GigaOM » Apple

What the end of mobile Flash means for Apple and users

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 19:08:36 +0000

Adobe confirmed it will no longer be developing mobile Flash on Wednesday, saying that HTML5 is the “best solution for creating and deploying content in the browser across mobile platforms.” It’s a major turning point for mobile dynamic content and video delivery, but it’s a step that will specifically affect Apple products and Apple users in unique ways. Here’s how.

1. The “full web” has less power to hurt Apple

In the short term, Apple’s competitors will lose the ability to beat consumers about the brow with talk of the “full web” experience that comes with Flash-supporting mobile operating systems like QNX and Android. That’s a good thing for consumers on both sides of the divide, since even mobile Flash support on most devices except the most current, most high-end ones amounted to an unpleasant, laggy, stuttering experience. But the real winner is Apple, since one of the competition’s most distinguishing traits, which is often used to try to make Apple’s platform appear weak by comparison, has now been taken away.

Existing versions of mobile Flash will remain available for devices, but without support from Adobe itself, it’s hard to tout that as much of an ecosystem advantage. Especially when Adobe admits the superiority of, and will support efforts to improve HTML5 technology for cross-platform content.

2. More content coming to an iOS device near you

Now that there’s only one game in town, companies who operate websites have no option but to make their content compatible with the most popular portable devices. For mobile browsing, iOS is the most-used platform. Now, there’s no excuse to wait and watch: Even if Android does eventually win out and take the lion’s share of mobile visits, HTML5 will be the content delivery vehicle of choice.

Since Adobe will also be actively promoting HTML5 as a solution for mobile devices, there’s also no one trying to work against development efforts in that direction. In fact, Adobe will likely work with content provider partners who’d been hanging on to Flash to upgrade to solutions that can deal with both technologies, depending on whether a user is on mobile or the desktop, like Flash Media Server 4.5.

3. A Flash-less desktop future

Apple no longer ships Flash pre-installed on its Mac systems, and some users find that installing it themselves can negatively affect battery life and performance. The full version of Flash might be the next to fall, however, now that its mobile cousin is no more.

As Aral Balkan pointed out on Twitter, “No Flash Player for mobile platforms means don’t use Flash on websites, period.” The statement makes sense, since mobile access is becoming an increasingly important way that users come to web content. Mobile Internet is predicted to eclipse wireline access by 2015, and mobile browsing is already overtaking desktop browsing in some markets.

Live streaming is another area where Adobe is losing out to Apple. Apple’s HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) is becoming a popular option for connected televisions, as well as the default tech of most streaming content providers. That’s just one more reason users will soon be able to do without Flash, no matter the platform.

Long story short, Adobe’s capitulation is great news for Apple, since it no longer has to fend off accusations of presenting a “limited” version of the web, and for Apple users, since content providers would actually have to actively go out of their way to make content that doesn’t work on iOS devices going forward. Even Adobe wins, since it no longer has to devout resources to bailing out a boat with way too many holes in its rusty hull.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Why HTML5 won’t take the wind out of Apple’s sails

Darrell Etherington — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 15:17:38 +0000

Apple’s operating profit growth could take a 30 percent hit by 2015, owing to the rise of HTML5, according to Bernstein Research analyst Toni Sacconaghi Jr. Forrester Research agrees that HTML5 adoption could also affect Apple’s ability to generate revenue from native apps, according to a PCWorld article on Monday. But industry watchers should be wary of underestimating the continued appeal of the native iOS app for two big reasons.

1. The limits of native apps can quickly change

Part of the argument behind the ability of HTML5 to replace native apps on devices like the iPad and iPhone is that the web tech is catching up in terms of features to iOS software. That may be true, but it will likely never actually reach par with native apps, because Apple is in the driver’s seat when it comes to what third-party software can and can’t do on its devices. Every new major iOS update brings new APIs for developers to play with, and each new hardware generation puts new connectivity options, radios and other hardware features at their disposal. For example, iOS 5 introduces 1,500 new APIs for developers to leverage, including access to iCloud Storage, Newsstand and Twitter.

Only Apple determines what its software can and can’t do and what kind of hardware it gets to work with; with HTML5, standards are set based on what all browsers will support, which requires more compromise. Also, HTML5 will necessarily have far more limited access to the full capabilities of iOS hardware, even though Apple has made some improvements on that side of things, like allowing mobile Safari to tap into larger portions of local device memory and geolocation services. But even if it looks like HTML5 is “catching up” to what’s possible with native apps, it will likely never actually match them, as Apple’s mobile tech evolves and it provides more APIs to native developers through the iOS SDK.

2. Apps have only just begun beating the mobile web

Mobile apps have only just recently started to be more popular than mobile websites for Internet access from smartphones and tablet devices. It’s a trend that has been in motion since the advent of app stores, and there’s little indication that it’s slowing or turning around, despite recent efforts by players like Vudu, Amazon and the Financial Times to create HTML5 web apps instead of going through Apple’s App Store.

It’s obvious that companies would prefer HTML5 over native apps, since web-based products would allow them to cut out Apple as a middleman and take in a larger percent of any profits, as well as make it easier for them to develop once for many platforms. But if studies around consumer mobile desires are any indication, the will on the user end of the spectrum just isn’t there to support an HTML5 mass migration. That may change as more HTML5 products come to market, but the advantages of native apps are still things consumers want: dependable offline access, device-specific interfaces and unfettered access to special hardware and software features.

I think Apple is poised to make more, not less, money from apps in the next few years, and I don’t think HTML5 is really in any position to cut into those profits yet.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Can HTML5 replace an iPad app? Financial Times to find out

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:36:18 +0000

While it may be an oversimplification to talk about HTML5 as a direct competitor to native apps, one company is about to find out how the two compete in a very real sense. The Financial Times, which in June introduced a tablet and smartphone-optimized version of its digital edition, has removed its apps from the iOS App Store instead of complying with Apple’s requirements for software that offer in-app access to subscription content.

Apple now requires that newspaper and periodical apps offering access to subscription content either offer subscriptions through in-app purchase, which entitles Apple to a 30 percent cut of all revenue, or remove links to their own external subscription sign-up pages. FT‘s subscriptions were handled outside of the store, and rather than just remove the sign up link like competitor The Wall Street Journal did, FT apparently prefers removing its native software altogether in the hopes that readers will make the transition to the web-based app.

The problem with Apple’s model wasn’t so much the revenue split, according to FT CEO John ridding, who spoke to paidContent.org recently. More important to the newspaper was the valuable customer information normally gathered through subscriptions, which under Apple’s model is an opt-in process that customers can decide on for themselves, rather than something passed on to the publisher automatically. FT‘s revenue model depends on its ability to gather that information, which isn’t guaranteed through Apple’s system.

But the effect the iPad has had on FT‘s digital success is not insignificant. FT.com now represents around one-quarter of the newspaper’s overall sales, and the iPad was directly leading to around 10 percent of the company’s digital subscriptions. Since the iPad’s introduction, however, the FT has seen around 100,000 new subscriptions, and even if only a fraction of those actually signed up through the iPad, that doesn’t mean other web-based subscribers didn’t consider iPad access a motivating factor in their decision.

The web app has already seen 550,000 users according to the FT, but it also provided free access for multiple weeks following launch, so it’s too early to say whether it’ll be able to drive the same kind of subscriber increases that the app managed.

So far, Apple has had mixed results when it comes to convincing publishers to embrace its subscription model, but many magazines in particular seem to be on board, and that number is growing. That might be because magazines depend more heavily on advertising dollars as opposed to subscriber info for revenue. FT is actually planning to continue to use the App Store for those type of products, including its How To Spend It weekend luxury magazine.

For those interested in seeing how an outsider approach to Apple’s ecosystem works out when compared to playing nice with Apple’s guidelines in exchange for a spot in the App Store, the FT represents a near-perfect test case, so stay tuned.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Hands on with Kindle Cloud Reader for iPad

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:50:04 +0000

Apple recently gave e-reader apps in the iOS App Store an ultimatum: Either sell your books through the company’s in-app purchasing system, providing Apple with a 30-percent cut of each sale, or remove any links to your own web-based stores. Obviously, that’s not ideal for e-book sellers. Which is likely why Amazon has decided to work around the App Store restrictions by introducing a new web-based app that works outside of Apple’s official software distribution channel.

Amazon introduced Kindle Cloud Reader on Wednesday, an HTML5-based web application that runs in mobile Safari on the iPad, Safari on the Mac and PC, and Chrome on the Mac and other desktop operating systems. Amazon has promised support for additional browsers and platforms soon, but the fact that the iPad is in the launch group of devices makes clear Amazon’s main goal with this endeavor, which is to provide its customers with a full Kindle experience on the Apple tablet, including access to the integrated Kindle Store.

So how does it work? Once you navigate to http://read.amazon.com in your iPad’s Safari browser, you’ll be greeted with an invitation to sign in with your Amazon/Kindle account. Signing in will bring you to a screen featuring your library of Kindle book purchases, as well as a prompt directing you to allow Safari to increase the size of the database permitted for the site. This is used for the offline cache Cloud Reader maintains for reading without an active internet connection. Kindle Cloud Reader lets you tap and hold books from your library to download them to local storage for offline reading, and also stores books you are currently reading offline automatically, so that your reading won’t be interrupted if you lose connection.

NextPrevious

Picture 1 of 8

Actually reading books in Cloud Reader is a pleasure, and you’d be hard-pressed to tell that you aren’t using a native app, especially if you place a shortcut to the web app on your iPad’s home screen, which launched the reader in a chrome-less, full-screen browser. You can change the font size and color of your books in Cloud Reader, and also view highlights, notes and bookmarks you’ve made on other devices. You can’t make new notes or highlights using the web app, but you can add new bookmarks just by tapping the upper right-hand corner of any page, even offline. It also works in both landscape and portrait orientations, as does the integrated store.

Some of the frills of the native app are missing, like page turn animations, access to Kindle periodicals, and the ability to search through a book for keywords. You also can’t look up terms in the dictionary the way you can in the full-fledged native Kindle app. But if you use those extra features sparingly, and go through books quickly, then Cloud Reader’s built-in bookstore might make up for those omissions.

The Kindle Store included in Cloud Reader makes browsing for books on your iPad a pleasure. You get a scrollable selection of recommendations at the top of the interface, and a list of best sellers and category navigation below that. You can search the store at any point, and navigate back and forward as you browse. The individual book listings actually provide you with more info at-a-glance in a more sensibly organized way than on the Kindle Store in the desktop browser, and you can try a sample of any book in the Amazon e-book library, which loads up right in the standard Cloud Reader reading interface. Unfortunately, it doesn’t remember where you were when you switch to your library; jumping back to the store brings you to the front page.

In the end, Kindle Cloud reader works, and works well, but purely for e-reading purposes, it doesn’t really match up to its native app counterpart. That said, the ability to shop for books and read them immediately might outweigh the disadvantages for some. For me, Kindle Cloud Reader will remain on my home screen, but I won’t be using it primarily for reading; I’ll be using it to buy. The iPad-optimized Kindle Store is a pleasure to shop, and thanks to iOS multitasking, I can pretty easily switch back and forth between the native and web-based Kindle apps. Even if I don’t use Cloud Reader as a native app replacement, it does prove one thing: Keeping integrated e-book stores out of native apps benefits no one but Apple.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Google+ should help, not hinder Apple’s social efforts

Darrell Etherington — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 21:19:47 +0000

Google+ has some features that may seem familiar to owners of Apple’s iOS devices. Huddle, for example, provides group messaging, kind of like iMessage. Instant Upload on Google+ lets you automatically post photos to the web, while with Photo Stream, pictures you take on one of your iOS devices are automatically available to others. Hangouts provides video chat, kind of like FaceTime. But while the Google+ offerings have things in common with planned or existing iOS features, they have key differences that make them complementary to, not competitive with, Apple’s mobile plans.

Huddle is Google’s mobile group chat service, and probably stands the chance of being the most similar to what Apple’s got on offer with its upcoming iMessage. But it’s designed around a very different type of messaging. You can organize contacts into groups and automatically message across those groups with a simple tap in Huddle, but it resides within Google Plus, and isn’t integrated with your device’s text messaging app. iMessage will serve as a communication tool for impromptu conversations with one or more people, and all the functions people normally accomplish through text and MMS. Huddle looks like it will appeal more to work teams and other more formally organized groups, and will work for the kind of event planning people do with groups of friends on Facebook right now.

Instant Upload and Photo Stream actually have very little in common, and make clear the different guiding principles behind Google’s new product and Apple’s offerings. Instant Upload is for sharing with a wide audience; Photo Stream is for keeping your media organized on devices either you or your close family owns. It’s the same with FaceTime and Hangouts: One is about one-on-one communication between relatively close contacts, while the other is about casting a wider net for a totally different kind of interaction. These could butt heads down the road if FaceTime implements group chat, but even so, FaceTime will likely be used in different contexts, like for catching up with mom and grandma at the same time, where Hangouts could be used for book club meeting, for example.

Google has said there’s an iOS app in the works for Google+, and even the current HTML5, web-based, front end looks great (as it should, thanks to former Apple interface designer Andy Hertzfeld) and works really well on iOS devices, according to my colleague Mathew Ingram. It’s clear Google wants to reach out to as many as possible with Google+, and Apple should bend over backwards to make that happen, because as the name implies, this new social product does nothing but add to the social appeal of iOS and the iPhone.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Facebook reportedly working on an iPad app

Darrell Etherington — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 13:27:47 +0000

Hot on the heels of yesterday’s rumors that Facebook would be launching an HTML5 App Store competitor and Facebook’s response that claims native apps and the web aren’t in direct competition, the New York Times reports that an official iPad app from the social network is in the works and should be coming soon.

People “briefed on Facebook’s plans” told the NYT that the new app, which would be introduced in the “coming weeks” for free in the App Store, would feature redesigned Facebook Chat and Facebook Groups features, along with a touchscreen interface created specifically for the iPad. The report further asserts that Mark Zuckerberg personally had a significant role in the redesign process, according to a person who works with Facebook.

The app will also supposedly take advantage of the iPad 2′s camera, allowing people to snap photos and upload them directly to Facebook albums. Photo browsing will offer full-resolution images, along with full-screen browsing, too.

That Facebook would be engaged in developing an iPad app does agree with what the company said yesterday in a brief statement regarding the Project Spartan HTML5 app store it was said to be creating. Specifically, Facebook had this to say about the website versus app debate: “We don’t expect developers to choose between HTML5 and native apps. We expect they will choose both, just as we did.”

Facebook has not provided any indication that it has been working on an iPad app since the device’s release. In fact, Zuckerberg even stated that he didn’t think the iPad was a mobile device, leading many to believe that the company thought its cross-platform website was a good enough client for the Apple tablet. The success of paid and free third-party iPad applications that plug into Facebook services, like My Pad and Friendly, seems to suggest that iPad owners feel otherwise.

Facebook declined to comment on future products when asked about the iPad application. I do think we can expect to see a native Facebook client, however, since continuing to ignore that growing segment would leave a lot of potential traffic and engagement on the table. Also, the Facebook experience on the iPad right now is pretty much defined by third parties. The social network probably isn’t crazy about potentially having part of its brand image resting in the hands of outsiders. Do you think Facebook will finally bend to user demand and introduce an iPad app, or continue to point Apple tablet owners to the web?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

CBS Video Content Coming to the iPad Via HTML5?

Chris Brandrick — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:25:49 +0000

Apple’s iPad is now only a matter of days away and in preparation for the device’s arrival, major U.S. television network CBS is preparing its website to cater for the tablet’s needs.

Keen eyed Apple bloggers spotted the change on the CBS website earlier this week, noting a number of “iPad test” links on various video content including the likes of CSI and The Young & Reckless. When clicked in a browser, these links navigate to just the normal flash version of the selected video. However, if the website is visited via an iPad, or an SDK iPad Simulator, the viewer is presented with an HTML5 version of the video page.

CBS’ experimental HTML5 pages do not currently have functional video, but the pages’ source code details several other HTML5 elements, including a full-screen mode. Despite the experimentally nature of CBS’ efforts the move hints that more mainstream content providers are beginning to adapt their content to work on as many devices as possible, including Apple’s iPad which controversially does not support Adobe’s Flash.

The use of HTML5 comes after Steve Jobs personally spoke out against Flash, and following the positive estimates as to how the iPad will sell it’s no surprise that major content providers are starting to make moves to accommodate Apple’s upcoming tablet.

Just how long it takes for all the major networks to play catch up and arrive on the iPad is unknown, but the sooner the better.

Steve Jobs Labels Adobe’s Flash a Dying Technology, But Is It?

Chris Brandrick — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 23:34:06 +0000

Steve Jobs has been bad-mouthing Adobe’s Flash once again, according to a recent Business Insider report. The Apple head honcho recently visited the Wall Street Journal to demonstrate the iPad. During his stay he allegedly criticized Adobe’s Flash technology, with the intent to move the popular broadsheet newspaper away from using the web display technology.

The report details that Apple’s CEO attempted to convince the Journal by downplaying Flash, describing it as a “CPU hog” that has “security holes.” He then added that Apple does not “spend a lot of energy on old technology” comparing Flash to other dead technologies, including Floppies, Firewire and even the humble CD. This continued dislike for Flash comes after Jobs downplayed Adobe’s technology at a town hall meeting with Apple employees earlier this month.

But could the typically forward-thinking Steve Jobs, and in turn Apple, be acting too quickly in disregarding Flash? It’s commonly accepted that Adobe’s Flash does not run as effectively on Mac platforms as it does on Windows, with Adobe’s CTO Kevin Lynch even accepting that there are some problems. However, due to Flash’s widespread adoption, it seems that labeling it as a dead technology now is a premature move.

The iPad’s widely reported lack of Flash means you can’t watch your favorite shows on Hulu, crop your corn on FarmVille or watch the latest video on the New York Times. Of course these are just a few examples of what a future without Flash would be like. But with hundreds of thousands of web sites playing host to flash content, it could be years before Apple’s desire becomes reality and a move away from the format is seen. So what alternatives could Apple be hoping to replace Adobe’s prevalent plugin with?

HTML5 is the immediately obvious choice for replacing Flash, with Apple itself already using it. But as TheNextWeb points out, the technology is not quite ready yet, with a number of issues holding it back. Currently only a few browsers support it, and full integration is not in sight. Feedback from early experiments have also not been overly positive, with users of YouTube’s HTML5 demo claiming it to be unsatisfactory and slow.

Beyond HTML5, Apple is also known for its love affair with the H.264 video standard. The video compression format is what makes YouTube work on your iPhone, and is also integrated into QuickTime. However due to hefty licensing rules imposed by MPEG-LA, the standard is not going to become mainstream anytime soon.

So, with other standards not quite ready to step up to the mark and Flash not disappearing anytime soon, it seems that Jobs’ campaign of hate will have to remain just that, purely vocal. It seems that iPhone and future iPad users will just have to get used to those blue Lego bricks.

Safari 3.2 Adds Anti-Phishing and Other Security Enhancements

Weldon Dodd — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:30:44 +0000

Yesterday, Apple released Safari 3.2 for both Windows and Mac (Tiger and Leopard). As usual, Apple’s normal update announcements are a little short on details.

This update is recommended for all Safari users and features protection from fraudulent phishing websites and better identification of online businesses. This update also includes the latest security updates. For detailed information on the security content of this update, please visit this site: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1222

The KnowledgeBase article about the security content of the update takes you to Apple’s main security page, which links to the Safari 3.2 security fixes. Most of the fixes are about arbitrary code execution but some are more subtle fixes to make sure that web pages don’t have access to local files.

The anti-phishing updates are two-fold. If you visit a malicious web site, Safari will warn you with the following dialog box:

Clicking on the “Learn more about phishing scams” link takes you to a web page that explains Strange Behavior and Malicious Software: Phishing attacks. Interestingly enough, this explanation is on Google.com rather than on Apple’s web site. I assume this means that Apple is using Google’s list of sites that they have identified as potentially dangerous, like you might see on some search results.

To go along with this, there is a new preference in the security panel to toggle this warning when you visit a fraudulent website.

The other change is a positive indication for sites that have taken the extra step to obtain an Extended Validation Certificate from one of the Certificate Authorities that have begun to do the extra background checks. If you visit a site that has one of these Extended Validation Certificates, Safari will display the site name next to the usual lock icon in green text, as you can see in this example from eBay.com’s login page.

Not all sites with SSL certificates have these EVC credentials (my bank’s online site does not, for example). When you do see the notice, you can click on this green text to get more details on the site certificate (just as you can for other sites by clicking on the lock itself). Make a note of the “Class 3 Extended Validation SSL SGC CA” line in PayPal’s description below.

There are lots more features coming in Safari 4 which should implement much more of the HTML 5 specification and the new SquirrelFish javascript engine, but this is a small step towards that.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.