This article's title got me thinking that Apple, as a company, could actually be interested in suppressing the advancement of the web. Their apps are a shockingly effective alternative to the internet, and the store becomes more comprehensive by the year.
Even at this point, Apple's apps can replace all but some long-tail usages. So, despite the fact that suppressing the progress of the web will hurt the user experience of its own web browser users, that affects users of all operating systems fairly equally. But in the meantime, Apple can keep improving their OS, the app development process, &c; and they could steadily crowd out the web until iOS becomes the primary (or, if Apple gets it way, the solitary) source of networked information distribution/consumption. And after a while, all of what are currently thought of as web or web 2.0 companies would all be at the mercy of Apple. They would, for all intents and purposes, privatize the web.
> Their apps are a shockingly effective alternative to the internet
To some, very limited, parts of the Web.
I think this statement is very telling in terms of illustrating how people's perception of "The Internet" has shifted over the years, along with the notions about is its overall purpose. Ad frankly, I liked the old notion (the one that centered around communication, rather than "apps and services") much better.
This can't possibly happen because regardless of how big Apple is, it is tiny compared to the Internet and everyone who depends on the open Internet, from Amazon, Facebook, Google, Netflix to whitehouse.gov and data.nasa.gov
That's not what I'm saying. Amazon, Facebook, Google and Netflix would be victims of this. People would still use their services, but they'd use their services through the dedicated iOS app, not through a browser. Then Apple will have become a necessary middle man for the consumption of the content that those companies distribute. And who knows what Apple would be able to get away with at that point. Charge Facebook $100mm whenever the push out an updated version of their app? All Amazon purchases must be made with ApplePay? Who knows.
This would be anti competitive as soon as the app store had a majority market share.
If it became too difficult for them "Charge Facebook $100mm" they would replace support with a lower quantity web app and blame Apple.
The reality is that Apple don't have as much interest in the web anymore, they have achieved their goal with web standards (removing enough of a dependency on Flash so they didn't have to support it). They have no need to make the web a successful app platform, so why waste effort on it.
For Google it's part of their core business, look at Angular, Closure tools, Dart, GWT etc...
Most of it comes from AdWords, i.e. Google Search. Angular, GWT, Closure, and Dart have nothing to do with it. They're also all essentially abandonware from Google's point of view, because management has rightly realized they have nothing to do with their core business.
This depends entirely on how you measure scale. If you do it just by number of apps/sites, sure, the vast majority of web URLs don't have a matching iOS app.
However, if you scale each app by the total amount of time users are on it, you'll find that most of humanity is spending their time on a very heavily weighted small slice of the Internet.
From that breakdown, the fraction of human-hours that is covered by sites that also have native iOS apps is much larger.
If the next version of iOS didn't even have a browser, you would be astonished at how little that impacted most users. As long as they can still run Facebook, Instagram, Threes, etc., they'd be fine.
> If the next version of iOS didn't even have a browser, you would be astonished at how little that impacted most users.
If time spent in an application is your criterion, true.
But that way you hugely underestimate the importance of, for instance, that daily (or even weekly) Google search the average user performs in their browser. It takes little time compared to your average social feed, but definitely impacts their lives. Just one quick example: a local business' phone number lookup.
I'd like to agree with you on a philosophical basis, but the reality is that Apple is 2x market cap of Exxon and iPhones recently outsold all Android in the US (calendar Q4 2014).
I don't think it's useful to downplay their influence.
Yeah some long-tail usages like everything those 90% of phone and tablet users do that are not on iOS. And 100% of what desktop users do. And 100% of what laptop users do.
Are you kidding me? 90% of what people do in iOS is in an app. Email (app), chatting (apps), Facebook (app), dating (app), Instagram (app), Twitter (app), news (app), games (apps). I could go on for quite a while until I start to encounter things that aren't in an app (e.g. Hacker News).
To be fair, the actual claim was "Apple's apps can replace all but some long-tail usages." which is blatantly false.
I'm not an iOS user so I might be a little off - but of your list Apple's apps do Email, chatting (for their protocol anyway), maybe they have a news app?
You can do pretty much everything outside the long tail with apps - usually with the better experience (outside of the long tail again) but they're mostly not Apple's apps.
First of all, iOS market share in 2014 was 15%. You can actually stop reading here if you like.
Second, we only use tens of apps, but most of us use hundereds if not thousands of websites per year, because most provide content, not applications. Installing an app for each of them does not scale.
And third, apps are currently uncrawlable and hence there is no way to search for server side content inside and across them. It's not unimaginable for the App Store to solve this one eventually.
Even at this point, Apple's apps can replace all but some long-tail usages. So, despite the fact that suppressing the progress of the web will hurt the user experience of its own web browser users, that affects users of all operating systems fairly equally. But in the meantime, Apple can keep improving their OS, the app development process, &c; and they could steadily crowd out the web until iOS becomes the primary (or, if Apple gets it way, the solitary) source of networked information distribution/consumption. And after a while, all of what are currently thought of as web or web 2.0 companies would all be at the mercy of Apple. They would, for all intents and purposes, privatize the web.