I used it?

Once.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[mdwh2]

Oh I'm sorry, someone with mod points has spoken - I'm obviously mistaken at all the defence people gave for the Iphone lacking MMS.

And heaven forbid someone mentions another phone - a Motorola V980, btw - in the comments. (What is up with the mod system lately? I can't remember the last time I had points, yet they're given out to people who misuse negative mods for "I disagree with this person"?) I'm not trolling, I'm arguing my point of view. Just because you disagree doesn't make it a Troll.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow good thing you and you alone are the marketing segment for the entire telecom industry. Maybe Coke Cola should close up shop because maybe you haven't used it in 5 years too. I swear Apple's arrogance is only rivaled by their user's. So what do you say about Apple actually implementing MMS now? Is it a useless addition or is it the greatest thing ever because they decided to put it in?

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[floodo1]

It's not that they're perfect, it's that they're good enough. Lots of people use Apple products and have complaints about them, it's just that they have LESS complaints about Apple than anyone else. Case in point, Apple's conditioning of people to have a dock with 10000x icons on it (through the default installation, the use of it in the Apple store, and the way in which almost everyone actually does this), seems absolutely RIDICULOUS to me. This particular problem can be alleviated through other software (namely Quicksilver), but even if it couldn't I probably wouldn't go back to Windows over it.

Stop creating a false dichotomy and look around a bit.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[mgblst]

The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position.

I am an Apple fan. I think Apple have made a great product in the iPhone and Macbook, but certainly they could make them better. As an iphone developer, there are parts that annoy me, some of them I understand why they do it (the approval process), some of the baffle me (UIWebview ratings, modifying the camera view).

I don't use this feature, I understand why Apple wouldn't allow it, but think they are wrong. But heh, they run this huge company, have loads of resource, and have produced the 2 best UIs in the iPhone and Mac OS X, so I am willing to bet they may have done some research.

Of course, maybe they are worried about Google, or punishing it for android/ new OS.

There are plenty of people out there who are idiotic towards Apple, hate them with a passion, usually think they only offer style over substance, and proclaim to not understand why people like the iphone when their phone has had these features for years. There are stupid people everywhere.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[smash]

Its a waste of resources they could have diverted elsewhere.

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

I love Apple products, but I hate OSX Leopard Server. I mean... they say you can install and manage everything graphically and it's not true. At the end, it is similar to a Linux Server, where you have to edit everything manually.
So you are wrong ;-)

Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another Willing-To-Criticise Apple fan here (perhaps this should be a thread?) use my MacBook / iPhone in preference to my Vista / Ubuntu boxes as a whole - BUT:
- Finder SUCKS (even win explorer makes it look bad)
- EVERY single app uses right click so WHY force users to keep doing a hold-a-key click Stubborn Steve?
- My nice recompile of Apache / PHP (to something usable) gets over-written every major update
- it sucks how the menu bar is disembodied

other than that, Great!

Latitude web app better than most "native" ones

[bangpound]

Google Latitude is an immature service. It's not as interesting or useful as Brightkite or even Loopt. However, the web app is brilliant. The responsiveness of the app is not very different from the iPhone Maps app. The directions tool is in some ways better. The fact that it's not a "real" app isn't important to me. In fact, it shows that most of the apps out there are unnecessary... they could be web apps instead.

Re:Latitude web app better than most "native" ones

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. It seems like a very nice html5 web app which begs the question: was it created by hand or with some uber secret version of GWT? IMO it's one of the best web apps I have yet to see.

If you don't like it let Apple know

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell apple that you don't like their decision and they are making the iPhone worse than any Android, BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile phone. Here is apple.com feedback, let them know how you feel. http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html

this should be the tipping point.

[DragonTHC]

Apple will be sued for their app store discrimination.

This should be the point at which everyone realizes that If a google app gets rejected, there's no point investing time and money into an iphone app.

Business isn't going to make a product which can't be sold.

Just like mainstream movie production companies won't make a film that can't be shown in theaters. It's about money and Apple is trying to play favorites.

Re:this should be the tipping point.

[Anonymous Coward]

"This should be the point at which everyone realizes that If a google app gets rejected, there's no point investing time and money into an iphone app.

Business isn't going to make a product which can't be sold."

"As of July 14, 2009, there are over 65,000 third-party applications officially available for the iPhone and iPod Touch on the App Store"

That reminds me...

[wampus]

Google just checked in a bunch of code for the next Android release.

Flamebate-tastic

[crmarvin42]

but it looks like Apple is determined to ensure its users only get a seriously crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions.

I think a more accurate replacement for this line would be, "but it looks like Apple is unwilling to make exceptions to their developer agreement for Google. Unfortunately, this means a crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions."

This summary makes it seem as though Apple conciously went out of their way to cripple the app, instead simply being inflexible in it's design restrictions. Everyone and their cat has an opinion on Apples "1 app at a time" policy, and that's fine. Bash that if you want to, theres plent of anger and frustration over that to go around. However, intentionally misrepresenting the issue here is counter productive, and prone to start a flamewar at best.

Re:Flamebate-tastic

[Aladrin]

"This summary makes it seem as though Apple conciously went out of their way to cripple the app,"

Actually, they did. Didn't you read the part of the summary where Apple insisted that it not be a native app and had to be a web-app instead? They -are- going out of their way to cripple it.

Re:Flamebate-tastic

[crmarvin42]

Actually they didn't.

The told Google that their app would not be approvable for inclusion in the App Store because it requires the ability to run in the background. They suggested that the best way to get the app on the iPhone would be to load it as a web app for this reason.

Google could have decided to modify the app so that it was approvable, but decided against that. Since Apple didn't write they app, they can't "intentionally cripple" it, they can only veto the apps inclusion in the app store if they decide it violates one of their rules.

Re:Flamebate-tastic

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF, at least read the summary. The native app already couldn't background; that's impossible on iphone. It was rejected because it duplicates functionality of the built-in Maps app.

Re:Flamebate-tastic

[RightSaidFred99]

I don't understand how the biggest, douchiest "open source" advocates who whine about DRM to no end are such huge Apple fans when the iPhone is the most CLOSED mobile system on the planet. It's just dumbfounding. I can't write my OWN FUCKING apps that run on the iPhone. It's astonishing to me, really.

Re:Flamebate-tastic

[crmarvin42]

I don't know if that screed was directed at me, but I'm not a giant "open source" advocate, douchie or not.

I have no problem with any OS developer dictating the term with which developers are allowed to write apps for their OS. If they are too restrictive they'll shoot themselves in the foot, and it'll ultimately be their loss. I just thought that the summary was unnecessarily written in such a way as to promote a useless flame war.

P.S. there are more "closed" mobile systems around, it's just that no one is actually interested in developing for them. the iPhone is simply the most closed of the Desirable mobile platforms.

Google and web apps

[YourExperiment]

This must be a tiny bit embarrassing for Google. They're staking their reputation on Chrome OS, an OS based on the principle that native apps have had their day, and that everything we want to do can be done perfectly well through web apps.

Yet everyone's describing Google's web app as "crippled" on the iPhone, solely because Apple wouldn't allow them to release the native version of it. Why did they even deem it necessary to write a native version in the first place?

Incidentally, is there something in the Slashdot terms and conditions which means the site has to get worse every day? I can't even interact with the comment box with my mouse any more, it just ignores all clicks as if there's another HTML element overlaying it. This is truly pathetic.

Re:Google and web apps

[Fallen Seraph]

Did you even RTFA? It's one thing for web apps to be fully functional on a desktop or a notebook, it's quite another on a handset. The specific issue as hand is that it's crippled because it can't run in the background, due to the iPhone's shitty implementation of multi-tasking, whereas as a native app they were hoping it could. If, however, it were the Pre, for example, this would be a non-issue, because Pre users can just keep a background browser open continuously if they want, and open other browsers at the same time, or other apps without having to close it.

Re:Google and web apps

[YourExperiment]

Did you even RTFA?

Yes.

It's one thing for web apps to be fully functional on a desktop or a notebook, it's quite another on a handset.

No it isn't, it's precisely the same thing.

it's crippled because it can't run in the background, due to the iPhone's shitty implementation of multi-tasking, whereas as a native app they were hoping it could

Why would they be hoping that? I think they'd be aware of the fact that neither web apps nor native apps can run on the background on an iPhone.

Re:Google and web apps

[kimvette]

Wrong.On a convergence device like the iPhone where you are forced to buy an unlimited data service, you are practically guaranteed to have connectivity to the cloud. That is not so on a standalone desktop or notebook. iPhone is down? Just drive a mile or two away and get perfect high-speed connection. Your cable or DSL is down? Make an appointment with your ISP and wait days to weeks for a resolution.

Re:Google and web apps

[WGFCrafty]

So can newer Blackberry users. On my Curve 8900, Alt-Back pulls up a bar just like Window's Alt-Tab does. I currently have Yahoo Messenger, AIM and Google Talk all simultaneously running in the background.

Now, I can't open multiple browsers while browsing the internet on it, but I guess this functionality you refer to is more similar to multiple tabs then multiple browsers.

Re:Google and web apps

[RightSaidFred99]

You're clueless. Google's vision is a standardized "browser" running web apps. It's not some shitty mobile browser developed by Apple that will only run one thing at a time, not in the background.

Your original post, to which GP replied, was some wierd accusation of how CRAZY it was that google complained they couldn't write a native app but had to write a webapp. What's stupid about your original post is that Google must do this because Apples web app execution environment is limited and sucky.

Re:Google and web apps

[YourExperiment]

You're clueless.

Excuse me? Can we at least keep this civil? If you want to point out an inconsistency in my argument I'm happy to listen, but I don't come here to be pointlessly insulted (I go to /b/ for that).

Google's vision is a standardized "browser" running web apps

No, Google's vision is web apps that will run on any standards compliant browser. They'd like their own browser/OS to capture a good chunk of market, so they can use that leverage to push their vision of what the standards should be. By no means are they as naive as Microsoft were, believing they can take over the market by pushing proprietary technologies.

Your original post, to which GP replied, was some wierd accusation of how CRAZY it was that google complained they couldn't write a native app but had to write a webapp.

There's nothing weird about my accusation, and I certainly never used the word "crazy" (let alone shouted it like you did).

What's stupid about your original post is that Google must do this because Apples web app execution environment is limited and sucky.

Now we finally get to the meat of your "argument", and it's just plain wrong. Neither web apps nor native apps may run in the background on the iPhone, so writing Latitude as a native app would not have helped. The iPhone is simply incapable of running Latitude properly.

That makes sense...

[Gaerek]

'Google's new Latitude Web app for iPhone is so hamstrung that Apple customers may be wishing they had a BlackBerry or Android handset instead.' Yes, because one crippled app is going to make me wish I had a Blackberry or Android...

Re:That makes sense...

[mdwh2]

You're right. Given that the Iphone is crippled even compared with bog standard cheap phones, it's not like yet another flaw is going to make them change their mind. The RDF is just too strong...

Re:That makes sense...

[mgblst]

I wish I had a blackberry or Android, then I could sell them on ebay and buy more great apps for my iphone. I think that was the posters point?

Re:That makes sense...

[FictionPimp]

Actually, this has kinda reached a breaking point for me. This is something I was looking forward to, and now it has fallen though. If a Andriod phone gets released for verizon or att then I will be all over it. My 3GS can go to my wife.

What's up with Apple lately?

[HangingChad]

... but thanks to an Apple rejection of the natively developed app, it's a web app.

Breaking iTunes compatibility on Linux and Blackberry and now they're crippling a Google app. What up? I'm sure there's a strategy here, I just can't see it.

I don't think trying to Balkanize their services and regulate iPhone users is going to ultimately be good for them or their user base. The iPhone user demographic may not have the same brand loyalty as the Apple faithful.

Beyond that I've always been impressed with Apple's execution...until recently. Instead of their usual suave and polish, always being ahead of the curve in packaging and style, lately they seem to be heavy handed and bumbling around a bit. Reactive instead of their usual proactive. Being reactive and heavy handed reminds me of Microsoft and even though I'm not a Mac fan myself I really appreciate what Apple did well.

I hope they right themselves and implement a service strategy with the same quality they've shown in other areas. If they start trying to make iPhones the AOL of cellular services, then Google and other providers are going to out-maneuver them with superior service offerings on a wider range of devices.

Maybe it's some flashback to the OS wars. Instead of a big market share and being the dominant player in the field, Apple is setting themselves up for a smaller but more loyal market share. Which could be either good or bad depending on how you feel about them tying their OS to their hardware.

Re:What's up with Apple lately?

[indiechild]

Apple has always been like this. It's Steve Jobs' style.

Sometimes it's maddening. But my overall experience with Apple products is still overwhelmingly positive, which is why I keep buying and using them.

Apple doesn't care for "marketshare" as such -- they care about profits. So as long as they get the biggest profits, it doesn't matter what kind of marketshare they have. Indeed, they might have only a small marketshare, which is perfectly fine. That's why Apple refuses to compete at the lower end of the market.

background

[WillKemp]

The iphone's OS has no mechanism for running applications in the background??? That's stunning! Is it based on Windows 3.1 or something?

Re:background

[larry bagina]

The iPhone OS supports background processes. The app store guidelines ban background apps, to preserve battery life.

Re:background

[topham]

Actually, the OS itself fully supports it.

Apple will not allow 3rd parties to write apps that can run in the background.
This is mostly due to battery life, and memory issues. Do some research on the typical issues people run into with background apps on other platforms and it starts to make a lot of sense. However, in this instance I think Apple is off their rocker. They should create an API to handle on-going location recording and posting.

Re:background

[Anonymous Coward]

The OS fully supports it. Apple doesn't allow it on anything that isn't part of the firmware. There's a jailbreak app that lets App Store apps run in the background by long-pressing Home. Yeah, it does hurt battery life. But there are some situations in which you need to have background apps, like this.

Android is much smarter about it - it has facilities for separating an app into 'user interface' bits and a small long-lived 'server' process, which lets the OS economize on battery life/memory more aggressively by killing the UI bits when they aren't being used but keeping the backgrounded part up.

And that goes to show...

[Anonymous Coward]

that Apple doesn't like people competing against their products. They want to look better.

This is why I am a PC. :)

Re:And that goes to show...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, because Microsoft has never acted anti-competitively, or even been found guilty of doing so in a court of law. Oh, wait...

* Post withdrawn if parent poster uses Linux. And if sarcasm was intended it should have been designated.

Wow, with full multitouch support...

[schon]

And Cyanogen says it has "full multitouch support throughout".

Considering Google left multitouch out to avoid a fight with Apple, this is an *awfully* big co-incidence.. Is this Google saying "game on" to Apple as retaliation for rejection of the native Latitude app?

As a very happy Android owner, the thought brings a smile to my face. :)

Re:Wow, with full multitouch support...

[Anonymous Coward]

And Cyanogen says it has "full multitouch support throughout".

Considering Google left multitouch out to avoid a fight with Apple, this is an *awfully* big co-incidence.. Is this Google saying "game on" to Apple as retaliation for rejection of the native Latitude app?

As a very happy Android owner, the thought brings a smile to my face. :)

No. Google left out multi-touch support because the first generation hardware didn't support it. Yes, there were hacks, but they were total crap. The HTC Hero is the first Android device with actual hardware (and software) multi-touch support. The code gets released about the same time that the related hardware gets released... how mind-blowing!

Re:Wow, with full multitouch support...

[schon]

No. Google left out multi-touch support because the first generation hardware didn't support it.

Bullshit. With the right software, the G1 does multitouch just fine, thankyouverymuch.

Yes, there were hacks, but they were total crap.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The "hacks" just enable it in software - there needs to be support in the kernel, and in the apps. You have that, the G1 (and Magic) both do multitouch just fine.

The HTC Hero is the first Android device with actual hardware (and software) multi-touch support.

This is the most bizarre statement you've made. If the Hero is the first with hardware support, why is it that you take the Hero ROM, load it on your G1, and you get multitouch? You have made two contradictory claims (of course, they're *both* false.)

The HTC Hero is the first Android device with multitouch support in software. You'll also notice it's not available in the US.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Before you donk Apple for this restriction...

[woohootoo]

maybe you should consider that there might be a well-thought-out reason why they do it. Quite simply, if they let every third-party app have free access to the CPU, the battery would last about 10 minutes. The reason that lots of people are bitching about the battery life on the Pre: multitasking. There's a technical trade-off between CPU load and battery life. Considering that battery life for a mobile phone is an important consideration, I think Apple made the right decision to limit CPU access. Sure, you could build a bigger iPhone that had a replaceable battery and carry a bag of batteries around with you, but the compactness of the iPhone appeals to a lot of people. Aside from the technical considerations, the functionality of Latitude, which allows the whole world to know where you are, strikes me as creepy.

Re:Before you donk Apple for this restriction...

[dunkelfalke]

The battery of my WM phone generally lasts for three days. With full multitasking, a larger and higher resolution display than iPhone and lots of eBook reading on the device. And the best thing is, my device is only slightly larger due to the huge screen.

There are also other benefits of multitasking like using ICQ while listening to music while reading a book.

Re:Before you donk Apple for this restriction...

[CaptainZapp]

Quite simply, if they let every third-party app have free access to the CPU, the battery would last about 10 minutes.

Ah, a technical wizzard. I can tell by this really sharp analysis.

But then please explain why my Symbian based Nokia 9300 allows to install whatever the fark I wish, multitasks 3rd party apps just fine, requires a reboot maybe twice a year and lives on a (n exchangable) battery load for about a week?

Sheesh! Fanbois...

Speaking as a bit of an Apple fanboy

[93 Escort Wagon]

HEY APPLE.

Worried about us users confusing Latitude with Maps? We're not that stupid.

Latitude is MUCH nicer. Thanks for putting us users first.

I find it odd...

[Jafafa Hots]

...that the ultimate narcissist application (everyone needs to know exactly where I am every second!)... ...doesn't work on the ultimate narcissists cell phone.

Did I miss something?

[Touvan]

Didn't Google claim last week that app stores were not the future, that web apps are? Then this week, they release a web app, because of Apple's decisions? Apple's not off the hook here, but this is perfectly in line with Google's stated vision for the future, and I don't know why they should get off the hook any more than Apple...

Re:Did I miss something?

[musicalwoods]

Well, I also think that Google has shown that their vision for web apps extends into offline mode ala Google Gears and multitasking via tabs. In this particular instance, if the web app is not open on the iPhone, it cannot record your location. They thought if they could use it as a special app, it would be able to update your location while you are doing other things.

No iphone?

[secureboot]

This is the first thing that's really made me want to get a non-iPhone. Latitude really introduces a lot of option for apps, and not being able to do this in the background really hamstrings the device. Hope Apple fixes this soon...

Re:No iphone?

[broken_chaos]

...Latitude is the 'service' where Google gets to track pretty much every move you make, right? I'm still at a loss why people are so enthusiastic over this.

Re:No iphone?

[baker_tony]

It's great for being able to find people in a park or exactly where that pub is without having to find out address or listen to your dunk mates explanation of where he is... I can't say I've ever had a need for running latitude in the background at any rate! Just turn it on when it's needed to help people find ya, then off again to save battery.

AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[Michael G. Kaplan]

AT&T wants to sell their 'AT&T FamilyMap' plan to its users. Subscribers are charged $9.99 for the ability to locate up to 2 other people with AT&T phones $14.99 to locate up to 5 people. Google latitude will do this for free only better because users can locate as many people as they want and it can locate non-AT&T users.

I think that Apple would be happy to allow this but the problem is that wireless providers abuse their oligopoly status to cripple cell phone features so that users are forced to give the wireless carriers money for things that they otherwise would have been free and better.

For example Verizon forces smart phone manufacturers to rip out WiFi so users are forced to pay Verizon to access the internet. MP3 players are ripped out of cellphones and replaced by silly paid services such as VCast.

Banning Latitude is almost certainly just another mundane example of carrier oligopoly abuse. The federal government needs to legislate to stop cell phone carriers from crippling phones.

Re:AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[Phroggy]

Banning Latitude is almost certainly just another mundane example of carrier oligopoly abuse. The federal government needs to legislate to stop cell phone carriers from crippling phones.

Wrong solution!

The federal government needs break up the oligopoly to allow real competition to thrive. In a competitive market, we can have the features we want without the government having to decide what features those should be, which always causes problems. Verizon can strip wifi out of your phone because they know you're not going to switch to another carrier that supports phones with wifi. There are plenty of reasons why it wouldn't be easy for you to switch - and THAT'S the root of the problem.

Re:AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

I love it; anything remotely wrong with the iPhone is AT&T's fault. Anything remotely wrong with the iTunes system is the RIAA or the MPAA's fault. It's a great defense. Apple does everything in the users' interests.

Re:AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I love it; anything remotely wrong with the iPhone is AT&T's fault. Anything remotely wrong with the iTunes system is the RIAA or the MPAA's fault. It's a great defense. Apple does everything in the users' interests.

Obviously you're a snarky troll, but you make an interesting point (even if you didn't mean to). You see Apple does what is in Apple's best interests, but in the case of iTunes Apple's best interests are to do whatever it takes to make iPods easy for people to use so they'll buy more. This makes them one of the strongest and most effective consumer advocates fighting against their partners in the RIAA and MPAA. Apple is largely responsible for the removal of DRM from online music stores because it is what benefitted Apple. The same is true for the iPhone. Many of the things the iPhone does are compromises, concessions Apple managed to get from AT&T that would not be allowed in other phones AT&T sold and supported. Now with the iPhone a resounding success Apple has even more leverage to push against AT&T and other providers in the next round of bargaining and while Apple's goal is to make money and do what is good for Apple, the consumer's interests happen to align with Apple's right now.

Re:AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[lordofthechia]

This is one of the reasons I jumped ship from Verizon. I got tired of having to go *through* the VCast music store (clicking something along the lines of "Buy Music") to play my music (every single frikkin time).

Also the fact that to use my own mp3 as a ringtone you had to:
1. Record a Voice Message clip directly to the SD card
2. Remove the SD Card form the phone
3. Plug SD Card to your PC
4. Copy mp3 onto the SD Card
5. Re-name mp3 to the same name as the Voice Clip
6. Put SD Card back into phone
7. Select the (numerically) named mp3 file as your ringtone

They later removed the ability to use Voice Messages are ringtones....

Lastly, they made it a *pain* to sync up the phone to a PC.

I switched to another carrier and was delighted to have a phone that was actually mine to use!

Re:AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone

[swv3752]

With Verizon buying up Alltel, and thrid tier carriers such as RCC, it begins to be a hard time to switch. We are now limited to 4 nationwide carriers- AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon. Depending on where you live, you might have the option of a second tier like Metro-PCS or US Cellular, or a third tier like CellularONE. But if you don't use the big guys, expect some pretty hefty roaming fees as soon as you are not in the home market.

Who cares? These types of apps should concern ppl

[blahbooboo]

I am not someone who normally posts this sort of anti-google message as I actually LOVE google's applications, functionality, and the real threat they pose to Micro$oft! But even I am starting to get concerned about how willing people are to give away all privacy for a few "colored beads."

I love all the Google apps, but this is getting rediculous. Now they will have my email, cell phone number, and ability to track my movement. Data mine both to compare my email use and apps use against my movements. Be able to figure out who my friends are and what they are doing... etc

I guess I am just not their core audience which is probably teenagers? I have played with a few of these services and after some use realized I have no interest in seeing where my friends are moving nor transmitting my location continuously even to a select group of friends.

Yes, I know. They have "privacy" settings etc. But at some point one has to think of the bigger picture and say "enough is enough." There is absolutely no legal safeguards on this data. Who cares? Well how about that little trip to Planned Parenthood? Or your trip to a doctor to take care of that mysterious "rash."

Not an iPhone Thing.....No Lattitude!

[ReverendDC]

Thus is ridonkulous. A program that tracks your exact location, transmits this info wirelessly, and stores it on the web....and does it in the background?!?!?!?! I have a Blackjack II and an iPhone - this garbage won't go on either phone ever. I have a problem with Apple rejecting it - freedom to have yourself tracked with "government privacy protection" stemming from an institution that can't decide if an IP address can identify you - but I will never put this garbage on my phone. Instead of knocking on the iPhone or Microsoft all of the time, turn your attention to Google for once. We allow them to track our emails and "scan" them. Docs, maps, geo-locating, chat "scans." Now Lattitude. How much will we allow Google to know about us before we become alarmed?

Re:Not an iPhone Thing.....No Lattitude!

[Ash-Fox]

"government privacy protection" stemming from an institution that can't decide if an IP address can identify you - but I will never put this garbage on my phone.

Government can track you with cell-location systems anyway - But nice try.

Monopoly?

[LBArrettAnderson]

"Apple requested we release Latitude as a web application in order to avoid confusion with Maps on the iPhone."

How does Apple get away with that as an excuse when Microsoft gets sued billions of dollars for simply including a web browser or media player with Windows? At least in Windows you can install a different browser!

Re:Monopoly?

[nedlohs]

Because one was found to be a monopoly by a court of law and the other was not.

Re:Monopoly?

[LBArrettAnderson]

Yes, that's what I was asking. Microsoft didn't get sued for Windows being a monopoly, but because within Windows, WMP and IE were dominating. Within the iPhone's OS, not only is the built in maps program dominating, but it's very difficult (and against the contract) to install anything else.

Re:Monopoly?

[nedlohs]

Windows itself was found to be a monopoly in the OS market having over 90% of the market, iPhones make up 10% of the "smart" phone market.

Re:Monopoly?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple gets away with it because they are not a convicted monopolist that is subject to certain rules of commerce that govern monopolists. Microsoft, being a convicted monopoly, must conduct business in a certain way or face penalties that do not apply to other non-monopoly businesses.

The word "monopoly" means something. Microsoft has one. Apple does not. Yes, you may find the Apple approach to relatively closed products distasteful but the legal commercial term "monopoly" does not actually apply to them. It does to Microsoft.

Re:Who cares? These types of apps should concern p

[PrimaryConsult]

Latitude is very useful for arranging meetups. Instead of "lets meet at the corner of X and Y", I can wander stores in the general vicinity of X and Y, and know to move closer to the established location as their dot(s) gets closer to the meeting spot. Since you can easily turn off it off with both the app and (in some cases) the physical gps device itself, you still have privacy when you want it.

Whoa, what is this!

[GameboyRMH]

The competition will, as always, be one step behind.

Is this irony? Whatever it is, it's thick enough to cut with a knife!

The iPhone now has to catch up to what the competition is doing - in terms of real usefulness (copy and paste, system-wide search, multitasking, you know all those trivial things), the iPhone's OS is still catching up to what Palm OS, Symbian, and even Windows Mobile were doing years ago. I LOL when I see those things being advertised as innovative new features. Apple's responsible for many innovations, but the only thing they innovated with the iPhone was the locked-in App Store - a "feature" that has led to the crippling of an entire category of devices for the foreseeable future.

Re:Whoa, what is this!

[mdwh2]

I entirely agree. And nevermind smartphones - even bog standard cheap phones had for years what Apple took ages to get (3G, copy/paste, Java, MMS, video recording). I don't even consider these features anymore - even five years ago they were basic standard items. If I bought a phone that didn't have them, I'd consider it a defect and take it back.

The Iphone may be at a smartphone price level, but it's not deserving of the "smartphone" name in terms of features. And look at sales figures - it's a minority niche player, in a billion dollar market. Why do we hear endless stories about the Iphone, but nothing from major players like Nokia, who are the real market leaders?

Someone should rename this place Appledot.

You get what you pay for !!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh wait! Iphones are more expensive than Crackberry's. Nevermind! :)

Switch to BB or Android for THIS? Puh-lease!

[lightningrod220]

I'm not wishing I had a Blackberry or Android, at all. Never will. Their UI and experience are shit in comparison. And something useless like Latitude won't make me switch platforms. That author was making some pretty stupid generalizations. People aren't switching platforms due to apps on the iPhone (or not on the iPhone), but they *do* want to switch carriers in the US. Many will tell you - the moment Apple drops AT&T and goes Verizon, you're going to see a HUGE migration. Some people will be giving AT&T the ol' "fuck you and your mother" while Steve Jobs is still on stage. They're here for the iPhone, and aren't about to change phones.

Re:Switch to BB or Android for THIS? Puh-lease!

[webreaper]

I'm not wishing I had a Blackberry or Android, at all. Never will. Their UI and experience are shit in comparison.

I agree on the BB front, but clearly you've not used an Android device, as the UI experience is pretty much identical (slidy windows, quick response, flickable GUIs, etc).

NEWSFLASH: Nobody Cares

[Stiletto]

Another iPhone article, another cry-fest. So, Apple doesn't let apps run in the background. Get this: NOBODY CARES.

How many people, do you suppose, shop for a new phone, narrow their search down to iPhone and some other phone, and say, "Gee, I love the iPhone, but I won't buy it because I can't run apps in the background!" My guess: Zero.

I'm going to make another guess: By an excruciatingly large margin, most people who own iPhones don't have any idea what you are talking about when you say "run apps in the background". They don't know, they don't care, and it doesn't remotely affect their purchasing decision. It's a phone, and they have busy lives. Apple doesn't care either, since they are making money hand over fist despite this "background" pseudo-tragedy that only you seem to be passionate about.

Crying about not being able to run apps in the background is about as stupid and pointless and ridiculous as Star Wars geeks crying "Han Shot First!" Nobody cares.

iPhone to Blackberry Conversion Report

[Statecraftsman]

I recently went for a swim with my iPhone of 17 months. Having this necessary decision point, I decided to try a Blackberry Curve 8900. Being intimately familiar with the iPhone both stock and jailbroken, I'm very impressed with the Blackberry. The Blackberry has a microsd card slot that supports up to 32gb. It gives you the option to be a mass-storage device and actually has a pretty decent media player. No OGG support but I can find the exact song I want in my 16gb card in half the time I could on the iPhone. There are all these annoying animations that look pretty on the iPhone but get in the way of getting stuff done.

Another thing that's great about the Blackberry is its ability to run J2ME applications of which there are many. Not to mention that some of these apps are free software. There's the App World if you want to go that way but you can also install things with the web browser.

Another big thing is buttons. All these buttons on the keyboard mean I can operate the phone/media player/flip through emails without having to look at/for the button. To sum up, it's nice to finally know why so many people have Blackberries. They're great for business and even though it doesn't show as well it's a lot more fun for a techy to play with and RIM clearly respects their users more.

So Apple is on our side this time

[Holi]

Latitude is one of the most privacy invasive apps that exists. You know something that keeps tabs of your location constantly. Apple is just making sure you actually want people to know where you are.

Here in the UK ...

[Goth Biker Babe]

... we don't have the Google G1 app at all! So I have a choice of the poor iPhone app or nothing. I own both an iPhone 3G and a Google G1 on T-Mobile UK. And I hate to say that at least I get everything on the iPhone that my US cousins get. T-Mobile UK have crippled the G1. Also, on the whole, the iPhone lasts far longer on battery than the G1 does.

MOD PARENT UP

[Some Bitch]

"Troll" for a factual post is a tad harsh.

cute.

[SCHecklerX]

Why do people spend so much for these things that you can't use the way you need to again? I'm no zealot, but at least the google map / latitude on my blackberry is written as an app you can actually use. If only they'd integrate the todo list with google sync, I'd have most of what I need in a portable information device.

Cool

[TranscenDev]

Sweet! An even faster way to drain my battery!!
~Ami
Chicago Web Design

Cydia

[ernst_mulder]

Maybe Google should distribute Latitude using Cydia (APT for iPhone, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cydia_(application)). This would provide everything it needs including background tasks and maybe, just maybe, it would be a wakeup call for Apple...

Re:Cydia

[ernst_mulder]

Oh apparently they already did. As of 30-7 "GV Mobile" version 1.2.2 is available in the ModMyi repository in Cydia for free. See http://www.iphonefootprint.com/2009/07/gv-mobile-and-other-google-voice-apps-goes-underground-for-jailbroken-iphone-users/. Official word from Sean Kovacs can be read here: http://www.seankovacs.com/index.php/2009/07/wow/.

Very informative!

[Hiperfon]

It's really imformative stuff. Nice work. Thank you. See: Hiperfon for java mobiles