Now everyone should know, if they didn't before, why Apple is no Microsoft. Apple isn't content to create a platform, they want to own everything. They want a walled garden, they want captive users, they want to be able to demand exorbitant profit margins in perpetuity.
Mostly benign monarchies may seem very attractive at first glance, but over time abuse of power is inevitable and then it's too late.
I wish that were practical, but Web apps just don't measure up for a lot of domains. Personal example: I was recently toying with the idea of porting a design program to be a Web app, but even just getting very simple typography right is pretty intractable.
Sure, not everything can be a web app, but a lot of the subscription world can easily be ported to web app, since the content will likely be delivered in HTML.
Interestingly, serving e-books over HTML would destroy the DRM models that Amazon and others have developed to "protect" their content. I can't see there being a Kindle web-based reader unless Amazon takes the same road as Apple with regard to DRM [1], and tells all their content providers to get on board.
If you're talking desktop, I agree, since the browser has become so pre-eminent there. But for mobile, Web apps are distinctly second-tier citizens. Just installing one on your home screen is voodoo beyond the ken of most iPhone users.
It's not so bad on Android. And Google is very good at Web Apps. Try viewing the web app versions of gmail and such on your phone. They're not as full featured as the dedicated apps, but they work damn well. The big thing is making them look like real apps to the end user. No one wants to have to remember a bunch of web addresses. Something like what Chrome does on the PC is good...instead of a classic link shortcut for your desktop, it makes an "app" out of it. Giving it its own icon and name like any other program on the computer.
If that's all the value you're offering your users, DRM is the least of your problems. If it's that easy for users to exhaust the content they actually want, you're going to have problems with customer retention, not to mention customer acquisition.
> I've changed my focus from iOS to web because of Apple's policies.
Bingo!
I leaned that way before as well. recent events just reinforced my decision to do the same. i've got one iOS native app in the pipeline for a startup client now. but it will hopefully be my last. there are just too many business ideas, too many features and experiences I can deliver quite satisfactorily as a desktop-friendly & mobile-friendly website, or on Android, to have to put up with this Nazi behavior on Apple's part anymore. i demand the ability to have whatever features I want, whatever content I want, do billing however I want, design my UI whatever way I think best, use whatever tools I want, and make new releases when and how I want, with no more bureaucracy, rituals or dumbass XCode quirks and mole-whacking. No more.
Apple doesn't want to own everything. They're happy being the BMW of tech and generate massive profits.
Comparing this situation to monarchies and abuses of power is stupid. It's just an in-app subscription model for a mobile OS that nobody is being forced to use.
Not all monarchies are bad, but most eventually turn worse. That's where the comparison to the iPhone platform is relevant. Apple has a lot of control over the platform, and so far people haven't been overly concerned about that. But over time people may start to realize that Apple is not as benevolent a company as they've been led to believe.
Yes, people can go elsewhere. And I think that's precisely what will happen. Apple has had the lead in mobile app development as a platform up until now, but their restrictive and short-sighted rules and policies may very well sap much of that momentum.
Mostly benign monarchies may seem very attractive at first glance, but over time abuse of power is inevitable and then it's too late.