Recently Wired posted an interview with The Mozilla CEO John Lilly. Towards the end of the interview Wired asks the question.
Wired: Are you going to develop a version of Firefox for the iPhone?
and the response?
Lilly: No. Apple makes it too hard. They say it’s because of technical issues — they don’t want outsiders to disrupt the user experience. That’s a business argument masquerading as a technological argument.
After dwelling on this I thought, this response could be applied to any number of technologies and applications. Not just Fire Fox. Everyone is now familiar with Apple’s response to the Flash Player going on the Apple iPhone. What if that response was also nothing but “a business argument masquerading as a technological argument”?
On the flip side if Apple were to make it easy for any such ‘outsiders’, as Lilly puts it, to get on its beloved new device then it could be the thin end of the wedge. For arguments sake if Apple were to allow Fire Fox with its XULRunner offline runtime engine on to the iPhone, then surely there is room for Adobe (Flash Player), Sun (Java Runtime) and even Microsoft (Silverlight) to all call foul play?
I dont know the technical capabilities or requirements to each of these runtime technologies. But making it diffiicult, or saying it technically cant be done does make for an easy way to keep a platform closed. I am not sure the advantage to Apple to shut these other technologies out? Is Apple acting in the best interest of its iPhone users and the user experience they receive? Or is something more sinister going on? Is it an attempt to lay claim to the mobile web, blocking out the competition while pulling those lovely user experiences and interfaces over our eyes?
What ever the reason, currently the message seems clear, with Apple and their iPhone, regardless who you are. Its do it Apple’s way or not at all. Maybe iPhone doesn’t need flash, but as a flash platform developer and an Apple user, it seems a shame that its missing to me.