Good point. This highlights the question of "what's a platform?"

Consider, as just one example, openlaszlo.org (which I mention because I 
have friends there). Their fat-client Web-delivered apps "compile" to 
Flash or AJAX.  Will iPhone Safari support Flash? Will it support DHTML 
as much as the standard Safari does? If so, then it's hard for me to 
technically or legally understand why a Laszlo kind of third-party app 
would be supported, but not a "native" third-party app?  Flash and AJAX 
have an API for applications to receive gestures and to display output, 
and so does the operating system. What's the difference?

I tend to think of Squeak as just another one of these kinds of 
platforms, on which apps can run.

I wonder when they'll support the Parallels VM...

If the reasons for the distinction are just arbitrary, we could make a 
Flash or Java VM for Squeak, in which the .image/.changes/.sources files 
all come over the Internet (hopefully with caching!)...  I have no idea 
how to estimate the performance.

-Howard

Darius Clarke wrote:
> I suspect they'll make 3rd party development go the Web 2.0 route.
> 
> You develop with their tools on their hosted server (for a fee) and
> then they control what can go to which phones (for a fee that scales
> with the number of targeted units).
> 
> Just a guess. Such a scenario lets them keep user experience uniform,
> predictable, and fewer disabling side effects. The scenario also keeps
> the bulk of processing on the servers where one has more room and
> flexibility for creativity & interactivity with other processing
> services and other data stores. DabbleDB might be more the development
> tool we'd use for such a phone.
> 
> We'd probably prefer developing for the open source phone.
> 
> Cheers,
> Darius
> 

-- 
Howard Stearns
University of Wisconsin - Madison
Division of Information Technology
mailto:hstearns at wisc.edu
jabber:hstearns at wiscchat.wisc.edu
voice:+1-608-262-3724