We’re working on an iPhone-optimized version of Ta-da List.
As I was working on some UI ideas, Ryan and I were talking about some of really cool things about designing for the iPhone.
I remarked that I loved the constraints. For example, we know the exact screen size/resolution, we know the exact typeface, we know how the face renders on the screen, we know the colors, we know the browser, etc.
Then Ryan nailed it: Designing for the iPhone is like a hybrid of print and web design.
The web we all know is rife with uncertainty. We don’t know the viewer’s screen size or resolution, we don’t know the gamma of someone’s screen, we don’t know if they’ve got a certain typeface and/or exactly how that face renders on in their browser, we don’t know the browser they’re going to use, etc.
But paper, on the other hand, is full of controls. Fixed size, fixed faces, fixed colors. What you print is exactly what someone sees (assuming you’ve done your homework on color and paper, etc).
So the iPhone is a weird mix. It’s the web, and things can scroll, and the data is pulled from remote servers, but it’s also a fixed width, a fixed browser, fixed typefaces, etc. It’s pretty cool and a really refreshing design exercise.
In other ways it’s also like going back to the early days of the web when people’s connections were a lot slower. The EDGE network and mobile phone latency emphasizes the need to keep page size down, images sparse, etc. It’s a return to the power of text, shape, color, and basic HTML.
I love it.
Christopher Hawkins
on 20 Jun 07Not having done any mobile app development, I have to ask: don’t those same positives apply to developing for ANY mobile phone? Is this really an iPhone-only thing?
Tim
on 20 Jun 07Will Ta-da List be anything like the already existing iPhone shopping list reminder app called OneTrip?
http://onetrip.org
Greg
on 20 Jun 07- Use fixed width styles
- Use web safe fonts
- Test app in major browsers
Simple. Easy. Real web development.
huphtur
on 20 Jun 07Why the special iPhone version? Didn’t Steve say any site that works on Safari, will work on iPhone?
Justin Reese
on 20 Jun 07Jason, you guys may not be able to answer this, but will you be using the default Prototype/Scriptaculous libraries, or a minimized version?
Not to sound patronizing, but have you ever really put out a dynamic web application? My plans always start “simple and easy”, but that’s while I have my head in the sand about IE6.
GC
on 20 Jun 07Have Apple published the details on the special URL calls that interface with the phone features? Or have they actually published the exact screen dimensions, fonts, etc., that you are talking about? If so, where? I can’t find it anywhere.
Darius K.
on 20 Jun 07That’s similar to building a console game vs. a PC game. The console has fixed hardware configurations, (mostly) fixed resolutions. The constraints can be very refreshing at times, and frustrating at others: especially when you’re porting something from PC to console.
Zach
on 20 Jun 07Yeah, I had this revelation when I was working on my first Dashboard widget.
This article must have been written by a designer though, because the analogy to print is funny (funny haha, not funny odd). It makes me think of the good old days of desktop app programming, rather than web app programming. Hey guess what, if it compiles and runs on Windows … then it compiles and runs on Windows. The end.
If my widget (your iPhone app) runs in Safari, then guess what, it runs in Safari. The end. I don’t have to pull up IE6, IE7, Firefox 1, Firefox 2, Opera.
The web has gotten so damn complex, pulling back to a single target platform lets you focus all your energy on innovation rather than compatability. So refreshing.
B
on 20 Jun 07Use fixed width styles
Oh yeah? For who? 800×600? 1024×768? See the problem? The “real web” as you refer to it is not fixed like the 320px wide iPhone screen.
Oh and have you ever seen the same font at the same size on Windows and Mac? They’re different. Windows fonts are wider. Pixels per square inch are different. Things are different.
Robbie
on 20 Jun 07I hope the non-mobile Ta-da Lists gets an update out of this, too.
Jamie
on 20 Jun 07/prays for dedicated Backpack and Basecamp pages too
tom sherman
on 20 Jun 07Uh, so designing for one browser (Safari) and one phone (iPhone) is economically viable now?
Hey, it’s easy to predict how a website looks at 1024×768 on IE6. I’m willing to bet the # of users that fit that EXACT profile (and hence a predictable display) match that of the iPhone users.
Basically what I’m saying is: yeah, when you slim the user base criteria down enough, it’s pretty easy to design for “everyone.”
Tor Løvskogen
on 20 Jun 07When’s the version for Opera Mini 4 comming?
Benoit Caccinolo
on 20 Jun 07Hi,
Is there any documentation about developping application for the iPhone?
Thanks
Will
on 20 Jun 07I’m stoked on the iPhone, and I like 37signals, but this is just stupid.
I thought the point of developing web apps was so that the app would work anywhere on the web, not just on this device or that device. It’s amusing how everyone is scrambling to build apps specifically for the iPhone, when the iPhone is one of the first mobile devices to sport basically a fully functioning web browser, capable of running everybody’s existing apps already.
Seems like a big waste of time to develop a web app, and then develop an iPhone version of your web app. When can we expect the Sidekick and Blackberry versions of Ta-Da List to come out? Or is this really just about jumping on the iPhone bandwagon?
Jamie
on 20 Jun 07I think if you check out http://onetrip.org/ it emphasizes the point Jason is trying to make.
Jon Maddox
on 20 Jun 07its like developing for a dashboard widget. I had the same feeling when doing that.
Plus, with the iphone/widgets, you get to use fancy CSS3 stuff like multiple background images. WOOT!
Eddie
on 20 Jun 07Will-
I hear you. I’ve come to believe that the “full web” should be available on any device… no special mobile versions should be required... at the same time, there’s nothing wrong with optimizing a web app or page for mobiles/devices.
A user experience is different on a desktop and mobile…so just because you can (and should) have the same page across both, doesn’t mean you can’t also be considerate of the mobile user as well.
I believe every site should have a “general admission”...the full web on any device and all that utopian jazz… but the user and the developer can then decide if they want a fully tailored, bespoke experience that takes into account the specifics of particular devices.
l0ne
on 20 Jun 07@GC: There are standards for some of the integration URLs (for example tel: for phone calls) and I hear there are a few others that are nonstandard but needed (ie sms:).
Brett
on 20 Jun 07Do you plan to UA sniff for the iPhone or what is your method of automatic detection if any?
Vincent
on 20 Jun 07Why again are you creating a mobile version?
Isn’t the point of the iPhone is that as long as it works in Safari, it will work on the iPhone.
Daniel
on 20 Jun 07Will said it well, but I just have to add
“Designing for the iPhone” is like designing fixed width for IE on Windows.
You can set up constraints for any environment, but the result will depend on that environment to be present. Doing that for a specific browser is considered bad practice, doing it for a specific browser on a specific phone is “cool” and lovable?
Tobie Langel
on 20 Jun 07Vincent, they’re probably aiming at creating an app for the iPhone.
Frank
on 20 Jun 07Will the iPhone even be on a 3g network?
If not then YES, you have to develop a mobile version b/c otherwise it would be dog ass sloooooooooow.
Chris McMahon
on 20 Jun 07I do some design and development work for kiosks and the restraints are similar. In many instances they project will be running off the localhost so no bandwidth concerns either.
Kevin
on 20 Jun 07For those who keep asking Why develop for iPhone if Safari can run REAL web pages?>
I can design a poster. It can be printed postcard-sized. The technology of the postcard can handle and display everything that was on the poster. But it will look bad. Type will be tiny, there will be too much text to fit comfortably, and stuff will generally just feel “wrong.”
Sometimes just because something can work doesn’t mean that there isn’t a much better way. Custom design will always trump scaling.
Besides – just because you’re optimizing for iPhone doesn’t mean you can’t run the same version of the app on a PC. It just might look tiny – like a lot of “fixed-width” pages do on my monitor.
Ankur
on 20 Jun 07They’re not creating a web page. They’re creating an application for the iPhone (as Tobie mentioned).
JF
on 20 Jun 07It’s about the experience.
“Build once run everywhere” or “one size fits all” is a broken pipe-dream. It often leads to a consistently bad experience.
Different devices have different strengths. Playing to those strengths means a considerably better experience for the users of that device.
Design decisions made for the big screen are often incompatible with design decisions made for the small screen. If you care about experience, you make independent decisions in both situations.
Yes, iPhone’s Safari will work with the standard version of Ta-da (and our other products). But using an iPhone is different than using a computer, so the software experience is different too.
It’s about using your finger, not using a mouse. It’s about big targets like a row, not about small targets like a checkbox. Those are just a couple examples of big experience differences between big screen and a mouse and small screen and your finger.
When you see it you’ll see.
Pat Maddox
on 20 Jun 07I agree that the constraints such as size, colors, browser will make it fun to develop for. However the slow EDGE network is a severe downside, make no mistake about it.
JF
on 20 Jun 07Pat… We call “severe downsides” constraint-based opportunities. They are good things. This is where creative solutions come from.
Rui
on 20 Jun 07Clicking on the 99th result out of an 100 results page from Google is fast, with a mouse and a reasonable screen size.
Try doing it on a cell phone… No mouse, small screen size, 99 key presses until you’re done.
Definitely, JF, I’m with you on this. Apps/Sites must be adapted to the environment they are supposed to be running in. Content, navigation, presentation, interaction, everything must be taken into account and adapted in order to provide a top notch user experience. Otherwise, you’ll have no users. No matter what.
Justin French
on 21 Jun 07Jason & Co, how are you going to handle the “for iPhone only” side of this? Is there a unique user agent string, or will you be supplying a unique URL, or a preference/cookie, or…
BigNerd
on 21 Jun 07This is one of the best blog ‘comments’ sections I’ve read in a long time. Lots of gritty, tense discourse.
With the Apple hype machine firing on all pistons, I’m reminded of the phrase ‘believe half of what you see and none of what you hear’
Sales projections show millions of Americans buying the iPhone, totaling billions in revenue for Apple. Good for them. Good for developers. Good for designers. Power to the people.
(Here comes the ‘but’ sandwhich)
BUT, If your target audience is the business user take heed. We live in a Microsoft world where I.T. departments will be s l o w to give group hugs to Apple. There are a lot of crack-berry uses out there. Does Apple have a drug rehab program? Can an addict go from the tactile, button pushing depths to a simple touch screen interface?
If you’re betting on BIG BUSINESS handing out iPhones to the minions when the clock strikes 12:01am on June 29th, think again.
Like anything that garners our attention and passion... “slow and easy” makes for a wise approach.
Blog on!
JF
on 21 Jun 07Ahh, here comes the “business user” or “big business” FUD.
Get over it.
I run a business, I’ll have an iPhone. There are millions of small business owners and consultants like me who will have an iPhone. The iPhone will be used by people with jobs who work in businesses.
Big business is so self absorbed they can’t understand that there actually far more people not part of big business than are part of big business.
The market is always bigger on the small biz side than the big business side.
Pat Maddox
on 21 Jun 07Pat… We call “severe downsides” constraint-based opportunities. They are good things. This is where creative solutions come from.
I understand that. Maybe I’m just not very creative, but I don’t see how a relatively slow connection is a good thing. It’s not. I can see why you’d want to approach it as positively as you can, but it’s also important to be critical so providers know they need to give us the best service possible.
JF
on 21 Jun 07but I don’t see how a relatively slow connection is a good thing. It’s not.
We have to design for the world that is, not the world we’d prefer. Would 3G be better? Sure it would, but it’s not 3G.
So, if the speed is slower, the speed is slower. As designers we need to think about how we can make designs that take slower speeds into account. That’s where creativity comes in.
How can you get to the point faster? How can you focus on what’s most important? How can you reduce the need for images? How can you figure out how to present information in different ways because you can’t display everything?
These are great questions for designers to ask whenever they are designing anything. A slower connection forces these questions on you faster. That’s a good thing.
Damian
on 21 Jun 07I’ve thought the same thing about other web-based applications, like designing for kiosk use. You’d know the exact specifications of the browser, monitor, computer, and the expected abilities of the users.
But then again, wouldn’t that take the fun out of cross-browser CSS? :)
Will
on 21 Jun 07I have NO doubt that the new Ta-da List app, and probably all of the other iPhone apps being created, will be awesome.
I understand what you’re saying Jason, about the difference in how you use an iPhone compared to anything else:
But isn’t that what the great multitouch interface combined with Safari is supposed to make irrelevant? Doesn’t being able to easily zoom into a website and click a checkbox mean that it’s not necessary to create a whole new set of functionality for sites to work. Isn’t that why the web on the iPhone is so much more alluring than it has ever been before on a mobile device?
I guess my criticism isn’t really of your Ta-da List plan, it’s more of the double standard created by Apple that, on one hand, the iPhone has the internet in full and makes it easy and accessible. But on the other hand, develop some apps that ignore that full internet and its interface standards, and instead try to be iPhone specific…
Either way, it’s gonna be fun. 9 more days :)
heri
on 21 Jun 07what i don’t get is where you got an iphone prototype and the specs for development. i thought apple was not disclosing this. or i might just be late to the party.
JF
on 21 Jun 07what i don’t get is where you got an iphone prototype and the specs for development.
eBay, where else?
No, just kidding. At the WWDC there was a session about designing web apps for the iPhone. We were there and took notes.
JF
on 21 Jun 07But isn’t that what the great multitouch interface combined with Safari is supposed to make irrelevant? Doesn’t being able to easily zoom into a website and click a checkbox mean that it’s not necessary to create a whole new set of functionality for sites to work. Isn’t that why the web on the iPhone is so much more alluring than it has ever been before on a mobile device?
Will, as I’ve said, our apps should work just fine on the iPhone if you want to use the full versions. But we believe we can make versions optimized for the iPhone which provide a significantly better experience. Faster, more focused, more appropriate for the device in hand.
Apple is saying “All the sites you already like you’ll still like on the iPhone.” But they’re also saying “We think the iPhone provides a great platform to make specialized web apps that play to the strengths of this unique device.”
Some will go the extra mile, some won’t. We’re bullish on the iPhone so we’re going to go a few extra miles.
Jerome
on 21 Jun 07I can’t wait to see well designed web apps running on the iPhone. I’ve been longing for a reason to leave my laptop at home, and with all the functionality of web apps these days I’m happily almost there…just as soon as I can ditch the corporate Outlook Exchange VPN slomotion machine.
I’m sure your Ta-Da list will be snazzy.
starvingartist
on 21 Jun 07Isn’t the uncertainty in regular web design also a good constraint? =)
AW
on 21 Jun 07A round of applause for Jason who tirelessly responded more on this one blog post than any other. ;)
Michael Long
on 21 Jun 07What about iPhone 2.0? Are we to assume that all future iphones will have the same screen dimensions and resolution?
Seems like you’re not only designing for a specific manufacturer’s device, but for a specific model and version as well.
Tony
on 21 Jun 07http://38thsignal.blogspot.com/
Joran
on 21 Jun 07Well done 37Signals on pushing innovation!
With response to Big Nerd’s “but not big business” -
“Run not to where the ball IS, but to where it is GOING TO BE”
Big Nerd made an objective and interesting point and I don’t mean to lump him in with what follows:
But really, some business IT people are just so lame it makes me want to throw up. They actually enjoy supporting a company like Microsoft with all its recent Open Source scams? Microsoft is utterly sick and I don’t think they will be around in any form of major glory much longer. These same IT people are probably the kind that think Steve Ballmer “is SO confident and inspiring” etc. Well, he’s made quite a fool of himself recently – evidence to be seen on YouTube ;)
The future of computing hardware is no longer in “computers” but in computers that work as well as and are actually standalone “appliances”. Think beige box vs iMac. We want to get in there, do our work and get out as fast as possible.
Have a lovely day.
Cheshire
on 21 Jun 07For the people who are still confused as to why you’d want to develop an app if your site works perfectly well on the phone’s browser, here’s a perfect Palm-based example: Let’s say you have a Treo. You can start up the Blazer browser and head on over to Google Maps, but it’s a much better idea to use the standalone Google Maps app that’s built specifically for the Treo. That app is probably the most useful thing I’ve put on my phone (real-time traffic info while you’re on the road!)—not counting Scrabble, of course.
Greg Macoy
on 21 Jun 07OK, so there’s all this talk about fixed-sizes/screens etc…
...but surely there will need to be options on the iPhone for accessibility (i.e. bumping up the font-size, using [the user’s own preferred] high contrast colours, or perhaps a more legible font) — or am I just going crazy here?!
Fortunately I’m not someone that personally has accessibility needs, but that’s not the point — isn’t there at least a moral requirement, if not a legal one?
Susheel
on 21 Jun 07Wow, This is a great discussion to be in. Jason’s really been pushing his point across and I agree on almost all points.
However, what brought me to the comments section was the print/web analogy and the reasons why print and web are so distinct. I’m a print designer who’s recently been dragged into the web world and I think you’ve got those points spot on.
Cheers!
Thijs van der Vossen
on 21 Jun 07Hm. It also feels a bit like going back to the 90’s when a lot of sites had a separate Netscape and Internet Explorer version.
Dan
on 21 Jun 07I have to say that while I normally agree with you I think you are very wrong on this one. The iPhone will not be a static platform at all.
I suspect, if it turns out to be a success – which nobody will know for a couple of years, there will be later generations of iPhone with higher resolutions, tweaked UIs. Even if the hardware remains the same the software almost certainly wont.
While the iPhone may be more like developing for successive versions of IE instead of the many browsers out there it’s just a reduction of different posibilities not a total lack of them.
iPhone development may be a hot topic at the moment, but it seems very early to be putting eggs in that basket. What if the iPhone isn’t a success but merely a catalyst to get the big name manufacturers to get their game together with mobile internet? Then all the effort making your app optimised for the iPhone will be wasted.
Carl
on 21 Jun 07@Greg
What if the user doesn’t like the font size and bump it up using Ctrl++? And what about the trend to have gigantic screen and high resolution? You would like your fixed size website to render super tiny on those screen?
JF
on 21 Jun 07I suspect, if it turns out to be a success – which nobody will know for a couple of years, there will be later generations of iPhone with higher resolutions, tweaked UIs. Even if the hardware remains the same the software almost certainly wont.
And if/when that happens we’ll see what we need to change. The future always changes. That’s a given.
But we’re not going to stand still today because things may be different 2 years from now. When things are different we’ll be different.
We look forward to progress, not away from it.
Matt Carey
on 21 Jun 07people might be interested in this link:
http://www.marketcircle.com/iphoney/
B
on 21 Jun 07Remember: If the iPhone picks up a wifi signal it runs the web on Wifi. So while your at home or in the office or anywhere with an open Wifi, you’ll experience the web at breakneck speed.
tom sherman
on 21 Jun 07JF, I applaud your sunny outlook and constraints-as-opportunities attitude, but you never did answer the question: Why are you designing an entire product for a single phone?
I’m not one to tell you how to allocate your time and resources, but it sounds like you’ve fully bought into the Apple hype machine and think that the iPhone is going to become the standard overnight. Is that realistic? Sure, the iPod was successful, but even that took time. We’re talking about cell phones here. People already have cell phones. People might not want a $500 phone. And, well, there are a few folks out there who don’t use AT&T.
Once again: mobile is not new. The web is not new. The iPhone is new, and that doesn’t change a heckuva lot.
JF
on 21 Jun 07Why are you designing an entire product for a single phone?
Because 1. we think it’s time well spent, and 2. we want to.
tom sherman
on 21 Jun 07Well, fair enough.
Now it’s time for you to show your face at a Chicago tech event! I’ve gone to too many of them to never have met you.
steve
on 21 Jun 07Once again: mobile is not new. The web is not new. The iPhone is new, and that doesn’t change a heckuva lot.
Mobile is not new and the web is not new but the web on a mobile device has never been done well before. So, assuming the iPhone lives up to its billing, it does change a heckuva lot.
Hal Lee
on 21 Jun 07I like the #2 answer!
Does it seem that you are spending more of your design thinking about how a user can/will interact using multiple touch points and how that will affect the essential web app or just getting the “constrained” interactions crisp and to the point .
My guess is that you started by getting the app working under the constraints and then started daydreaming but I am curious.
BTW thanks for keeping the responses coming that is one of the main reasons that I actually read svn!
Greg Battig
on 21 Jun 07With iPhone, aren’t there really two different “screen sizes” – Portrait and landscape mode?
It seems that when optimising for one mode, the other mode won’t be quite as optimal. This is a difference to print design, where you decide upfront on the orientation of whatever you print on.
I’m curious about how you deal with this, or if you just declare that “this app is best viewed in portrait mode”.
Interesting article though, I’m looking forward to writing/optimising apps for iPhone myself.
Thomas
on 21 Jun 07‘Why are you designing an entire product for a single phone?’
Isn’t it commonly noted that the 37S team build products that THEY will use. If Jason and his team will be using iPhones, then surely that makes sense for them.
You may as well give it a chance. If it doesn’t work then so be it. You have started with Ta-Da List which isn’t your biggest product, so therefore it won’t be affecting you much if the idea fails.
steve
on 21 Jun 07Greg: One thing that came to mind immediately is that you could display more or less of the text (say of a todo item) depending on whether you were in portrait or landscape.
Alex Bunardzic
on 21 Jun 07Isn’t this “rife with uncertainty” in itself a glorious constraint? Having a full control over one’s environment is not really a constraint, it is a liberating experience.
Not having any control or say over one’s environment is a constraint that only the most courageous designers fully embrace.
Greg Battig
on 21 Jun 07steve: that’s an interesting idea.
I’m not sure though how you’d actually react to the user turning the phone, if there’s some JS events that you can react to or something. Maybe to switch stylesheets or I don’t know what.
Perhaps that was mentioned at the WWDC session 37signals attended?
jharr
on 21 Jun 07What Jason outlines here are exactly why the web-app approach will ‘work’ for the iPhone and why the 37signals apps ‘work’ on the web. Design for the real world and real users, push the boundaries as much as you can and have fun doing it.
The negativity seems to be pretty heavy. Not sure if it’s sour grapes (you can’t have one or your Windows ego won’t allow it) or hating-to-hate but I think this shows some of the difficulty Apple’s going to face that maybe they’ve been slightly insulated from in the past, people who are dying to see them fail. It’s just part of being successful I guess.
Eliot
on 22 Jun 07This may have already been quoted, but to follow up to the “Big Business” FUD, here’s a quote from Daring Fireball yesterday:
The thought of being able to use Basecamp from an iPhone completely justifies the purchase for me. I would be ecstatic about using 37s products from my phone for… guess what… WORK! And I’m not in a webdesign or startup industry. I’m in an completely non-Internet related industry, but I want to get stuff done and using Basecamp or Ta-Da list when I’m in a factory or in a client’s office gives me the goosebumps! Bring it on!!
Anonymous Coward
on 22 Jun 07You can already use most web apps on your cell phone. Take a look at Opera Mini (new beta came out this week) or Opera Mobile.
Prashant
on 22 Jun 07Jason :will you be going to Chicago Tech Event ?? :)
Pieter Schiks
on 22 Jun 07Without knowing much about the technical constraints, i am wondering about the use of fixed width, because you can rotate the browser and see websites in either portrait or landscape orientation (so there are 2 resolutions). Wouldn’t experience be better if your app has a fluid layout?
steve
on 22 Jun 07Greg: You wouldn’t even need javascript. Just float the elment, set it to a certain percentage of the page width, and hide the overflow. Then, more or less will be visible depending on how wide the browser window is.
ChrisFizik
on 22 Jun 07echoing most of the sentiments in the comments on here, come on guys. Of course it’s going to be refreshing designing with known constraints. But it’s a step backwards from the rich media platform the web has become/is supposed to be. Mobile apps are not exactly a platform for serious innovation except for what magic you can squeeze into those constraints. :-\
JF
on 22 Jun 07Ahh, good old “serious innovation.”
Scott Meade
on 22 Jun 07What does Jobs mean when he says the iPhone’s innovation is that it uses “Web 2.0 Internet standards”. Apple uses the “Web 2.0 Internet standards” phrase four times in that press release. Did he talk at WWDC what Web 2.0 standards mean to him?
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/11iphone.html
Does he mean simply that web apps on iPhone look like and behave like web apps on a laptop, and are richly interactive?
Darren
on 23 Jun 07I would think the “Web 2.0 Internet standards” bit refers to things like AJAX and CSS.
As for the main question here, I’ve got to say I agree with Jason. Sure, the iPhone can view and interact with standard web-apps, but that’s inefficient, non-intuitive and frustrating. Rather than trying to force somebody with a touchscreen to pretend he’s got a keyboard and mouse, it makes so much more sense to create a customized web-app that plays to the iPhone’s strengths.
To put it in perspective, compare the difference between the way Mail works on Tiger and the way it has been implemented on the iPhone, and you’ll understand why 37signals are doing what they’re doing.
Jackson123r
on 25 Jun 07While using Safari for the Application interface, any one can use an App designed for the iPhone. But this is not without a few draw backs as well, all of the extra features of the phone cannot be utilized. An example would be a game not being able to use the included vibrate function for force feedback.
http://www.pspconverter.com/iphone_converter/
Sebhelyesfarku
on 25 Jun 07The iPhone is an overhyped turd for brainwashed Maczealots, clueless fashion lemmings and RAZR refugees.
MIke
on 26 Jun 07and don’t forget the largest database of iPhone related applications:
AddFone http://addfone.com
a search engine for iPhone related apps, where anyone can add their own apps to the engine.
E. James Ford
on 27 Jun 07I, for one, am really glad that the iPhone inspired a bit of simplicity and I agree that this is going to be more important for ALL web apps… iPhone or no.
In the meantime, though… Care to port that super paired-down version into a Thunderbird Extension? If you guys did that, you would rule the inbox.
Don Wilson
on 27 Jun 07I’m shocked at the amount of criticism for Ta-da list on the iPhone. It’s a simple web application on a phone that’s been needed for years.
Simple as that.
Robert
on 27 Jun 07For years I’ve read 37S talk about how against the principles o the web it is to design for any device.
Apparently the iPhone is the exception.
Though I’m not sure why. “It’s a totally new webbrowsing experience!” No. It’s not. Ever seen Opera or IE running on a Windows Mobile device? You have a touch screen (doesn’t have to be stylus). You have CSS support. You have support for tel: links.
Yeah, we get it, “design what you will use”, and sure you all want iPhones. Fine. But lets not extrapolate from that perfectly justifiable line into “OMG, revolutionary”, because frankly, the iPhone ain’t. Imagine the looks of surprise people at work got to learn that after seeing that ad where someone gets the directions to the seafood restaurant near them, is that you didn’t see the bit where you had to tell the phone where you were. But hey, let’s not rock the Apple marketing machine (which is impressive, and they do do well) and point out that ever-so-slightly misleading “we’re going to do everything to imply this thing has GPS, when it don’t”.
This discussion is closed.