<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: iPhone native Apps redux</title> <atom:link href="http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/</link> <description>Just another WordPress weblog</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:25:19 +0000</lastBuildDate> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: john</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-27213</link> <dc:creator>john</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:53:09 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-27213</guid> <description>Oli,interesting that even folks like John Gruber are suggesting it is about 90% crap.http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/07/29/app-countAll I suggested was that using Cocoa was kinda extraneous, and I got slammed :-)j</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oli,</p><p>interesting that even folks like John Gruber are suggesting it is about 90% crap.</p><p><a
href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/07/29/app-count" rel="nofollow">http://daringfireball.net/linked/2008/07/29/app-count</a></p><p>All I suggested was that using Cocoa was kinda extraneous, and I got slammed :-)</p><p>j</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: oli</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-27088</link> <dc:creator>oli</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:33:18 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-27088</guid> <description>Aah woops, conflation error. It’ll be interesting to see if this conversion percentage holds further down the track, especially given it’s ~90% crap atm :-S</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aah woops, conflation error. It’ll be interesting to see if this conversion percentage holds further down the track, especially given it’s ~90% crap atm :-S</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: john Allsopp</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-26829</link> <dc:creator>john Allsopp</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:05:50 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-26829</guid> <description>Oli,that  2% is about exactly right for desktop apps as well - which is in the range of 1-3% download to purchase - interestingly it&#039;s also roughly the conversion rate of free to paid accounts for web services like basecamp.Looks like the App Store doesn&#039;t change everything after alljohn</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oli,</p><p>that  2% is about exactly right for desktop apps as well — which is in the range of 1–3% download to purchase — interestingly it’s also roughly the conversion rate of free to paid accounts for web services like basecamp.</p><p>Looks like the App Store doesn’t change everything after all</p><p>john</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: oli</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-26522</link> <dc:creator>oli</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:46:43 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-26522</guid> <description>Initial reports suggest a &lt;a href=&quot;http://search.twitter.com/search?q=ratio+from%3Agruber&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;~2% conversion for iPhone apps&lt;/a&gt; offering both free and paid-for versions. This seems to be the app store way of offering a demo. Eight times the conversion rate of traditional software sales is quite impressive, although this might be attributed to ‘new iPhone giddiness’ ;-) Also these numbers are for $10 apps, whereas I guess the 0.3% conversion rate is for $60+ applications.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Initial reports suggest a <a
href="http://search.twitter.com/search?q=ratio+from%3Agruber" rel="nofollow">~2% conversion for iPhone apps</a> offering both free and paid-for versions. This seems to be the app store way of offering a demo. Eight times the conversion rate of traditional software sales is quite impressive, although this might be attributed to ‘new iPhone giddiness’ ;-) Also these numbers are for $10 apps, whereas I guess the 0.3% conversion rate is for $60+ applications.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: dave</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-26448</link> <dc:creator>dave</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:45:17 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-26448</guid> <description>It seems obvious to me that Apple are trying to focus the spotlight on the App Store and away from web applications. There are various reasons why they would want to do this, such as a show-case of a couple of dozen eye-catching applications with which to launch the new system rather than clutter it with old news. Apple also need to get the message across to users and developers alike that they have a secure distribution system in place that is as easy to use as putting an MP3 on your iPod.With the release of 2.0, they certainly have not left webapps behind - they&#039;ve just stopped blowing that particular trumpet as loudly now that they have the SDK to promote. There are still plenty of additions to webkit to keep a web developer busy, with hopefully more to come, but a distinct lack of activity in how to showcase these applications. Again, easy to understand when you realise that you don&#039;t want to detract from the launch of the App Store.The fact is, these SDKs are two different beasts who also happen to be pretty good friends and are able to play well together. The native SDK appears to be immature enough to the point that it will defer any complex text layout to a webkit component, whereas webapps know nothing of GPS, accelerometer, camera, etc and have no choice but to suggest you go native until a Javascript API is released.I have found a hybrid approach interesting, but that is because I am coming it this from the angle of a web application that wants to appear native but really needs to be a web application but nevertheless wants the exposure that the App Store provides.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems obvious to me that Apple are trying to focus the spotlight on the App Store and away from web applications. There are various reasons why they would want to do this, such as a show-case of a couple of dozen eye-catching applications with which to launch the new system rather than clutter it with old news. Apple also need to get the message across to users and developers alike that they have a secure distribution system in place that is as easy to use as putting an MP3 on your iPod.</p><p>With the release of 2.0, they certainly have not left webapps behind — they’ve just stopped blowing that particular trumpet as loudly now that they have the SDK to promote. There are still plenty of additions to webkit to keep a web developer busy, with hopefully more to come, but a distinct lack of activity in how to showcase these applications. Again, easy to understand when you realise that you don’t want to detract from the launch of the App Store.</p><p>The fact is, these SDKs are two different beasts who also happen to be pretty good friends and are able to play well together. The native SDK appears to be immature enough to the point that it will defer any complex text layout to a webkit component, whereas webapps know nothing of GPS, accelerometer, camera, etc and have no choice but to suggest you go native until a Javascript API is released.</p><p>I have found a hybrid approach interesting, but that is because I am coming it this from the angle of a web application that wants to appear native but really needs to be a web application but nevertheless wants the exposure that the App Store provides.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: john</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-26068</link> <dc:creator>john</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 01:02:51 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-26068</guid> <description>Jonathan,many thanks for the frank and thoughtful comments.Re the offline issue - that is going away soon, I&#039;d expect, not because iPhones will be always on, but because we&#039;ll have client side caching.
I&#039;m keen to see how the App Store plays out - I&#039;m very interested in the stats as to how many folks download free versus paid for apps. We might see in a month or so (not holding my breath - see comments above)thanks againjohn</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathan,</p><p>many thanks for the frank and thoughtful comments.</p><p>Re the offline issue — that is going away soon, I’d expect, not because iPhones will be always on, but because we’ll have client side caching.<br
/> I’m keen to see how the App Store plays out — I’m very interested in the stats as to how many folks download free versus paid for apps. We might see in a month or so (not holding my breath — see comments above)</p><p>thanks again</p><p>john</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Jonathan Stark</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-26063</link> <dc:creator>Jonathan Stark</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:47:33 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-26063</guid> <description>FWIW: I&#039;m an iPhone webapp developer currently learning Cocoa, and let me tell you, it&#039;s brutal. &quot;Desktop&quot; is a totally different mindset (and toolset) from web. And frankly, the &quot;responsiveness&quot; advantage seems to pale in comparison to the &quot;deploy anywhere&quot; aspect inherent in modern web apps. But then again, as a web developer, I naturally make apps that are multiuser, which leads me to my main point...I am totally addicted to Moonlight Mahjong. If it was deployed as a web app, I wouldn&#039;t play it at all. Why? Because it is my go to app &lt;strong&gt;when my iPhone is offline&lt;/strong&gt;. The moral of the story is that some apps make more sense online, some make more sense offline.Yes, I agree that eventually, there will be no such thing as &quot;offline&quot;. However, there are fortunes to be made and lost between now and then. The fact that Google *might* be broadcasting free wifi over radio someday, is no reason to sit on our hands today.Overall, I agree that the &quot;native iPhone app&quot; is a step backwards in the scheme of things. So you might ask, why am I learning Cocoa? The answer is simple:Because it&#039;s worth it.As different as Cocoa is from LAMP+CSS+JavaScript, it&#039;s not really that hard. The development tools are awesome and free. There are a ton of free resources online to help you learn. There is an active and helpful Cocoa community.I have seen the traffic spikes that come as result of a mention on Apple.com. When you combine the awesome marketing power of Apple, with the convenience of iTunes-style purchases, it&#039;s a no-brainer. With the App Store, you are given the chance to piggyback on top of the trust that users have granted to iTunes, and the infrastructure provided by Apple, Inc to offer a single click (nee &quot;Tap&quot;) purchase of your software.Spending a few weeks porting your app from web technologies over to Cocoa is worth the effort when you consider that doing so puts millions of potential users one click away from paying you a dollar.Honestly, I don&#039;t know why I am posting this. It would be more beneficial to just kept my mouth shut. Less competition ;-)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FWIW: I’m an iPhone webapp developer currently learning Cocoa, and let me tell you, it’s brutal. “Desktop” is a totally different mindset (and toolset) from web. And frankly, the “responsiveness” advantage seems to pale in comparison to the “deploy anywhere” aspect inherent in modern web apps. But then again, as a web developer, I naturally make apps that are multiuser, which leads me to my main point…</p><p>I am totally addicted to Moonlight Mahjong. If it was deployed as a web app, I wouldn’t play it at all. Why? Because it is my go to app <strong>when my iPhone is offline</strong>. The moral of the story is that some apps make more sense online, some make more sense offline.</p><p>Yes, I agree that eventually, there will be no such thing as “offline”. However, there are fortunes to be made and lost between now and then. The fact that Google *might* be broadcasting free wifi over radio someday, is no reason to sit on our hands today.</p><p>Overall, I agree that the “native iPhone app” is a step backwards in the scheme of things. So you might ask, why am I learning Cocoa? The answer is simple:</p><p>Because it’s worth it.</p><p>As different as Cocoa is from LAMP+CSS+JavaScript, it’s not really that hard. The development tools are awesome and free. There are a ton of free resources online to help you learn. There is an active and helpful Cocoa community.</p><p>I have seen the traffic spikes that come as result of a mention on Apple.com. When you combine the awesome marketing power of Apple, with the convenience of iTunes-style purchases, it’s a no-brainer. With the App Store, you are given the chance to piggyback on top of the trust that users have granted to iTunes, and the infrastructure provided by Apple, Inc to offer a single click (nee “Tap”) purchase of your software.</p><p>Spending a few weeks porting your app from web technologies over to Cocoa is worth the effort when you consider that doing so puts millions of potential users one click away from paying you a dollar.</p><p>Honestly, I don’t know why I am posting this. It would be more beneficial to just kept my mouth shut. Less competition ;-)</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: john</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-24983</link> <dc:creator>john</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:06:23 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-24983</guid> <description>Hi Nicky,I do recall reading somewhere very recently that you must be over 18, and a US Citizen. I can&#039;t find anything to clarify this, and there do appear to be at least a number of Japanese language applications, which may of course be developed by US developers.But the general point remains that Apple decide who may develop.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Nicky,</p><p>I do recall reading somewhere very recently that you must be over 18, and a US Citizen. I can’t find anything to clarify this, and there do appear to be at least a number of Japanese language applications, which may of course be developed by US developers.</p><p>But the general point remains that Apple decide who may develop.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: nickyP</title><link>http://www.webdirections.org/blog/iphone-native-apps-redux/comment-page-1/#comment-24701</link> <dc:creator>nickyP</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:08:29 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.webdirections.org/?p=574#comment-24701</guid> <description>&lt;cite&gt; being a non US resident or company, I am not being accepted as a developer&lt;/cite&gt;Incorrect: Apple has accepted non-US companies in the developer progam. I know of several non-US companies/people who got accepted, as late as WWDC08 in June.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><cite> being a non US resident or company, I am not being accepted as a developer</cite></p><p>Incorrect: Apple has accepted non-US companies in the developer progam. I know of several non-US companies/people who got accepted, as late as WWDC08 in June.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 3/19 queries in 0.012 seconds using memcached

Served from: www.webdirections.org @ 2010-03-18 23:19:40 -->