(Via Denbagus.)

If you are like any other developer (me included), you have honed a certain set of skills and look for jobs where you can flex them while picking up a few tricks here and there. Often, they make your work life interesting and sometimes make you an invaluable employee. With the advent of the iPhone OS, there has become an arms race of sorts with Android, RIM and WebOS (Palm/HP). All this leaves most web developers on the sidelines looking in. “Hey Apple, I have a great idea for a new app…”, if only I knew Obejective C. I don’t code in those compiled languages at all, despite taking courses in C & C++. Web development has brought me jobs and opportunities, but few working on desktop applications. I am sure my experience is not unique.

Given this, web developers have been on the outside looking in. Now, it appears we may have a bite at the apple, no pun intended. If web developers can create top shelf apps that are compelling in their relevance and ease of use, users will take notice. Especially if they can truly have the same experience on several platforms/devices.

This revelation from TweetDeck about a web version instead of one for each smartphone platform comes on the heels of my employer coming to the same conclusion. We discussed an iPhone app.

• “What if they won’t approve it?”
• “The development/testing can only be done on an Apple machine”
• “You have to get approved to develop and pay each year for API access”
• and so on.

In the end, even an Apple fanboy like me had to relent. We just can’t invest the resources with so much in doubt. Apple also has control over our deployment and we have to wait for each update to be approved. For a member organization driven by an active user base, that’s unacceptable.

Instead, we are embarking on a web application using jQuery and jQTouch. So far, its been a win, win. We can leverage our PHP/HTML/Javascript knowledge and deliver a program that can be deployed on all smartphone platforms. Once we are done, we can create stylesheets for each platform and away we go.

Now, what’s the main drawback for this kind of application. Simple. Round the clock Internet connectivity on both ends. If you don’t have a device with an active Internet connection, these apps are inaccessible and useless. But, with smartphones requiring a data package that includes Internet access, you only have to worry about keeping your server up and running. With a company like Rackspace doing our hosting, we are covered here as well.

While I don’t expect these web apps to replace the traditionally compiled ones, the news from Tweetdeck bodes well for both web developers and users. I expect great applications that will be available on several devices with shorter time between updates. No one would complain about that.

(Via Tweetdeck.)

As long as I pay AT&T, I don’t think it matters that I want to use my “unlimited” (5GB) iPhone data plan with my laptop. I pay them for Uverse TV/Internet, home phone and two iPhones. They get almost $350/month out of me. Really AT&T, would it be too much to ask you to just allow me to tether my iPhone via Bluetooth. I have done it before with an old Nokia phone so I know it’s possible on your network.

Now, as any good technophile knows, more browsers means more opportunities for friends/family/pastors to call and say, “Hey, what is this and should I download it?”.  My answer is often a simple “Only if you really need it.”  Since they are unsure what it does, chances are the answer is no.  Does that mean I want folks to ignore this Apple offering.  No, of course not.  But, I also don’t want them to learn a new program just to make me and Apple feel better.  If they are already using IE, I have probably mentioned to them that Mozilla Firefox is my personal preference.

As someone who get these questions at church all the time, I have to balance my personal preference and (semi) professional recommendations.  I suggest the same at your church.

As for me, I am looking forward to the new features of HTML 5 that Apple mentioned (however they work).  But as for Safari 3.1, I would like for one thing and one thing only.  When I click on a link, it would be nice if a new tab was created instead of a new window.  On my Mac, I can get around this by clicking with the middle button on my wireless Mighty Mouse.  On my work PC, no such luck.  That’s one of the main reasons I use Mozilla Firefox at work.

Revised: It seems Apple  is also cleaning up some security holes with this version.  This is a good thing since many sites have compared its phishing filters to IE 7 and Firefox 2 and found Safari wanting.  That is not a good thing if you want folks to accept your browser and use it on a regular basis.It also like the middle button on my PC will also open a tab when I click on a link.  It’s nice to get this working, but the default button (left-click) should also do the same, or at least have it as an option in preferences.