NY Post blocks web access for iPad users
- Started
- Last post
- 17 Responses
- Boz
LOL..
So NY Post starts blocking access to the web site if you are visiting with iPad and redirects you to download the subscription based app on App Store. What a shocker...NOT!
Users are outraged! LOL..
I say why?! This is the world Apple wants everyone to live in. The app world.. By not playing with others and not allowing full rich web on their devices and offering subscription based model through their app store that's tied to their platform now users get what they deserve and why other experts have been warning about this new app model hurting web for a while now.
It's interesting to see whether or not others follow suit but I wouldn't be surprised they would.. the whole subscription based system, closed platform, no access to Flash content, magazine not wanting to revamp their sites to work with Apple's hardware all lead to this forcing users to pay up for something that was previously free. It's an opportunity to make money from users because Apple allowed it to happen and by doing so is negatively affecting the web. As with a lot of things, Apple is not forcing these guys to do so, but the economy side of it, the idea that this control exists with devices we use today and makes sure Apple gets a chunk of it will most likely create this new wave of block sites to user paid app model.
It's hilarious reading comments and how everyone attacks NY Post.. It's not NY Post that's the reason you can't access websites numbskulls, it's because you chose a nazi like tech company, their products and platform. Now you can get butt fuc*ed by paying up! :)
But that was obligatory Apple trolling from my side.
I'm curious to hear though, do you think this will be present more often?
He's what I will do with my approach for the app and system I'm building. I am creating everything with HTML5/Flash/AIR and so on for different platforms because it's one code and it works for many things in browsers but I will most likely sense for iOS devices and point users to download the app because it's much easier that way then dealing with this blocking of shit and making everything work specifically for Apple. I don't think I'm the only one thinking this way (and this NY Post thing is just one of the things that leads me to believe I'm right).
Your take on this?
- Dillinger0
IBM almost went bust when they adopted this tactic back around 1989 with regards to component parts.
- ToxicDesign0
Well one thing I've noticed recently when watching the GoogleIO event when they rolled out this site called RO.ME, as a way to demonstrate their "better than the rest" browser tech,was how you HAD to view the site in Google Chrome; it struck as funny since it seems we are now coming full-circle again and are (about) to experience all the web/browser/app fragmentation we had to deal with 10 odd years ago, i.e. "This Site is Best Viewed in Netscape!" and the like...
I think we are at another crossroads where all the major players are coming to-a-head, jockeying for position with their own respective agendas, and we as designers, as developers are the little expendable pawns getting wip-lash...
Another funny thought I had recently was about that video-clip of Microsoft's Balmer jumping up and down across the stage yelling, "Developer!", "Developer!", "Developer!" (you know that video, the one kids love to hate on), and how, you know, that dude was at least honest! At least in the sense that he KNEW who he had to appeal/suck-off/convince etc. because it IS the developers (+/ designers) who make or brake a particular tech/platform etc..
Regarding this NY Post iPad jive. I'm not surprised in the least. Apple is giving what these old-school (or any school for that matter) Content Providers want -- a uniform, closed, cohesive experience that they can wrap up in a nice little bow and charge money for. And that bow is Ipad/Iphone/IOS.
</my2cents>
- ToxicDesign0
What *is* the definition of an "Open Web", I think that is what is being "politicized" right now by each camp as they try to define it "in their own image" as it where... and you're right to point out that Apple's definition of what Open Web means is now perhaps coming back to bite their users.
I mean, first they tell us that "Flash isn't really the web" (bs imo) and that their users should just get used to it (or shut up, whatever you prefer), but now? What is this? If I visit "The Open Web" with my iPad I cannot get the Open Web anymore because NYPost has sniffed my iPad user-agent?
Yep it *is* quite hilarious :p
- monospaced0
So annoying! The App costs $1.99 and includes a 30-day subscription!? That's such BS. I'm always peeved that I can't view the normal YouTube on my iPad either, that it redirects to the YouTube app that's built-in (and can't be deleted). It makes the web experience frustrating to say the least. I'm going to complain to my friends at the NY Post. This is ridiculous.
- Boz0
bingo.. as I mentioned before that "open web" approach will always basically mean every company wants their browser to be dominant and will produce stuff that works best with their browser and their underlying platforms which leads to shit like coding 5 version of CSS and JS features and whatever so it will run on different browsers etc.
What I find really ironic is that shitting on Flash being a plugin that works across ALL browsers pretty much equally, we are now being spoon fed this bullshit where plugin dependence is EVIL and depending for everything through a browser (which is really like a huge ass plugin but that's not ubiquitous at all like Flash plugin and very much platform dependent). Just because something is open in spec and treated as open (without licensing) doesn't mean it's good nor will lead to progress.
This is rebooting 1990s all over again with fragmentation, app models and so on. And while the technologies to create content might be open, the actual implementations and support is NOT which is even worse then having a plugin like Flash that works everywhere and that you can alternatively block.
Apple doesn't like Web.. It's not in their interest if you look at it from a business standpoint. They have huge hate for Flash, they are trying to take web apps and put them on their platform exclusively so they can sell more hardware and make money from the sales cuts. And we are seeing that happening more and more for IOS platform.
On the other hand as you pointed out Toxic, we will be seeing labels again (best working with Firefox, or best working in Chrome or best experienced on IE9/IE10).. This was the shit we got out of with IE6 and Flash solved.
Now they are trying to get back to that model again.
- monospaced0
But honestly, you can't blame Apple, not with a straight face. Like you said, Boz, they aren't forcing any of this and they don't require content providers to charge for apps, or content (do they?).
- They're actually brainwashing people but the people have no idea.VikingKingEleven
- Apple that is.VikingKingEleven
- Exactly, I don't blame Apple, it's their "apologists" I take issue with.ToxicDesign
- Anyways, good times! :)ToxicDesign
- Boz0
Well they are not "forcing" people but the reality is that their whole infrastructure, the closed up model, the way they do business is making this happen and is very unhealthy.
Here's an example for you that I think we will see soon come true.
Mac App Store. Apple says that Apple won't prevent you from downloading stuff from internet and from other sources. But the reality is that they can say that because the more they get people hooked to sell their apps through Mac App Store the more it becomes the only real way to sell stuff on OSX as Apple will will market the shit out of it. They will also get ammo to close up web access 2-3 years from now with the excuse of security and being able to control viruses and so on and then the circle is complete. You will not be able to download betas, trialware, freeware as much because now everything goes through the app store and that wlll be the only way to get it because of the "security" and "having your system run awesome". Which is really a delusion because app will always crash shit no matter if they are being sold through app store or from the web.
So in general, most Apple fans will eat this up as true because it has ring of truth but since Mac App Store became a huge selling point, the web model will be done on Apple platform and you'll here people like ernexbcn saying how it's the best way to do it and we don't need anything being open and that it's the best way to do things. This is that brainwashing and really genius way for Apple to get what they want from their cult and push their agenda without being lynched.
Investors and Wall Street will support it because they don't give a shit about you as a user. They don't want you to get free shit, or have choice. It's not good business. That's why they love Apple so much, they are embodiment of everything that's wrong for consumers and great for business and making tons of money.
- monospaced0
Ok, great points. I think the Mac App Store is cool, but there is something sinister underlying it and I feel a loss of control and I don't like it. I think all Apple OS upgrades, especially major ones, should come on a physical media with all the Apple packaging they're famous for as well, and with this whole "Lion is only available online" business I am just peeved and a bit confused. So, do I have to now pay $29 for each machine I upgrade? I used to be able to use the same disc for all of them, but not anymore. More and more I'm seeing things the Boz way.
- Apple already did their shit to the music industry, and it FEELS like there's no going back...but we'll seemonospaced
- And now with publications...eekmonospaced
- monospaced0
The web-savvy public, and those whose careers focus around it, will have to step aside this monopolization and make a case for less restriction on content before it is too late. The whole idea of the web is that it's not controlled, that it exists everywhere and is basically free, at least that was the idea when it started (in my mind). I hate to say it, but it is very American in its roots, and we don't stand for this kind of shit historically. Let's see...
- inteliboy0
The archaic record label & publishing fat cats have a big part in all of this no? I don't think it's as simple as Apple being a "nazi" platform, as you so eloquently described boz.
- ukit0
Honesty Boz you have taken your hatred of Apple for not supporting Flash to kind of ridiculous extremes. Apple is going to shut down the internet? Not let you download programs? lolz
Anyway the example above was a decision by a single company, which so far I haven't seen replicated anywhere else. If anything, the trend is to move away from the app model and build web apps for mobile users using open standards. Example is the new Financial Times app which circumvents the app store and offers the same experience via the browser in HTML5. Facebook is about to launch an entire dev platform based on this approach.
- ToxicDesign0
Interesting. I personally view the Mac Store as a "nice have" on Apple's part and not something really game-changing. But then again, I just deleted the icon from my dock when I upgraded to Snow and haven't bothered with it since. Is the Mac App Store even a success? What do I care? I already bought what I need, which is what? A dozen pieces of software? I don't need a fart app on my *real* computer thank you very much!
I guess for me, I have "already surrendered" to Apple when it comes to the *desktop*, as an ex-Windows guy I personally don't care, I just need my system to work (which it does thankfully), so if I have to get a disc, download or whatever, fine.
- Just don't mess with my Interwebs thank you very much! :)ToxicDesign
- ToxicDesign0
Regarding Facebook and HTML5, it'll be interesting to see what happens there since this looks like the "push back" to Apple's App Ecosystem...
- ukit0
I wouldn't look at the NY Post as the cutting edge of any trend...I think it's just laziness on their part:)
I think if anything things will slowly migrate to the web. HTML5 app is the new buzzword.
Companies are responding to a couple issues...one is the increase in subscription fees demanded by Apple, and loss of control generally. The other is simply having to go through the trouble of delivering applications to multiple platforms in multiple programming languages.
Building stuff in HTML5/ JS solves these issues, since all browsers and devices will presumably support them and continue to moving forward. I don't think there's any question this is the platform of the future even if a few compatibility issues still need to be worked out (at this point choice of video codec and 3D/ WebGL support).
- What you basically describe here is the "Google way" which I think is great. The final battle really is the video codec battle... place your bets!ToxicDesign
- Yeah, it really is the Google vision.ukit
- Boz0
It's not going to shut down internet ukit.. I'm raising points that many are already seeing happening. Apple's interest lies in closed up platform, ultimate control and the way you can consume the content and apps. It works FANTASTICALLY for them on iOS and they are trying to replicate that system completely to OSX.
Your example of Facebook HTML5 and Financial Times are just proof that some people are fighting Apple's approach. And thank god for that.. but I don't know if it's going to be enough.
Facebook and Financial Times with HTML5 (which btw runs absolutely HORRIBLE) I tried it, is most likely be more counter productive in rasing the point then helpful.
That's why I think doing like Flash/HTML5 combo for tablets will be the ultimate solution for tablets but since Apple has a non-neglible influence on the market now the whole thing is a clusterfuck and the easiest way to really publish is in effect Apple's closed platform.
I personally don't think Facebook HTML5 doesn't mean squat in the overall scheme of things. It's a social network and has really nothing to do with publishing nor media content in general. It it trying to boost creation of apps but how successful will it be is completely different question because HTML5 just doesn't work well yet and requires a shit load of compromises.
Another thing with Facebook is that people don't want to give them again control. People want open market and to control their own products and services and not depend on Facebook or Apple of whatever..
This whole open web initiative has created a mess that there is not solution to.
- omg0
what did apple do now?
- ukit0
"This whole open web initiative has created a mess that there is not solution to."
Sure there is, the solution is just called...better web standards support. Think back a year ago, hardly any browsers supported HTML5. Now you have support for at least some of these new capabilities in all major browsers including IE, and the whole thing is gradually reaching critical mass.
We shouldn't mistake a necessary period of companies getting on board with these features as being a "new browser war." The 90s era was really an example of browser makers introducing their proprietary features on their own and having the features that won out being written into the standard after the fact.
Whereas now, with a couple of exceptions like the video codec disagreement, there is a detailed roadmap that everyone agrees on. Does that mean features become available cross-browser instantly and that there are no occasional disagreements to be worked out? Of course not. But it's far from a clusterfuck, just a necessary transition.