A Moment of Clarity Regarding the Raison d'Etre for the App Store (daringfireball.net) 84
John Gruber, writing at DaringFireball: Feel free to file Google's release this week of an update to their iPad Gmail app with support for split-screen multitasking under "better late than never," but this is so late it borders on the absurd. It's like the difference between showing up fashionably late and showing up a week after the party. Split-screen multitasking was introduced for the iPad back in 2015 with iOS 9. Five years to add support for a foundational element of the iPad user experience. And an email client is near the top of the list of the type of apps where someone would want to use split-screen. Five years. Google makes a lot of software with terrible user experiences for users who have poor taste. Their iOS software, in particular, has for the most part never suggested that it was designed by people who like -- or even use -- iOS. It's the blind leading the blind. But yet the Gmail app is currently the number one free app in the Productivity category in the App Store.
On the surface, it's tempting to blow this off. To each their own. Whatever floats their boat. Who cares if millions of iPad users are satisfied using an email client that is a poor iPad app, so long as actual good iPad email clients are available to those who do care? But what about those stuck using the Gmail app not because they want to, but because they have to? Who can help them but Apple? I worry that it's not tenable in the long run to expect Apple to continue striving to create well-crafted -- let alone insanely great -- software when so many of its users not only settle for, but perhaps even prefer, software that is, to put it kindly, garbage. There have always been popular Mac and iPhone apps that are objectively terrible apps -- where by "popular" I mean much-used, not much-loved. But what made Apple users Apple users is that they complained vociferously if they had to use a terrible app. Word 6 was a sack of dog shit Microsoft dropped off and set aflame on Mac users' porch, but we all knew it was a flaming bag of dog shit, and even those of us who didn't even use Word were angry about it because it was an insult.
I worry that this sort of "Who cares, it's better than nothing" attitude has seeped into Apple itself, and explains how we wound up with barely modified iPad apps shipping as system apps on the Mac. But more than anything I worry that this exemplifies where Apple has lost its way with the App Store. What exactly is the point of running a strict approval process for apps if not, first and foremost, to ensure that they're good apps? An iPad email app that doesn't support split-screen multitasking for five years is, by definition, not a good app. I'd like to see all the vim, vigor, and vigilance Apple applies to making sure no app on the App Store is making a dime without Apple getting three cents applied instead to making sure there aren't any scams or ripoffs, and that popular apps support good-citizen-of-the-platform features within a reasonable amount of time after those features are introduced in the OS. I don't know exactly how long "reasonable" is, but five fucking years for split-screen support ain't it.
On the surface, it's tempting to blow this off. To each their own. Whatever floats their boat. Who cares if millions of iPad users are satisfied using an email client that is a poor iPad app, so long as actual good iPad email clients are available to those who do care? But what about those stuck using the Gmail app not because they want to, but because they have to? Who can help them but Apple? I worry that it's not tenable in the long run to expect Apple to continue striving to create well-crafted -- let alone insanely great -- software when so many of its users not only settle for, but perhaps even prefer, software that is, to put it kindly, garbage. There have always been popular Mac and iPhone apps that are objectively terrible apps -- where by "popular" I mean much-used, not much-loved. But what made Apple users Apple users is that they complained vociferously if they had to use a terrible app. Word 6 was a sack of dog shit Microsoft dropped off and set aflame on Mac users' porch, but we all knew it was a flaming bag of dog shit, and even those of us who didn't even use Word were angry about it because it was an insult.
I worry that this sort of "Who cares, it's better than nothing" attitude has seeped into Apple itself, and explains how we wound up with barely modified iPad apps shipping as system apps on the Mac. But more than anything I worry that this exemplifies where Apple has lost its way with the App Store. What exactly is the point of running a strict approval process for apps if not, first and foremost, to ensure that they're good apps? An iPad email app that doesn't support split-screen multitasking for five years is, by definition, not a good app. I'd like to see all the vim, vigor, and vigilance Apple applies to making sure no app on the App Store is making a dime without Apple getting three cents applied instead to making sure there aren't any scams or ripoffs, and that popular apps support good-citizen-of-the-platform features within a reasonable amount of time after those features are introduced in the OS. I don't know exactly how long "reasonable" is, but five fucking years for split-screen support ain't it.
First world problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Control freak pissed off that he can't bend two multinationals to his will. Film at 11.
Probably not all the vim (Score:2)
"I'd like to see all the vim, vigor, and vigilance"
$50 says this author has never seen vim.
He would freak out if he did ever see vim because he can't just speak and have the machine do what he's thinking, without learning anything about how to use it.
Re: Probably not all the vim (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In reality, there a are two interfaces that can be used:
GUI - The things you can do are limited to what fits comfortably on the screen. For more than about 10 possible actions, you need many levels of menus. See for example Microsoft Word.
CLI - You know the commands. Thousands of individual actions are available and you can combine them in millions of ways.
The first option is appropriate for the ordering kiosk at Taco Bell, where many users are first-time users and won't know anything at all about how to
Re:First world problems (Score:5, Informative)
When Steve Jobs introduced the App Store in 2008, he said, “We don’t intend to make any money off the App Store. We’re basically giving all the money to the developers and the 30 percent that pays for running the store, that’ll be great.”
Re: (Score:2)
The doublespeak is so bad that if someone says "pass on the savings" or "we wont charge", I can safely assume the opposite and be correct a vast majority of the time.
Obligatory Spaceballs (Score:2)
Apple executives: I know we need the money, but...
Steve Jobs: Listen! We're not just doing this for money!
Apple executives : (look at Steve, confused)
Steve Jobs: We're doing it for a SHIT LOAD of money!
Re: First world problems (Score:3)
When Steve Jobs introduced the App Store in 2008, he said, âoeWe donâ(TM)t intend to make any money off the App Store. Weâ(TM)re basically giving all the money to the developers and the 30 percent that pays for running the store, thatâ(TM)ll be great.â
If course, that 30% also applies to the tens or hundreds of thousands of free Apps there, too. So, let's see: 30% of "free" is....?
Zero. Which is great; because the storage, Product Page creation, bandwidth, storage, approval and update services are all at no cost, too!
Oh, wait...
Re: First world problems (Score:4, Informative)
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
$100/year/ developer
30% of free app advertising profits
Or are you uninformed or ignorant?
So, IOW, a total of $100/yr. (actually, $99, IIRC). For:
Unlimited App Publishing (remember, we're talking Freeware Apps here), all with:
Unlimited Hosting
Unlimited Download Bandwidth
Promoting (Product Page in App Store)
Unlimited Review Tracking (more Database space and Maintenance)
Unlimited Update Tracking and Downloading Service + Bandwidth
Having a huge "to you door" set of potential Users.
All for $8.25/mo; no matter if you publish 1 or 1,000 Apps. And how many Freeware App Publishers only have 1 App in the
Re: (Score:1)
Besides, Apple can't risk because they can't screw up. If
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re:First world problems (Score:5, Informative)
Control freak pissed off that he can't bend two multinationals to his will. Film at 11.
I have always used the stock Apple Mail app for my Gmail, just like my iCloud mail. The putative suckiness of the Gmail app means nothing to me if I don't have to use it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, I was wondering what the fuss was all about.
Who the fuck needs a special "Gmail app" to check their email?
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Surely there's other options than Apple's own email client and Google's Gmail client.
Re: First world problems (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Who the fuck needs a special "Gmail app" to check their email?
Those who want Google's tracking to go into that extra level of detail?
Re: (Score:1)
But what about those stuck using the Gmail app not because they want to, but because they have to?
What a load of rubbish.
I use Gmail, and I don't use an "app". Sometimes I use my web browser and sometimes I use a real email client.
This story is just another example of the bizarre "everything must use an app" mental illness that is running rampant.
get over yourself (Score:3)
even those of us who didn't even use Word were angry about it because it was an insult.
Something is wrong with these people who are angry about software being released. Get over yourself.
Re:get over yourself (Score:4, Informative)
You never used Word 6. As the saying goes, "Even the people who pirated it returned it."
Yeah, it was that bad. And, frankly, Microsoft learned their lesson.
Re: get over yourself (Score:2)
You never used Word 6. As the saying goes, "Even the people who pirated it returned it."
Yeah, it was that bad. And, frankly, Microsoft learned their lesson.
You have made my day!
Yes, it truly was that bad.
Re: get over yourself (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Was it apple maps bad or siri bad or apple ping bad?
Far worse. It was Windows ME bad. Utterly unusable.
From what I heard, it was a (failed) experiment at using some sort of MS internal proprietary intermediate language with a slow-as-shit interpreter. A failed MS attempt at "write once, run anywhere".
Split screen apps need special coding? (Score:2)
So, I haven't owned an iOS device for 6 years or so, but I currently have a chromebook with a 360-hinge. When I use it in tablet mode, I can run any two apps (chrome OS or Android) in split-screen mode where I can drag the dividing line to change the relative sizes, and I don't think this requires any special coding or configuration. On iOS devices, does this only work when the apps are specially programed to allow this? Um... why?
I think I see the major design problem now, but I don't think it's where T
Re: Split screen apps need special coding? (Score:1)
It works on iPad as well, but if your app isnâ(TM)t designed to work in that mode then you have to either stretch or squeeze the app into the viewport. Sure, Android users are used to seeing ugly apps as there is no unified viewport but it can be off-putting for Apple users to have weirdness and blurry icons when you squeeze an app designed for a full screen into half the screen.
Technically iPhone 1 apps viewports still work on iPad too, and I still have one of those, but the image scaling necessary to
Re: Split screen apps need special coding? (Score:2)
So Use Android (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So Use Android (Score:5, Insightful)
This is like complaining the Apple's itunes is a steaming pile of dogshit on Windows (which it is), oh really they don't support a competing platform heavily? Go figure.
Exactly. Both giant multinationals have quite literally several billion reasons why this state of affairs persists. Google doesn't want GMail to be nice on i-devices because they don't get paid for i-devices. Apple doesn't want GMail to be nice on i-devices because it might make people like Google. Apple fanboys are lucky that Google is more ethical than Microsoft was in a similar situation, or the i-device GMail app would randomly self-destruct just to annoy them.
There's an argument to be made that one's apps on someone else's platform are an ambassador of one's own offerings. I know my view of all things Apple is heavily colored by the steaming pile of dogshit that is and always has been Windows iTunes. But rather than put their best foot forward, somehow these giant corporations have always taken the opportunity to track dogshit across the living room, all the way back to Microsoft's infancy. It's petty. It's childish. It's probably counter-productive and net-negative. But they keep doing it.
WTF firehose (Score:1)
How did this get through without being flagged "stupid"?
Re: (Score:1)
I can't imagine anyone would have voted for it. Must have been an "editor's special selection".
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine anyone would have voted for it. Must have been an "editor's special selection".
Considering that all the "editors" here are drooling morons, this is not surprising.
My apologies for insulting the drooling morons of the world by comparing them to Slashdot editors.
eh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Word 6 was a dog. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyhow, I've grown old fighting these battles and so I don't bother much anymore. I just wanted to mention the nostalgic feel I got reading about Word 6. Gruber, like me, can't let it go.
Re: (Score:2)
Google on apple. . . (Score:1)
Maybe if you didn't constrain yourself to such a heavily walled garden while using an email program from a competing company that operates a more open environment. .
What stinking pile of garbage is that text? (Score:1)
Look at Apple Maps... (Score:2)
So use the OS apps. (Score:5, Informative)
GMAIL supports CALDAV, CARDDAV, SMTP, IMAP and POP3. They are totally open. You don't need to use their apps.
Re: (Score:2)
... for now.
Google doesn't know UI (Score:1)
Why does Apple need to be the arbiter of what's an acceptably good app, when the marketplace will do that by either using or not using an app based on how good it is?
Re: (Score:3)
Google makes a lot of software with terrible user experiences for users who have poor taste.
Re: (Score:1)
Everyone has given up (Score:1)
Who in their right mind uses a 3rd Party Email App (Score:1)
Apple software (Score:2)
I wonder if the author has ever seen the gigantic piece of sh!t that are almost all the apps that Apple has released for Windows. They are absolutely horrible, I'm not a designer but just looking at them I see how they don't fit at all with the rest of the environment and it turns out that Apple fans will tell you that it's OK.
Open up iOS? (Score:2)
One of the grouses I have with the App Store is that it's my only option to get apps. That means Apple has to accept anything--no matter how crappy it might be. They can't really be subjective (eg, "I don't like your UI. Make it more iPhone-ish. But not too iPhone-ish. [dilbert.com]") without creating complaints. And users, ultimately, want to get things done. They'll put up with a clunky way versus having no way.
One of the things I've muttered that I'd like to see is for Apple to allow side-loading. Then go throu
Missing the point about missing the point (Score:2)
The main benefit of the App Store for users is no malware. Besides the fees, one of the main benefits of the App Store for Apple is that it prevented Apple from having to harden everything in their system against malware.
Anyone creating a new platform in the mid-2000s would have seen what malware did to Windows and all the trouble Microsoft had to endure. App Store is a 98% fix for all of those issues.
It's not about telling App developers they have to support split-screen on the iPad.
Re: (Score:1)
You are correct. 98% is less than 100%
that word does not mean what you think it means. (Score:2)
App store = 'we have total control of the market and you get stuck with whatever we feels makes us the most money'
App store Does not equal "you get high quality apps that we have vetted and ensure will really work well for you "
Any overlap between the two apparent definitions is purely co-incidental as locking you into only things a single company controls will ALWAYS be PRIMARILY about MONEY FIRST and any other concern of your is ONLY important in relation to how it affects the corporations MONEY.
Tail wagging the dog (Score:2)
Absurd is ios apps needing to be updated to get OS features like split screen or dark mode.
There is no reason of existence. (Score:2)
Theft and fraud and usury are not valid reasons.
For valid earnings with software and art, aka being paid for the actual work, instead of for imaginary "property" we have Kickstarter, Patreon, Flattr, the humble hat on the street, and many more.
And for software installation, we have package managers.
So What Exactly Is New? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is pretty much the way it's always been. No company is going to spend significant resources to make their apps run as well or better on a competing platform than they do on their own platform. As you point out, Microsoft has been doing this for decades and anyone who had to use iTunes on Windows to sync their iPhone or iPod has their own horror stories. So exactly why would you expect any different from Google?
Oh, it's been there for quite some time, you're just noticing it now. Apple hardware and software has been on a slow decline for almost a decade. The easiest way to prove this is to ask people which Macbook Pro model is the best. Between 2006 and ~2012 the answer was always the latest model. Ask people today and you'll get a ton of different answers due to the fact that over that period they:
- Soldered memory and storage onto the motherboard, preventing users from upgrading them or replacing broken modules on their own and requiring the entire motherboard to be replaced at a cost of around $1000 to $1500
- Forced keyboards onto users with virtually no travel and were extremely susceptible to breaking. Even after they realized how fragile they were, they continued to foist them onto users for years and simply offer to fix it for free (if you don't count the time and money to travel to the nearest store and wait for them to fix their screwup). All of this to shave off a sliver of the thickness of the laptop
- Removed USB-A ports despite the fact that many people depend on them (nothing like dongle-life)
- Removed the MagSafe connector entirely
- Removed a hardware escape key that many software developers rely upon (these people provide the software that makes your products useful - keep them happy!)
- Replaced many common chips on the motherboard with chips that are identical except for a different pin layout. This offers no perceptible benefit to the consumer but it prevents independent repair shops from being able to repair your computer (again, $1000 to $1500 board swap when one of these ticking time bombs explodes)
It's my opinion that Tim Cook doesn't care about quality. He's taken his remarkable skill of squeezing money out of suppliers and turned that energy toward squeezing Apple's customers. Many people have endured these actions but I don't think I know a single person who is as happy with Apple today as they were a decade ago. Apple is no longer revered, but merely tolerated, because many people would rather endure the devil they know than spend a ton of time and money migrating to the unknown. And Microsoft certainly hasn't been giving Apple users a ton of reasons to switch given all of their spyware and forced, botched updates.
Great, now I'm the one coming off like an angry old man. I think I'm alright with that as long as I don't allow it to drive me to fanboyism for any particular company.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it's been there for quite some time, you're just noticing it now.
No he noticed it at the beginning, he just didn't want to type it and was waiting for copy paste support.
Re: (Score:2)
To me, it seems like more of the same. I've *never* liked the GMail interface. Not since its inception. I've yet to see a mail interface as good as most text-based ones that I used in university in the late 90s. Pine and mutt still stand out to me as highly functional and remarkably usable if you're dealing with text email.
Google's focus on user-facing quality has always been middling at best. They're a services company, and they will provide you with excellent services and a mediocre interface. That really
Smart guy, do not agree (Score:3)
The article author, John Gruber, was the/an inventor of Markdown, and used to work for Bare Bones, according to Wikipedia. So he definitely knows something about good interfaces.
Still, he is way off target here:
What exactly is the point of running a strict approval process for apps if not, first and foremost, to ensure that they're good apps?
The point, Mr Gruber, is security, in terms of both app behavior and distribution. The intended mechanism for ensuring good apps is the ratings system. Which clearly needs improvement.
On Macs, I personally install tons of software away from the App Store, but for my family members I am much happier with them using it rather than unproven executables from websites popping up on Google. On our iOS devices, well, I don't try to do anything tricky with them (e.g. installing compilers) so the Store meets our needs just fine.
They need to reanimate Steve Jobs (Score:2)
You can access Gmail with any IMAP email program (Score:2)
You may find, however, that Google has done extra work to pre-sort your email into certain categories (social, promotions, and regular) using their spam filter AI. Work that those other email apps haven't done, so you'll get all
Another Karen whines about her tough life... (Score:3)
Christ, get it through your head - Apple is a marginal platform. It only represents 7% of the PC market. If Apple really wanted Google to support their platform well, they'd pay them to do it. It's not like they don't have the money. The fact that they don't says a lot about how much they want Google on their platform. Don't get all pissy when Google reciprocates the feeling.
And respect lost (Score:2)
Five years. Google makes a lot of software with terrible user experiences for users who have poor taste.
Criticising the "taste" of users completely undermined any argument you may just have had.
Boo hoo (Score:2)
The entire software landscape is littered with not just applications / programs, but web sites, desktop environments, and even entire operating systems whose functionality and UI's suck so badly that when the shitty devs and 'architects' mailed them in they even forgot to put the address and the stamp on the fucking envelope. And users just keep taking it. So a) why should companies care when their customers can't be bothered to vote with their wallets / installation choices and b) what makes Apple special?
Re: (Score:2)
Add to that the fact that one persons "terrible interface" is another person's "just the way I like it, I've been using it like this for 10 years and you'd better not change a thing or I'll complain".
Design decisions, even bad ones, get locked in once the users get used to them, and it becomes increasingly painful to reverse them.
Useful work (Score:2)
Wow. (Score:2)
Do Apple congregants even understand how astonishingly narcissistic and self-absorbed they sound?
Interesting thought experiment (Score:2)
If Apple freed itself from the confines of being an App Store monopolist on its own platform, would they be able to do this, and would it be better?
So assume that Apple allows a 3rd party app store onto iOS, but Apple does what Gruber wants and has strict guidelines for minimum functionality. Let's also assume that Apple can police something like that and actually guarantee the quality standard that they lay out.
I think I'd pay more for those apps. I think I'd still go to the trusted, validated store for th
AAPL goodwill .v. good sense (Score:2)
Sooo much cash is flowing through Apple’s fingers it can’t count it - much less effect QoS, too.
It’s own software are prima-facia evidence that it neither has the vision nor the pool of talent to host any more than “ other people’s software” i.e. Pages, writeNow, etc... to wit AppStore.
The OP tells exactly where the next big thing has a clear lane to challenge Apple. In the same vein Google are just as vulnerable with its Gsuite. I haven’t found a good mail client
Doesn't matter. (Score:1)
It doesn't matter. It's an iPad. It's not a tool, it's a toy.
Nobody should be checking their email on an iPad. If you're out somewhere, use your iPhone. If you're at home or at the office, use your Macintosh.
The iPad is for reading books and playing games. Nothing else. It's not a phone, it's definitely not a computer. Use it for the only things it's good for.
Re: (Score:3)
Your age is showing.
In fact, my age is showing as well, since I can remember this exact same argument being made against personal computers by mainframe and minicomputer manufacturers.
The truth is, toys are toys until the world figures out how to use them as tools; then they are also tools.
Speak for yourself... (Score:2)
"Split-screen multitasking was introduced for the iPad back in 2015 with iOS 9. Five years to add support for a foundational element of the iPad user experience. And an email client is near the top of the list of the type of apps where someone would want to use split-screen."
Even on a Mac/PC, I almost entirely use apps in full screen. My browser is currently full screen as I'm typing this. When I use webmail, it's full screen. When I'm using Outlook, it's full screen. Word, Ecel, Photoshop, command lines -