1. beachtrader's Avatar
    Will you be able to run any of those web apps while on the phone? AKA Can they be completely cached on the phone so data access is not required to launch them?
    Yeah, you should. Just like you could have html files and a web site on your local computer and browse it you should be able to do this with Safari.

    A web browser is just a conduit to the programs/files on a server. In this case Safari will be the conduit to the programs/files on your iPhone instead.

    As for the person who says they develop web development and doesn't know anyone who uses AJAX...well I guess they have never used google or google maps then. Gmail, google maps and a lot of other prominent sites use it and it runs very well.
    06-11-2007 11:31 PM
  2. TomUps's Avatar
    As for the person who says they develop web development and doesn't know anyone who uses AJAX...well I guess they have never used google or google maps then. Gmail, google maps and a lot of other prominent sites use it and it runs very well.
    I stand by my statements. I invite anybody that works in a company that has web developers to ask them what they think about ajax. I bet you get very few positive comments.
    06-12-2007 12:21 AM
  3. samkim's Avatar
    Hey Antoine, there are tons of apps; that as far as I know you will not be able to run through a web app without giving it control to local APIs(which would defeat the whole purpose of sandoxing)
    Things like radio control apps, volume hacks, etc. Anything that would require access to hardware API's you just won't get.
    Also; I'm not aware of this being spoke of or resolved; what happens when you go offline? will you lose connectivity to all your apps? Does this built in browser use something along the lines of Google's Gears? Sorry if I didn't catch the answer to this one.
    I may be asking too much, but I subscribe to Make mags motto.. "If you can't open it, you don't own it." Or something like that.

    What I'm really wishing for is an larger version of the IPhone that is open and not connected to a wireless carrier.
    Maybe the next IPod will be what I'm looking for.
    But Steve said that these apps will be able to make calls and access emails. I'm not sure how that's consistent with not getting access to hardware APIs.
    06-12-2007 12:27 AM
  4. Antoine of MMM#IM's Avatar
    Can they be completely cached on the phone so data access is not required to launch them?
    I wanna play with Safari 3 as I think there are answers there as to where Apple is thinking.

    I know people on both sides of the AJAX coin. I like it when it is done well and is not just eyecandy. When rich application interaction means more than a long download time I get excited.
    06-12-2007 12:38 AM
  5. surur's Avatar
    Some-one said it very simply - will you be able to download a power point via Yahoo mail and then open it via Google office - in most cases this would completely violate any sandbox approach.

    Surur
    06-12-2007 02:27 AM
  6. marcol's Avatar
    Not just possible, but easier to get wholesale approval from all the IM biggies since technically one could sign into all of them, and then have a wrapper screen that shows the state of the respective IMs.
    Jolly good. Thanks.
    06-12-2007 06:21 AM
  7. Antoine of MMM#IM's Avatar
    Some-one said it very simply - will you be able to download a power point via Yahoo mail and then open it via Google office - in most cases this would completely violate any sandbox approach.
    At this point Google wouldn't let you do that. However, Google Gear's makes me think that at some point one could have instances of Google Office (or any web office client) in a browser tab/window and then it would be for the respective client to have the appropriate controls (APIs) to enable this functionality.

    But like it was stated above, this all depends on how much of the underlying APIs are exposed to the browser. Too much exposed and Safari becomes as security negligent as IE and Windows and people will again complain on having to download this and that security patch for the respective holes.
    06-12-2007 10:20 AM
  8. Dieter Bohn's Avatar
    From the WMExperts article:


    I take total offense at this. There are a whole lot more people doing some element of web development than there are doing mobile device development. The fact that the the iPhone just took the focus away from the native app side of things and thrust it on the web app sides of things means that if new developers want to jump in, the barrier to entry is lowered.

    Those of you basing what is and is not a smartphone on the ability to develop therefore need to modify your definition (2.0 if you will) to include web apps. The iPhone might not change the flow completly, but because it will trumpet mobile web apps, the consumers that use the iPhone just might end up wanting basic web app-like services for their device. From there, the browser is the OS to develop on, and native apps become background concerns.

    Lastly, this is an excellent move for carriers. Mobile apps that rely on teh browser mean a data connection, meaning more unlimited plans that need to be had. Good for them, good for Apple since the platform is essentially closed but open in one area.
    I certainly didn't mean to offend! If Apple would:

    1) provide some sort of framework where you could run these webapps locally and
    2) provide a way to have some sort of "browser window but not safari" available to developers (i.e. so you could have a safari webapp open the background)

    ...that would go a long way towards helping. I *still* think it's not enough, though.

    btw: I'm a bit of a WM Evangelist though much of it is honest as I really have drank the kool aid. I like to think I maintain a bit of objectivity. Mike's initial thoughts are also worth a read over at phone different.

    Mike and I actually had a long, very drawn out IM exchange yesterday afternoon and it's likely that'll result in an article similar to the one that Ducker and I did with the iPhone way back.
    06-12-2007 02:17 PM
  9. Iceman6's Avatar
    I think it is hilarious that Apple is proposing a web app solution for the iPhone, with only EDGE and WiFi for connecting client and server. IMO web apps will only work when Wifi is available.
    06-12-2007 02:29 PM
  10. newtonjack's Avatar
    when he said this about the iPhone:

    The move comes just weeks after Palm's CEO politely called Apple's new iPhone "a highly developed media player, which happens to include a phone." Judging by the new hire, the remark came from a bit of jealousy - we'll see whether the magic of Mercer can help Palm feel a little better, though. It's been a while since Palm has produced anything notable - or at all, in fact. The PDA maker hasn't updated that part of its business since fall of 2005, over a year ago.


    http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/03...iPod_designer/
    06-12-2007 02:36 PM
  11. Antoine of MMM#IM's Avatar
    I certainly didn't mean to offend!
    Sorry, it was an inital reaction at the statement "real developers." The OS apps versus web apps argument is one where neither side ever looks realistically at the other, and its largely an older MS-hewn view.

    1) provide some sort of framework where you could run these webapps locally and
    2) provide a way to have some sort of "browser window but not safari" available to developers (i.e. so you could have a safari webapp open the background)

    ...that would go a long way towards helping. I *still* think it's not enough, though.
    As soon as Safari 3 is gold, I think we'd have a better idea of what could work. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Adobe AIR (Apollo) is a part of this. Though AIR is a runtime and doesn't need a browser to function.

    Mike and I actually had a long, very drawn out IM exchange yesterday afternoon and it's likely that'll result in an article similar to the one that Ducker and I did with the iPhone way back.
    Looking forward to this. I liked that previous article format.

    I think it is hilarious that Apple is proposing a web app solution for the iPhone, with only EDGE and WiFi for connecting client and server. IMO web apps will only work when Wifi is available.
    Web apps will work no matter what kind of internet connection is available. If it is written with EDGE users in mind, then it will work just fine. Many developers are lazy and write unoptimized code, and so wifi might be the best bet for best performance, but will not be only recourse.

    (Man I like this topic)
    06-13-2007 01:23 AM
  12. MacUser's Avatar
    Web apps will work no matter what kind of internet connection is available. If it is written with EDGE users in mind, then it will work just fine. Many developers are lazy and write unoptimized code, and so wifi might be the best bet for best performance, but will not be only recourse.
    So, let's say you load a web app, leave a WiFi area and have no EDGE connectivity, will the app still work? Will it only work until you quit Safari? Any additional clarification how these web apps truly work/function?

    TY
    06-13-2007 05:23 PM
  13. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    :evil: For Archie

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost...6&postcount=38

    Antoine, whats good for the carriers is bad for the consumers. Why should one be happy to depend on network access to read their Bible on the IPhone? You better not think of driving through the desert using Google maps, do you. And no third party apps for you if you dont buy a data plan..

    This sucks (for Archie of course :evil: )

    Surur
    So you're unable to read Ebooks on the iPhone, with that huge screen??? Another strike if true.
    06-14-2007 04:07 PM
  14. archie's Avatar
    As somebody that has done some web development, my opinion is that ajax stinks, nobody uses it. Do not expect 3rd party apps that are like what you see on the palm os. I have no idea what apple is thinking.
    What exactly do you use? XML, XHTML, CSS and JavaScript are the most used technologies on the web. Show me a web page that DOESN'T use these.

    This announcement that Apple made earlier this week about using these to develop on Safari has nothing to do with the iPhone by the way. They are simply leveraging the iPhone's guaranteed success to gain marketshare in the browser arena. I don't expect everyone to see this I guess but you will see why in a few more months. Safari will wield a great amount of power.
    06-16-2007 03:11 AM
  15. surur's Avatar
    What exactly do you use? XML, XHTML, CSS and JavaScript are the most used technologies on the web. Show me a web page that DOESN'T use these.

    This announcement that Apple made earlier this week about using these to develop on Safari has nothing to do with the iPhone by the way. They are simply leveraging the iPhone's guaranteed success to gain marketshare in the browser arena. I don't expect everyone to see this I guess but you will see why in a few more months. Safari will wield a great amount of power.
    A great amount of power to compromise our windows boxes I guess. It occurs to me the IPhone is going to be even more vulnerable to exploits than if they used native code, due to all the holes in Safari.

    Surur
    06-16-2007 03:46 AM
  16. marcol's Avatar
    A great amount of power to compromise our windows boxes I guess. It occurs to me the IPhone is going to be even more vulnerable to exploits than if they used native code, due to all the holes in Safari.
    Darn, I think you're right. I think I'll give up Safari and OS X altogether and just go with IE and Windows. I hear they never have any security issues.
    06-16-2007 08:12 AM
  17. marcol's Avatar
    Waste of time, just an iPod mp3 player

    microsoft review zune
    http://www.bestdvdtools.com
    Welcome to TreoCentral. That's a pretty mysterious first post. Care to explain?
    06-16-2007 08:14 AM
  18. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    Darn, I think you're right. I think I'll give up Safari and OS X altogether and just go with IE and Windows. I hear they never have any security issues.


    The other day, I had to install MORE security XP updates. Vista is out, yet XP still need updates. They didn't even secure the 7 year old(I think) OS yet!!
    06-16-2007 08:20 AM
  19. surur's Avatar


    The other day, I had to install MORE security XP updates. Vista is out, yet XP still need updates. They didn't even secure the 7 year old(I think) OS yet!!
    I think it means they continue to secure it. Or would you rather be forced to upgrade to Vista or Leopard because MS stopped supporting XP?

    Surur
    06-16-2007 08:37 AM
  20. surur's Avatar
    Welcome to TreoCentral. That's a pretty mysterious first post. Care to explain?
    I think he's saying MS can make a better music smartphone than Apple can. While that remains to be seen, the IPhone has obvious areas which are extreme letdowns.

    Surur
    06-16-2007 08:38 AM
  21. Pearl_Diva's Avatar
    You should see how many updates I have! It's annoying installing updates monthly. It should have had it's holes plugged LONG ago! It's like they need to just rewrite the code entirely to make it more secure!
    06-16-2007 08:40 AM
  22. MacUser's Avatar


    The other day, I had to install MORE security XP updates. Vista is out, yet XP still need updates. They didn't even secure the 7 year old(I think) OS yet!!
    Yup...it's highly disturbing. Alas, I do have a PC I keep around...oh the shame...
    06-16-2007 08:42 AM
  23. marcol's Avatar
    It should have had it's holes plugged LONG ago!
    I think XP is made of holes and when they're all gone it won't exist anymore
    06-16-2007 08:47 AM
  24. MacUser's Avatar
    I think XP is made of holes and when they're all gone it won't exist anymore
    LOL...then the choice of Vista Extreme, Pro or Ultimate...
    06-16-2007 08:57 AM
  25. surur's Avatar
    It doesn't help when Apple exports holes, like the quick-time flaws, and now the safari remote code execution and spoofing ones.

    Isn't it funny that Apple is promoting Safari development on the IPhone for security reasons, when the only way to hack the Mac in a recent test was through a safari.

    MacBook hacked in contest at security event
    Zero-day vulnerability in Safari Web browser used to commandeer a MacBook in hack-a-Mac contest at CanSecWest conference.
    By Joris Evers
    Staff Writer, CNET News.com

    Published: April 20, 2007, 4:03 PM PDT
    Last modified: April 20, 2007, 8:09 PM PDT

    Macaulay, a software engineer, was able to hack into a MacBook through a zero-day security hole in Apple's Safari browser. The computer was one of two offered as a prize in the "PWN to Own" hack-a-Mac contest at the CanSecWest conference here.

    The successful attack on the second and final day of the contest required a conference organizer to surf to a malicious Web site using Safari on the MacBook--a type of attack familiar to Windows users. CanSecWest organizers relaxed the rules Friday after nobody at the event had breached either of the Macs on the previous day.

    Macaulay teamed with Dino Dai Zovi, a security researcher until recently with Matasano Security. Dai Zovi, who has previously been credited by Apple for finding flaws in Mac software, found the Safari vulnerability and wrote the exploit overnight in about 9 hours, he said.

    "The vulnerability and the exploit are mine," Dai Zovi said in a telephone interview from New York. "Shane is my man on the ground."

    Apple spokeswoman Lynn Fox declined to comment on the MacBook hack specifically, but provided Apple's standard security comment: "Apple takes security very seriously and has a great track record of addressing potential vulnerabilities before they can affect users."

    Dai Zovi plans to apply for a $10,000 bug bounty TippingPoint announced on Thursday if a previously unknown Apple bug was used. "Shane can have the laptop, I want the money," Dai Zovi said. TippingPoint runs the Zero Day Initiative bug bounty program.

    A TippingPoint representative said the company would pay, after looking at the vulnerability. "If it is an actual zero-day in Safari that's fine with us," said Terri Forslof, manager of security response at TippingPoint.

    The successful hack comes a day after Apple release its fourth security update for Mac OS X this year. The update repairs 25 vulnerabilities.

    CanSecWest organizers set up the MacBooks connected to a wireless router and with all security updates installed, but without additional security software or settings.

    Its a good thing you did not have to install any patches for OSX last month though... or did you?


    Apple patches more than a dozen holes in OS XBy Dan Goodin in San Francisco → More by this author
    25 May 2007 22:42
    Five uber updates in as many months


    Apple has released an update that patches more than a dozen OS X vulnerabilities, several of which can lead to the remote execution of malicious code.

    The most serious vulnerability resides in an OS X feature called mDNSResponder, which enables computers to locate and connect to devices such as printers and webcams on a local network. An attacker could use it to execute code by sending malicious packets to Macs connected to the same subnet, making the exploit ideal for use in internet cafes and offices.

    Code exploiting the vulnerability has already been circulated by Immunity, a company that provides intelligence to security providers, according to Immunity's CTO, Dave Aitel.

    "Remote roots like this don't come out every day," he said of the vulnerability.

    Apple credited Michael Lynn of Juniper Networks for reporting the vulnerability. Lynn was the Cisco security researcher whose bosses threatened him with legal action in 2005 after publicly discussing vulnerability details in Cisco routers.

    Yesterday's update was the fifth time in as many months that Apple has released to patch multiple security holes in its software. Apple has released other security patches this year, most recently to fix a high-profile vulnerability in QuickTime that allowed a hacker in a contest to publicly hijack a brand new MacBook Pro.

    Among the other serious holes plugged in yesterday's update is flaw in OS X's CoreGraphics. That vulnerability could allow attackers to run code on a victim's machine by enticing users to open a maliciously crafted PDF file.
    Surur
    06-16-2007 09:01 AM
55 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD