You're viewing an article in iPO's historic archive vault. Here, we've preserved the comments and how the site looked along with the article. Use this link to view the article on our current site: Blog: iPhone Web Apps May be Better Business Model Than Native

News

Blog: iPhone Web Apps May be Better Business Model Than Native

Tuesday, July 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 PM - by

Now that the App Store for iPhone has launched, everyone is excited about native apps. However, John Alsop took a look in detail at the business models for Web apps and native apps and concluded that native apps are not as appealing. In fact, they could be a great leap backwards.

First, Mr. Alsop argues that most of what's done with native apps, aside from the Apple remote and few others, can be achieved with Web apps using HTML, CSS and Javascript. Also, nowadays, Web developers can have their icon on the iPhone home screen, making it even look like a native app.

Given that, Mr. Also went on to argue that few of the native apps "do very little tapping into the shared resources and intelligence of the Web." Not to mention that native apps are iPhone specific whereas Web apps are cross platform, iPhone developers will have to re-write their apps for other platforms such as Nokia, Android, etc.

In addition, there are a host of other problems. When the developer updates the app, Apple gets to decide when the update is pushed out. In fact, Apple is the gatekeeper in general. Web apps are updated instantly for all users

Possibly the most compelling argument is the financial model. Mr. Alsop went into detail about how, if a competitor's app is good enough, it's unlikely you'll ever see a sale for your app from that customer. In addition, subscription models for Web app services provide a continuing cash flow which is good. However, native apps that sell for, say, US$1.95, will have to sell in very large (one time) numbers to support, after Apple's 30 percent take, a self sustaining software business if the developer wants to earn even a modest US$50K/year.

"The iPhone has amazing standards based support for developing applications - CSS/HTML/Javascript. Applications which will also run on the desktop browsers, on other mobile devices, on the Chumby, on your fridge, on your Wii, on Panasonic Viera televisions, and devices not yet even built. It's time to put platform specific fragmentation behind us, and write applications for the one true platform. The Web," Mr. Alsop concluded.

While the responses in the comments point out a few debatable items, and the article doesn't take into account native apps on future Apple platforms, the overall arguments are sufficient to give any serious developer pause and ponder their business model well for native apps.

7 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

A guest said: (hide)

Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:32 pm

When they come out with a "web app" version of Super Monkey Ball, wake me up.

Oh, and this author seems to think developers will only make one $1.95 iPhone app. Seems unlikely.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:43 pm

One thing this and many other articles don't take in account; geographically speaking, most areas of the U.S. don't have reliable Cell or WiFi service. I live in Maine. Getting any kind of Cell signal is very challenging. Yet I can still use my iPhone all the time thanks to native apps. If an app requires an internet connection, it's very unlikely I'll get to use it.

Quote this post ↓

kbohnert said:

member since 21 Oct 2004 with 5 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:57 pm

I thought one of the biggest complaints on ver. 1 of the iPhone was that developers didn't want to write web apps, but wanted to write native apps. Wasn't that the whole reason behind the jailbreak community???

Quote this post ↓

j.martellaro said:

member since 07 Dec 2006 with 97 posts, TMO Staff, send him a message or view his profile

Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:16 pm

Indeed, developers have wanted to write native apps to get local control and access to the iPhone hardware. For example, camera, GPS, Wi-Fi, accelerometer, etc. In some cases, that access has been limited by Apple, for example, driving/navigation apps. In other cases, as a guest wrote above, native games trump Web games, I see Mr. Alsop's article as thoughtful material, not an argument for an "either-or" decision.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:25 pm

"one true platform. The Web," says Mr. Alsop. Has this guy ever tried actually developing for the Web? One platform? Bah! Try dozens of platforms. Every OS, every browser, every version of every browser, NOT one platform.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:14 pm

"Web apps are cross platform, iPhone developers will have to re-write their apps for other platforms such as Nokia, Android, etc."

Nonsense--they needn't do any such thing. The minor players can fend for themselves.

Quote this post ↓

Nemo said:

member since 28 Aug 2007 with 24 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Wed Jul 23, 2008 9:58 am

I think that Mr. Alsop's argument is for the most part well taken, but it is clearly wrong in one respect. Whether a developer, even for one app., chooses the web or the native platform isn't an either-or choice. In some cases, the web will be a better choice for an app; in others, the native platform will be a better choice, and in yet other cases, some form of hybrid app. will be the best choice. Take the new SproutCore framework that Apple uses to develop its MobileMe applications, developers can use it to develop applications for the web that also fully function offline, when connecting to the web isn't available or isn't desirable. Or as Mr. Martellaro mentions, supra, an icon on the iPhone can link to the web app., or that same icon, using SproutCore or some other framework, could easily run that same application either natively on the platform or on the web or on both the platform and the web, depending upon circumstances and conditions.

Business models will also become just as flexible and hybridized. The subscription model will be best for some apps; for others the purchase at download model will work best; for others, advertising supported models will work best, and for others some combination and variation of those models will be better. For example, the best model for a particular app might allow free download of the initial application that will mostly work on the web by charging a subscription but which might also charge to download major updates that enhance functionality. The possibilities for both hybrid business models and online/offline functionality are limited only by the imagination and the need to have a viable business model, and open frameworks, like SproutCore, will play a major role in developing these hybrid applications and business models.

I think that, in the future, the most successful developers will employ flexible, hybrid applications and business models, depending on the customer's needs and desires and the conditions present in the environments where the customer uses the application. So let the games begin: online, offline, subscription, ad supported, pay at download, a mixture of all of the foregoing, it's all good.

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.