Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

No iPhone Apps, Please — We're British

Posted by samzenpus on from the none-for-us-thank-you dept.

GMGruman writes "The BBC has stirred up quite a row in Britain about a shocking use of taxpayer funds: creating iPhone apps to provide citizens services. As InfoWorld blogger Galen Gruman notes, it's apparently bad in Britain for the government to use modern technology during a recession, a mentality he likens as a shift from 'cool Britannia' to 'fool Britannia.'"

32 of 393 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe something everybody can use? by SigNuZX728 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    iPhone apps are great and all, but they're not much use to people who don't have iPhones. Why not work on regular old websites? Also you run the risk of Apple pulling your app from the store. Then there's thousands of taxpayer pounds down the drain.

    1. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by JustinRLynn · · Score: 5, Funny

      iPhone is best (NSFW language)

    2. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by janek78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I'm all for the governments embracing modern tools and technology, developing an app for a selected brand of phones to help motorcyclists - that's just ridiculous.

      TFA makes a point that "It's very likely that not all of the government's iPhone apps were well-conceived -- but neither are all of the private sector apps in the App Store". But the private ones are not funded with our tax money! It's alarming that the author does not see the difference. Let private parties make ridiculously absurd applications that only two people in the world have use for. Let them make apps that NO-ONE needs or wants. But the government does not have this liberty, the government does not have any of its own money or resources.

      If there is demand for an app that acts as a warning light for motorists, let someone make and sell it, let people compete for whose is the best.

      Dear government, you are (almost) always ineffective and always expensive. Please remember that and stick with doing your real job.

    3. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not to mention that the apps don't seem terribly useful. Have a look at the original BBC article - to quote, "The most expensive application was a proposed Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) app that provides "a masterclass for changing your wheel"." and then goes on to explain how it can act as a hazard warning light, calculate fuel consumption and track RAC patrols. So, right there you've got an app costing (apparently) £40,000 to develop, that only runs on a single, expensive platform and is only of use to RAC members who don't know how to change a wheel. Waitaminute.

      Firstly, if you passed your test in the UK in the past five years then knowing how to change a wheel is actually part of the test. You don't have to actually do it on the test, you just have to demonstrate that you know how - so if, for example, you're disabled you could ask someone to help and tell them what to do. Furthermore, if you don't know how to change a wheel, *and* you have RAC cover, then you could just phone the RAC and within half an hour or so a guy in a big orange van will be along and change it for you.

      That forty grand could be spent on far more useful things.

    4. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by BagOBones · · Score: 4, Funny

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAOtC9QfXac the other side also NSFW language

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    5. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by SquarePixel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They might be cheaper and more open, but there definitely isn't more Android phones around. If we go by marketshare, best bet is Symbian.

      However it doesn't really make any sense to make apps for such a divided market. Websites work just fine from a phone and they work for all.

    6. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by qc_dk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because I live in Scandinavia and changing tires(summer/winter) is most certainly relevant to safe driving?

      Plus, Scandinavia is one of them ebul sociamolist places without poor people, so getting your tires changed is ~$100 (cost of labour only), and I'm paying 60% tax. It makes no sense for me to work two days more to afford something I could do myself in 30 minutes.

    7. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Informative

      Er, no! Symbian only has a 2% market share and falling.

      The link you give refers to some form of US only survey. They don't make it clear, other than using the word "National" rather than "International".

      The article is talking about the UK, and last time I looked that is not one of the US states.

      Worldwide, Symbian is still the market leader, with 44.3% of the market. The nearest competitor is RIM with 19.4%.
      http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1372013

    8. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by jewelie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Er, no! Symbian only has a 2% market share and falling. Personally, I don't even know anyone with a Symbian phone anymore - they've moved to Blackberrys or iPhones.

      People with money have moved, the rest of us are still using older phones or none at all. (Being a geek doesn't always mean being rich.)

      Government made apps for specific platforms are just an unfair waste of money - IF any were to be made, they should have been made in J2ME.

      Although not everyone has personal access to the internet (I know many in such a position), everyone has access to libraries, and libraries provide access to computers and the internet, so information being supplied by websites would be FAR more appropriate.

      If mobile access is required, why not make the websites standards compliant and terse and to the point enough such that they are accessible on mobiles; all modern mobiles can access the internet if need be.

      I'm annoyed as heck that apps are being provided by the government exclusively to the elite and their Jesus phones. Totally inappropriate, especially during a recession. However, it seems to be an internal trend in the BBC too unfortunately, prioritising iPhone and iPad access over more open platforms; they seem to think everyone and their kitteh has one or the other. :(

    9. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by BasilBrush · · Score: 3, Informative

      Given that you don't live in the UK, it's not your government, and it's not your tax money. So spare us the pleas.

      The dumb article has it wrong. It's not an app for "motorcyclists", it's an app for "motorists". Motorcyclists don't "change their wheel" by the roadside, they don't carry a spare. A few might carry a spare innertube. But that's not what this app is about.

      Reading between he lines the app appears to be one to encourage people to update their details with the DVLA - who are in charge of road tax and licensing. In order to encourage people to download it, it has some motoring utilities, such as the ones mentioned.

      What we have here is a chain of misinformation that goes TPA -> BBC -> Galen Gruman -> "GM" Gruman -> Slashdot. The TPA is "The Tax Payers Alliance", which is a right wing lobby group against pretty much any government spending, that routinely twists the truth in press releases, and is responsible as a result for a lot of misinformation in UK news channels. So a rocky start, but at each step of the way, the message has become more twisted still.

    10. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are two things wrong with that number. Firstly, it is for Smartphones only, not Feature Phones, which are regarded as a separate segment. Symbian owns over 70% of the (much larger) Feature Phone market. This includes phones that can install and run arbitrary apps, browse the web, send emails, and so on, but for some segmentation reason do not command a premium price.

      The second problem is that it's a US number. The US mobile phone market sucks. You have competing standards, no interoperability, and a lot of carrier lock in. In the UK, it is very common (even among non-geeks) to buy a pre-pay SIM and pop it in your existing phone, to buy phones unlocked, and for the person on the fastest upgrade cycle to pass their phone on to one of their friends and have the whole thing trickle down.

      In a completely unscientific study, I tried counting the types of phone I saw on the train when I last went to London. I saw two iPhones, no blackberries, and I lost count of Symbian phones some time over 70. I didn't see any Android phones until I got very close to my destination (Google London). I've not seen a N900 in the wild yet, though I'd be quite tempted by one in a year or so when you can pick them up cheaply.

      For reference, my current phone is one I picked up for under £50 (including a bluetooth earpiece) when I lost my last one. It runs Symbian, supports UMTS and WiFi, can act as a bluetooth modem, and can make SIP calls (over WiFi or UMTS, although I only use it over UMTS). It has a built-in web browser and mail client, although I rarely use either. I can install my own apps on it - for example I installed an app that lets me carry around and view a local copy of the OpenStreetMap maps for my local area (I also installed the Google Maps app, but it requires a network connection, and most of the time I need a map it's when I am in the middle of the countryside). This phone is counted as a Feature Phone, not a Smartphone, so would not count in the statistic that you quoted.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by teslar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because I live in Scandinavia and changing tires(summer/winter) is most certainly relevant to safe driving?

      Sure, but why would a DVLA test be relevant to you if you live in Scandinavia? Conversely, why should the DVLA test for things that might be useful in Scandinavia? I agree that it's useful to know how to change tires (and it ain't exactly rocket science anyways). But "the British DVLA should test it because it saves me money in Norway" is not a good argument.

    12. Re:Maybe something everybody can use? by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People have already pointed out that that's a US survey (where Nokia have virtually no presence), and anecdotal "evidence" is not a good argument.

      The other problem is that you don't know how many people you know have Symbian phones. The thing to remember is that an Iphone user will advertise this fact. They get an Iphone, and post "I'm on my Iphone". And if they don't say it, their app will advertise it with every single post: "Posted using XXX for Iphone".

      Everyone else refers to their "phone". Apple users talk about their "Iphone".

      Everyone else just uses their phone. An Iphone user gets it out and says "I'm going to check the Internet On My Iphone" as if unaware that this stopped being impressive by about 2004. I've even had random strangers butt into my conversation to brag "Oh, we've got Iphones".

      Thus, your brain spots all the Iphone users, even if it's just 5% of people, and thinks it's greater than all the users who never tell you what their phone is.

      Am I wrong?

  2. iphone by Frenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, but maybe the taxpayer dollars should be spent on services that everyone can make use of, not just iPhone users.

    1. Re:iphone by zwei2stein · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes, but how else are brittish going to "donate" money to ipod developer nephew of director?

      He has to make living, you know ... what better way to provide him that giving him project that no-one will really use (and thus noone will complain about if it goes horribly wrong.).

      --
      -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    2. Re:iphone by williamhb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok, but maybe the taxpayer dollars should be spent on services that everyone can make use of, not just iPhone users.

      It's more than just that. If the Government develops iPhone apps, but not apps for the other proprietary platforms, then that could be seen as a Government endorsement of Apple over their competitors. Why are taxpayers' pounds being spent endorsing and promoting a foreign company's products that few can afford? Of course it offends British sensibilities -- not only is it the poor subsidising the rich (all taxpayers pay, but only the wealthier who can afford iPhones benefit), and not only does it distort the market for smart-phones, but it also puts the companies that invest in the UK and EU at a disadvantage. (Many of the other mobile developers, such as Nokia and Google, invest and employ significantly in the UK)

    3. Re:iphone by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly, the InfoWorld blogger is an idiot if he doesn't get this.

      We can't justify spending thousands on something that not only an absolute minority can access, but likely only a minority of that minority will ever bother to use anyway.

      They'd even have had an argument if they'd done it for Symbian, by far the UK's biggest mobile platform, but even that would be a push. The fact they focussed on a minority, but popular device simply demonstrates they just wanted to play around with the latest gadgets rather than focus on actually doing their job. The web is far and away the most sensible option.

      But it's something that effects even pseudo-public sector- look at the BBC, their iPlayer app prioritised the iPhone well ahead of any platform, despite being completely against the BBCs requirement of providing equal access to content that license payers pay for.

      If it was private sector then that's fine, what they do is upto them, they may still be criticised but it's their choice at the end of the day. Public sector doesn't have that choice, you can't expect people to pay the same taxes and one of them get all the benefits and the other get nothing simply because of their choice of mobile phone particularly if the phone they chose is actually the same as the majority of the rest of the population are using. In public sector it has to be all or nothing- either support iPhone, Android, Symbian, Blackberry, MeeGo or don't do it at all and again, as people have said here a few times, the web is far and away the best platform to do it for all.

      I'm sure someone will point out some fringe platform and say "Well should they support that?", no, of course there are fringe cases and they can't be expected to necessarily support 100% of platforms, but they need to make sure they at least cover the majority of the population for this sort of thing- ideally a vast majority, such as around 95% or so.

      The only thing I will say is that public sector has had problems with websites too so it's not just a case of switching to the web until they sort out their issues there, one website they created (nothing overly complex, just a standard CMS albeit with lots of content) cost £105 million- how can that even be justified? Most private sector developers are saying they'd have quoted around £50,000 for the same site, maybe up into the hundreds of thousands if they had to employ staff to enter all the content and such, but £105 million? How can you even spend that much money building a website?

      So public sector in the UK has a major problem with IT, the iPhone apps are just one facet of it, but sensible web development seems to be the obvious solution in most cases.

    4. Re:iphone by X10 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Next year, the BBC will air programs that you can only view on a Sony TV set.

      --
      no, I don't have a sig
  3. no by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's bad to waste money doing iphone apps when you could save money and do a website which people other then iphone users can use. Why no do android apps too? What about blackberry, symbian etc? max? linux? pc? Yes, it's a waste of money because most people haven't got an iphone, android phome, mac etc etc. Some people have a pc, and they probably have an internet connection, so a website will do. It's the BBC - they make/show tv shows.

  4. hmmmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it more that some people have suggested that making applications for unemployed people, that only run on phones costing 40 pounds (70$) a month is a bit poorly targeted. And that perhaps making websites for renewing car tax etc is more efficient than making apps that only run on a tiny minority of people's phones (any phone that can run an app can use the website.)

    Why on earth does the government need to spend loads of money making things slightly more convenient for a tiny minority of nerds and rich tech hipsters, when these people are perfectly able to use the existing websites.

    Sent from my phone, obviously!

  5. £10000 for a flashing light? by bool2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "...and was shocked that people would believe it to be unseemly and even objectionable that a government was using modern technology to help its citizens in noble tasks like avoiding becoming roadkill when their motorocycles break down or keep track of potential jobs without being stuck at home all day -- the very things you'd want government to do with your tax dollars" I can't imagine why anyone would object to spending £10000 on an app to make a flashing light. And I have to wonder how many unemployed people who own an expensive iPhone will be using government jobs websites... Lets face facts here. The iPhone is a heavily locked down platform run by control freaks in California and owned by a very small percentage of the population. Tell me again why should my tax go towards supporting that platform?

  6. Supporting citizens vs supporting a platform by Dinjay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the BBC story if anyone is interested: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10514367.stm

    Governments using modern technology to support/educate users should be encouraged - it will assist the UK IT industry employment, grow UK IT capabilities and give citizens the information they need when they need it. But at the same time, a government should be careful not strongly benefit one closed source platform over other platforms. Of course this doesn't mean that the UK government should build applications in all mobile platforms - just that they should build at lease some software application on another platform - preferably an open source one.

    --
    You break all the laws of physics and you seriously think there wouldn't be a price?
    1. Re:Supporting citizens vs supporting a platform by dave420 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fuck whether the platform is closed or not - the biggest problem is that public money should be spent on public benefit. Not everyone has an iPhone, so an iPhone-only app is stupid. At least make it a normal website, which anyone with a browser can access.

    2. Re:Supporting citizens vs supporting a platform by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not everyone has the internet so making websites at all is stupid.

      Anyone can walk into a library and can access the Internet for free in the UK, including homeless people. In contrast, the iPhone is a tiny, proprietary platform. There are two important differences.

      The first is ubiquity. Anyone who wants access to the Internet can get it for free via a library, or relatively cheaply at home. The government's own assessments of the cost of living for defining the poverty line now regard Internet access as an essential utility for adults (they have for families with children for a few years) and factor this cost into their computed cost of living.

      The second is market distortion. Any make of computer can access the Internet. Any make of web browser can view a web site. Any ISP can access a web site. In contrast, only a phone from Apple can run an iPhone app. The availability of apps for a specific platform makes that platform more attractive, and if the government makes the app then it is implicitly providing market assistance to a specific (foreign) company. Even if they make an app for all existing SmartPhones, this makes life harder for new entrants into the market (and we've seen three of them in the last couple of years, so it's not a stretch to imagine more).

      The last point is the more important one. This was the same objection that we had to the original iPlayer. It used Microsoft DRM, giving a huge boost to Microsoft's products in the UK. If they had retained this system, then the only mobile devices capable of watching taxpayer-funded programs would have been those running Microsoft software (now they use Flash, which is still far from ideal, but better than it was).

      It is the government's job to provide services for its citizens, it is not the government's job to promote one company's products over its competitors'.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. It's the upcoming cuts, not the recession by Christianson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The issue here isn't that there's iPhone apps being developed during a recession, it's that money is being invested in a duplication of services when the government is looking to slash spending by up to 40% across the board. When we're looking at a devastation of public services, it's hard to condone spending intended to benefit a minority of Britons with access to a luxury device.

    1. Re:It's the upcoming cuts, not the recession by tnok85 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Listen. The coolness of Britannia is at risk here. I can't imagine any course of action except to accelerate these iPhone app plans, unless Britannia wants to take over for France as the uncool kid on the block.

  8. HTML5? by exomondo · · Score: 3, Informative

    With the capabilities of HTML5 you'd think they'd do webapps instead of platform-specific ones.

  9. just plain insulting by ILuvRamen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They sort of buried the lead. It's not "the latest technology," it's an iPhone. Programming a government anything for an Apple product is extremely unfair and insulting to people smart enough to use something better from another company.

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  10. Square Wheels by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the apps was for the Job Centre which tend to concentrate on lower paid jobs to help people on the dole find employment. So the target audience for the app are those least likely to be able to afford an iPhone to use it! If, instead of being distracted by a shiny new toy, even a minimal level of thought had been put into the planning stage this would have been obvious.

    What the article completely seems to miss is that the scandal is about stupid, ineffective use of technology not the use of technology itself. Innovation is certainly to be encouraged but if your new innovation is a square wheel you should expect to get shouted at for wasting money.

  11. Re:Proprietary formats by Spad · · Score: 4, Informative

    The summary is fucking awful. This isn't about the BBC *at all*, they're the ones reporting the story about the *Government* wasting money on largely worthless iPhone apps rather than focusing on useful, cross platform ones.

  12. I think it's a bad idea by obarthelemy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    - iPhones are proprietary. Unless the Gov supports other platforms (Android, RIM, WinMob, Symbian), it is unfair to support just one.
    - Could not the same results be achieved with a web-only (intrinsically multi-platform) app ?
    - is the stuff that important that it MUST be available on a mobile (I should RTFA, maybe...)

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  13. Re:The BBC should be broken up by fremsley471 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The BBC is probably the one thing that Britain is best at in the world. No other English-language country has anything as good as it (can't comment on others); it is quite wonderful. I think you underestimate how much it would cost to subscribe to ABC1-friendly 6Music, Radio 4, BBC2/4 if it were not cross-subsidised by the 90% of the population who never watch them- but can if they like. Cultural ghettoisation is bad for all of us. And, of course, who makes a huge % of the high-quality programmes you see on non-BBC tv?

    I totally agree with you re: news reporting. However, allowing Sky/Fox to be the arbiter of news agendas sends a violent shiver down the spine.