Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

YouTube App Removed From iOS 6 Beta4

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the you're-outta-here dept.

IOS 233

TrueSatan writes "iOS 6 beta 4 has removed the YouTube application that existed on iOS since the first version in 2007. Apple confirmed that YouTube is gone from iOS 6. Google is apparently building its own app saying: 'Our license to include the YouTube app in iOS has ended, customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser and Google is working on a new YouTube app to be on the App Store.'"

cancel ×

233 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Mars expedition is staged (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898761)

Do you think it's just a cooincidence that the Mars rover expedition is happening just as the movie Total Recall is coming to movie theaters? Do those Mars pictures remind you a little bit of desert Earth photographs? That's because they're being taken in ARIZONA, at a repurposed military installation. There is some serious money changing hands here and the government will do almost anything to keep you from finding out about it. In many ways, faking this expedition is way, way easier than it was during the Apollo years, due to no astronauts on the mission, comparable gravity, and atmosphere.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898829)

I find it a little coincidental that as soon as we have another extraplanetary presence, there are a bunch of new crazy people popping up talking about how it was faked. There has to be some kind of causal link there. I try to stick with empirical data though, so I think we should test this by doing at LEAST one more extraplanetary mission, and quantify how many quacks appear. Perhaps then we can determine, once and for all, if there is a causal relationship between awesome science and delusional idiots opening their mouths.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (-1, Offtopic)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898873)

Shut up Luddite.

If NASA faked the Mars landing, they would have had fake scary Martians burn an American flag and diss Dale Earnheardt on the camera before they attacked and destroyed Curiousity. At least then they'd be able to justify getting some of their budget back from defence.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898899)

From what I've read, the new Total Recall movie doesn't even happen on Mars.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (4, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899051)

From what I've read, the new Total Recall movie doesn't even happen on Mars.

WTF!?

Then it ain't Total Recall. If I can't see a mutant 3-titted Martian hooker in cheap biodome light, then I just don't see the point in watching that movie...

Re:Mars expedition is staged (0)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899279)

While Mars was cut, there still is a 3 boobed hooker, so it's not all bad. Just mostly.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (2)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899397)

From what I've read, the new Total Recall movie doesn't even happen on Mars.

WTF!?

Then it ain't Total Recall. If I can't see a mutant 3-titted Martian hooker in cheap biodome light, then I just don't see the point in watching that movie...

The original story (written in a book) was not set on Mars. Therefore Arnie's Total Recall was not Total Recall.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (4, Insightful)

kallisti (20737) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899545)

Therefore Arnie's Total Recall was not Total Recall.

Yes it was, it's just not "We Can Remember It For You, Wholesale". Which neither movie really resembles in the slightest.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899567)

The original story (written in a book) was not set on Mars.

It also wasn't called "Total Recall" (it was titled "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale").

So Arnie's Total Recall *is* "Total Recall", but not "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale", whereas Colin Farrell's Total Recall isn't really "Total Recall", but more "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale".

It's all rather confusing, but not nearly as confusing as reading some of Phillip K. Dick's novels.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898929)

In many ways, faking this expedition is way, way easier than it was during the Apollo years, due to no astronauts on the mission, comparable gravity, and atmosphere.

"Comparable gravity and atmosphere"? Ha, you pitiful fool, they've got you hook, line and sinker. It's only "comparable" because they made you think it is that way. Did you really seriously think Mars exists? Or Moon, for that matter? It's all a century old masonic communist project to create a single world government under the guise of "space colonization"! Just look at what China is planning for "Mars" now, and ask yourself if it's a coincidence that US is also actively pursuing that direction... in no time at all you'll see cooperation announced, and from there it's only a couple of years before you get to learn how to say "thank you for not punishing me today, comrade commissar" in Chinese!

Re:Mars expedition is staged (3, Funny)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898937)

XKCD [xkcd.com]

Re:Mars expedition is staged (1)

irving47 (73147) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899057)

I'm sure you're right. I suppose it's convenient, too... The rocket used to "launch the mission" wasn't carrying anything that went to Mars. It was launching the satellite that controls the minds of a significant portion of the population. (ie-the ones that are not shielding their brains with the proper grounded metallic covering.)

Re:Mars expedition is staged (1)

elfprince13 (1521333) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899331)

I'm actually concerned that my metallic covering isn't properly grounded. Could you walk me through proper procedure?

Re:Mars expedition is staged (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899179)

Y'know, back in my day, our conspiracy theorist nuts would come up with better flimsy evidence than that. They'd string together total coincidences that might stop to make you think for a second before they noticed the bleary eyes and slight hint of frothing around the lips. They certainly wouldn't depend on a movie's release date to pull it off; that's the job of the movie industry shills. And they MOST definitely wouldn't pull a movie out of their asses that had nothing to do with Mars (the remake takes place entirely on earth, loony).

*sigh* Kids today. No respect for the lunatic wackjobs of old.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899261)

And our wackjobs typically came from an academic background, born from frustration and lack of faith in the bureaucratic nightmare of life in academia combined with long-untreated mental illnesses. They at least had a basic, if not twisted, concept of the scientific process; where's your demand for nearly-impossible-to-obtain "evidence" to disprove you? And if those demands don't have AT LEAST three obvious escape plans such that you can rationalize your way out of accepting the evidence when presented to you, don't even bother embarrassing yourself by demanding it.

Re:Mars expedition is staged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899311)

I hate to be the one to say this but YHBT YHL HAND.

Internet is staged (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899323)

Just like the supposed government invention of the Arpanet, which allegedly became the Internet.
Both of these things are fake, and there is actually no such thing as the Internet.

It's just a BBS with no one but you connected, and the world population being simulated by AI.

Which of course means you do not even exist, and your post is faked by an AI. Since I am the only human in existence and the rest of you are fakes, it gives me a perfect excuse to treat the world and other people as my plaything, without having to feel bad at all!

thank god (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898771)

I can now delete an app I never used.

Re:thank god (5, Funny)

mwfischer (1919758) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898803)

What about the other 51 apps you probably have on your phone that you used once? /also guilty

Downward Spiral (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898783)

First no Google Maps, now this. iOS is really heading south.

Re:Downward Spiral (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898815)

But I live in Antarctica you insensitive clod!.

Re:Downward Spiral (-1, Troll)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898817)

Awww, do you need someone to hold your little hands?

Re:Downward Spiral (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898825)

Yes. Please hold me tenderly. Let the bristles on your neck touch my face softly.

Re:Downward Spiral (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899167)

Is that you [wikipedia.org] coach?

Re:Downward Spiral (4, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898973)

Yup, because no one could possibly produce anything better...

YouTube never made sense as a built in app - it also breaks your flow of usage if you want to view multiple videos on one page, as each takes you out of the fecking browser and into another app. Keep it all in the browser and allow it to full screen the video when requested - you know, like PornHub does!

And relying on a third service for what is rapidly becoming a central reason to have a multipurpose phone (mapping and turn by turn navigation) when the relationship between you and that third party was never going to fly, especially when that same third party is fostering a competitor to your platform - goodbye Google Maps, hello something better.

Re:Downward Spiral (5, Insightful)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899083)

YouTube made lots of sense when the iPhone first came out. Back then, youtube.com didn't work properly in Safari--the app was necessary to even watch YouTube videos. Since then, support was added and the .app never received much in the way of updates. This move is actually a good thing. Just go to youtube.com/mobile and tap "add it to the homescreen".

Re:Downward Spiral (4, Interesting)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899299)

The Android app has quite a few extra features compared to the mobile site. The UI is more responsive since there is no need to fetch HTML/Javascript of course, and you get all the usual system integration goodies like the sharing menu. On-screen controls and the menu button work better while watching videos too.

If the iPhone version sucked, well, that isn't a reason to celebrate it going away. That is a reason to complain that it sucked compared to other versions.

Re:Downward Spiral (3, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899089)

>>>relying on a third service for what is rapidly becoming a central reason to have a multipurpose phone (mapping and turn by turn navigation) when the relationship between you and that third party was never going to fly, especially when that same third party is fostering a competitor to your platform - goodbye Google Maps, hello something better.
>>>
How disappointing you don't see a problem with this. It would be equivalent to Comcast/NBC ejecting all the ABC and FOX-owned channels from our television screens. Goodbye FOX News... goodbye FX... goodbye ABC Family... goodbye Disney... goodbye Nickelodeon... goodbye A&E... goodbye Showtime... et cetera. (Don't worry: They'll soon be replaced with NBC-owned channels which are "better".)

Re:Downward Spiral (2)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899329)

Your comparison makes sense only when ABC and Fox also run a competing network to Comcasts/NBCs. Until then, it's to the same situation as I describe.

Google is giving a lot of functionality to Android for free with regard to Google Maps - Apple has to license that functionality at a cost (there was a big thing made of the fact that turn by turn direction apps were against the terms of the license they held). So what should they do, pay the increased license cost and continue to be held hostage, or free themselves from the shackles of a competing organisation?

It's one thing when the people you do business with are just your suppliers, it's a whole different ball game when they are also your largest competitor and they also hold all the balls.

So what's disappointing in that? Nothing as far as I can see.

Life is hotter in the south (1, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898983)

First no Google Maps, now this. iOS is really heading south.

Yes, south to a more hospitable climate.

Instead of being locked into YouTube, iOS users can happily use any video service (like Vimeo for example).

Instead of iOS developers being limited in what they can do with a map (like no turn by turn directions) by arbitrary Google limitations, iOS map based apps can now do anything they like atop a map.

The only ways iOS users are not better off from being freed from Google is that they get more ads from Safari based YouTube viewing on iOS. But since that's Google's choice, it's hard to blame apple for it...

Re:Life is hotter in the south (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899215)

Please tell me how Google "locked iOS users out from using Vimeo".

Re:Life is hotter in the south (4, Insightful)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899411)

Instead of iOS developers being limited in what they can do with a map (like no turn by turn directions) by arbitrary Google limitations, iOS map based apps can now do anything they like atop a map.

How about iOS developers that need high perfomance javascript in their webviews? Or users that would like to use Opera as their default to open links? On Android not only can I make any browser (or none of them) the default but I can fine tune it down to the point that links from different sites seamlessly open in my browser of choice, e.g., some sites just look better in Opera like Slashdot, some better in Chrome like CNet. And because a developer restricts API access or doesn't offer a particular API at all doesn't mean it's some "arbitrary decision". There are many things that go into those types of decisions and just because Apple brass is accusing Google of essentially "being mean" and you parroting the party line doesn't make it so. Think carefully lest you be hypocritical.

Re:Life is hotter in the south (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899453)

"javascript" "high performance" good one.

Re:Downward Spiral (1)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899403)

Yeah, because this:

http://imgur.com/a/vK6tr [imgur.com]

Looks and functions so much worse than Google Maps. Oh wait, it's better. As far as YouTube, that's Google, not Apple. Apple's license with Google expired, and Google is making an AppStore replacment that will undoubtedly be available by the time iOS 6 launches to the public.

Re:Downward Spiral (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899563)

Yeah, because this:

http://imgur.com/a/vK6tr [imgur.com]

Looks and functions so much worse than Google Maps. Oh wait, it's better.

Yeah, but Google has already previewed their much improved Maps [pcmag.com] for iOS 6 so that's the one the Apple app will be competing with. I don't know how far Google is willing to go to put a great Maps experience on a competitor's platform but if they are committed, just like with the Google Now vs. Siri thing, Google can almost certainly make a better Maps app than Apple since they have the experience and the data that Apple can't match. Personally I use Android and iOS devices and I love it when apps are decoupled from the underlying platform. Maps, Youtube, etc. should be a separate download so they can be updated without having to wait for a whole new version of the OS to come out. Most of the original Google Apps for Android including, incidentally Youtube and Maps in addition to GMail, Chrome Browser and probably some others I'm forgetting are now a download from Google Play and are updateable that way. Yes, your phone will still come with that stuff but the apps aren't in lockstep anymore. This is a good thing and should be celebrated for what it is.

Glad to be an Android user.... (2, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898807)

I'm glad to be an Android user. I'll stick with that.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (3, Informative)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898827)

What has that got to do with anything? You *DO* realize that youtube is available via the Safari browser too, right? And that you can put a shortcut to it in your screen? And the mobile version can pull down better resolution stuff..?

A lot of people prefer to use the mobile version of youtube rather than the app. With the app, you can't even copy a damned url link.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (2, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898849)

*I* am also able to decide that I want a YouTube app and I don't have to let Apple make that decision for me.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (4, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898915)

So you choosing to download an app is "apple making a decision for you", unlike the app being included no mater what you choose?

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898939)

You're kind of an idiot, aren't you?

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899513)

But downloading the app will use up some of my download quota for the month meaning I won't get to watch as many youtube videos.

The horror!!!

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898925)

i see you live a full life to pay attention to such trivial things as a lack of a youtube icon on a screen

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (5, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898951)

In this case, the change is actually for the better as far as you are concerned, then - where previously YouTube was a stock iOS app, and, as such, unremovable, Now it's going to be just another app published by Google via App Store, so you can decide whether to install it or not.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (-1, Flamebait)

Jaktar (975138) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898969)

You're assuming that Apple will approve it.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (4, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899017)

Why wouldn't Apple approve it? Especially when they already gave the line of "Google is working on their own app" as an excuse.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899161)

Come now, you're trying to inject sense into this. Not allowed!

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899509)

Really? Because a quick peek at the AppStore on my iPad seems to show Google has no issues putting apps up:

http://i.imgur.com/8TOIL.jpg [imgur.com]

But keep wearing that tinfoil hat brother!

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898985)

So is there some reason you can't choose to go to the app store and download it if Google decides to release a dedicated app?

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898975)

>>>What has that got to do with anything? You *DO* realize that youtube is available via the Safari browser too, right?

But I don't want to use the Safari browser.
Or any browser period.
I want to use the Youtube app.
But Apple's taken that option away, because Apple Knows Best (coming to a black-and-white TV near you).

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (5, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899047)

Then just download the new app when it hits the store and shut the fuck up. This is a change only in that the Youtube app is no longer unremovable from the system which was a stupid idea.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

irving47 (73147) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899087)

I'm not arguing with you... BUT.. This is just another example of where the consumer misses out (is inconvenienced, however slightly) because of all this patent and licensing nonsense that we've been hearing non-stop for the last what? 10 years?

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899165)

This has nothing to do with patents. The 'license' was just that Google paid Apple to make Youtube a built-in app. The agreement has now expired and it will just be a separate app.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899071)

What a pointless discussion. The YouTube app was included with iOS because Google had a license with Apple. What difference does it make whether the app is published by Apple or Google. The app no longer comes stock? Either go to youtube.com in the mobile browser or use Google's own app. Not hard. Personally, I don't know why Google shouldn't be supplying their own YouTube anyway, and I fail to see how not renewing the license is bad for users or anyone.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899101)

This is really stretching it. The agreement ended. Google is going to replace the app with one of their own. Download and use that one. No choice is lost, in fact more is gained. You choose whether or not to download the app.

I'm pretty sure there were people on Slashdot in 2007 claiming that the Youtube app was evidence that "Apple Knows Best" and they must be stopped.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899275)

Choke on a bag of dicks you cock socket.

Story Is Flamebait (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899069)

I'm sure the "story" poster intended to torch off a giant anti-Apple flame fest.

But as usual, it's a non-story.

As they say, "Move along, nothing to see here..."

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

DdJ (10790) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899155)

With the app, you can't even copy a damned url link.

But you can mail or tweet it, which is the main reason I'd want to copy it myself, so I never even noticed that "copy" wasn't one of the sharing options.

This change sucks for me, but I'll adapt. I prefer the behavior or the app I have right now over that of the web site (mobile or desktop). Sure, Google may add their own app shortly, but want to make bets over whether or not they'll force all sorts of Google+ social/sharing crap on users?

All I want is a simple list of channels my account is subscribed to that lets me access the videos uploaded to those channels, plus the ability to interact with my own videos and lists.

Ah well. The last time I looked, there were open APIs for YouTube. If Google messes this up, I'll either write my own app or switch to Vimeo. Slightly annoying, sure, but ultimately not a huge deal.

(Now, if they get rid of the AppleTV YouTube channel as well, that could suck.)

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899313)

It will probably look more-or-less like the Android app for YouTube.

I suppose this depends on what you mean by "forcing sharing on users". If by that you mean "displays a +1 button with the video information page", sure, they'll do that.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899289)

you can copy the URL link on the mobile application on Android.

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898869)

You have a very apropos user name!

Re:Glad to be an Android user.... (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899189)

My girlfriend has a Kindle Fire and the Youtube app on that thing is phenomenal. As in it never buffers especially compared to my Xoom. I'm pretty sure they are proxying it somehow and feeding a compressed version but still it's pretty smooth and exceeds the experience I get.

Slow news day (0, Flamebait)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898839)

I'm not usually the guy to post the "bitch about Slashdot" troll post, but seriously guys: It's not necessary to post something everytime someone from APPL, MSFT, or GOOG wipes their ass.

"Oh noes. Default app got removed, now I either have to download the new one or use a web browser! Slashdot story, ACTIVATE!"

Re:Slow news day (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898941)

I'm not usually the guy to post the "bitch about Slashdot" troll post, but seriously guys: It's not necessary to post something everytime someone from APPL, MSFT, or GOOG wipes their ass.

Whereas the story I posted the other day about how Valve is updating their user agreement to ban class-action lawsuits, ala Sony/EA, magically disappears from the firehose about 20 minutes after submission.

Either malice or stupidity, either way not a complement...

Re:Slow news day (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898945)

flamebait? no more like insightful - so i moded that way

Re:Slow news day (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899005)

I believe Apple, and Google are quite influential in the technology world some people even still use Microsoft in places. So reporting what they do is pretty much the whole point of this sites existence. That said a quick glance over the front page shows Incredible Planets; Cold Servers; ISP vs The Law ; Celebrity Gossip (admittedly of Apple Fame); Phone Carrier Scandal (with Apple Slant); Nuclear Cyber Attacks; Dead Gaming Koreans; Ironic Microsoft Security Article...but No Google at all, Apple mentioned only to boost another article, and Microsoft in what has been a pretty shunned post. To be fair what a lovely mix of technical articles...and NO OLYMPICS. Today Slashdot delivered.

Re:Slow news day (1)

dyingtolive (1393037) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899249)

I was mostly being ironic with the slow news day comment, but this is kind of a non-story in the scheme of things.

Make a Link on the Desktop (2)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898847)

Personally, I hate the iOS App for YouTube. I have a link on my desktop which I use instead. Works great.

Re:Make a Link on the Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899013)

Well, Apple isn't making the app anymore, so it might not suck so much.

Re:Make a Link on the Desktop (1, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899451)

I was going to post a comment about how whenever Apple removes a feature or the iPhone doesn't do something all the fanboys suddenly don't want it and never wanted it and it sucked anyway and normal people don't use it and it's better with out... But then I realized you might actually be making a genuine point.

The Apple fan club has made having any kind of serious debate rather difficult.

Good (5, Insightful)

MrDoh! (71235) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898853)

These devices should come with the basic app market/store and as little else as possible. When signing up, offer the basics, browser/email, and a list of suggested good to haves, but the lighter these things are on base install, the better. Ok, might be a pain for some people getting a device that's 'empty' and needs 5 mins of installing before it's considered useful, but sure would make upgrades easier later with having no apps baked in.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898967)

But but I need somebody to tell me what is appropriate and the best for me.

Re:Good (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898989)

These devices should come with the basic app market/store and as little else as possible.

Yep, it's a joy installing something like Cyanogenmod or similar on an Android handset and getting nothing but the most barebones pack-ins even when installing the gapps. You get just what you need as far as extras. The browser, the market, a terminal, and a few extras like calculator. No streaming apps, no gmail, youtube, nothing. Not even Maps is included. If you want it, play.google.com has it. I wouldn't have it any other way.

Does there need to be an app for everything? (4, Interesting)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898887)

I'm amazed at the indolent culture spawned by the iPhone: Nowadays, you can't just go to a website. You have to have a special executable for every single different website you visit!

It seems like there are people who don't go to certain websites, until they announce "Announcing the blah.com iPhone App!"

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (5, Insightful)

magamiako1 (1026318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899011)

Part of the reason for 'having an app' is for native performance on the hardware itself. Even Facebook is making a native app on iOS.

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/27/3120964/facebook-objective-c-app

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899147)

WTF does "performance" have to do with Facebook??!!
Facebook's a freaking website. A bunch of static content appears there.
It's not a game, a web app, or a video. Performance?

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (2)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899259)

WTF does "performance" have to do with Facebook??!!
Facebook's a freaking website.

But it is a shitty website that is trying to do a ton of things behind the scenes (even if they aren't things that the user wants or sees). A dedicated app could (conceivably) handle that more elegantly.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899065)

I don't personally believe the customers are demanding this "we want a dedicated app" approach, in most cases. Instead, I think it's mostly driven by content providers that have been unsuccessful in monetizing their web content. They think if they develop an app, they'll somehow magically figure out how to turn their customers into profits.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (3, Interesting)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899141)

As a part time mobile developer, I can kind of understand why. For any truly interactive site running a lot of javascript and doing anything ajaxy, the performance on a mobile device more is nothing short of ass-tastic. You go to a lot of sites and get greeted with some weird javascript popup that's almost impossible to click close on as the button just doesn't respond well. And a lot of sites take a long time to load especially blogs like theverge.com. A mobile app for those sites almost always loads the content quicker, has native controls for scrolling etc. so you don't have to rely on the craptacular javascript emulated UIs, and just does a better job of formatting the content to the screen. Of course all that could just be the fault of the website in question but I just don't see (for example) how engadget.com could ever be as good on the iPad as the engadget app. They both show the same content but the app is so much faster and has additional features that would be very difficult to do on the actual site with web dev tools. The only real issue is that if you had an app for every single site that needed one you'd have one cluttered phone. Maybe they could just disappear and automatically pop up if you put the url in the browser or clicked a bookmark. This could be done right now at least on Android since you can trigger apps to respond to custom uri's. Like slashdot://slashdot.com when clicked as an embedded link or in a bookmark could automatically open a "Slashdot" app.

Of course with suitably fast mobile devices, the speed advantage of the apps starts to get smaller and smaller. On my Xoom with Jellybean I don't bother to use any mobile site apps as the sites work perfectly well in the browser and all controls work well. My first gen iPad not so much.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899159)

The Youtube app was a hotfix since you couldn't view the site without Flash.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899225)

I'm amazed at the indolent culture spawned by the iPhone: Nowadays, you can't just go to a website. You have to have a special executable for every single different website you visit!

The browser wars are over.

The wars for placement in the app store have begun.

The app developer can use any audio or video codec he likes, development can be as open or closed as he likes, web "standards" don't mean a hell of a lot and what the geek doesn't know won't hurt him.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

swb (14022) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899303)

You can't just go to a web site because the web site's developers/owners have decided they want to run scripts from a dozen different domains and the tool that did the primary site decided that since everything works well on his 8-core desktop with 64 gigs of RAM, why it will work on everyone's desktop, especially since they all have super-large displays, too.

Some websites get it and produce a mobilized version of their web site which runs well on a small device. But it seems most are locked into a big, clumsy, hostile user interface that doesn't scale (physically) that an app for a mobile device becomes necessary for sanity.

Re:Does there need to be an app for everything? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899365)

Web sites are slow because every time you navigate the browser has to connect and fetch more data. An app can also easily spawn a background thread to, say, handle posting a message while the UI is free to get on with other stuff. You can sort of do it in Javascript but it is never as fast as a native app.

That's why Twitter and Facebook apps are so popular. No need to sit on the site waiting for your photo to upload or ads to download. Plus they integrate with the system nicely, so for example on Android you can send photos directly to the Facebook app from the Gallery.

Coming soon, "Apple iTube" (0, Flamebait)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898905)

Isn't that how it goes? Remove competition and then add in watered down version Apple controls.

Re:Coming soon, "Apple iTube" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40898955)

You got to it first. I wish I had mod points and I wish I didn't have to post this as AC.

Re:Coming soon, "Apple iTube" (4, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899063)

Wait, what? They're removing a watered-down YouTube app made by Apple, and now you'll have the option to install an official one instead (or just use the website.)

So no, it's the exact opposite of what you said.

Re:Coming soon, "Apple iTube" (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899095)

Isn't that how it goes? Remove competition and then add in watered down version Apple controls.

So Apple... somehow controls the new YouTube app Google is developing? Wow that's amazing!

Re:Coming soon, "Apple iTube" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899207)

I guess you haven't heard how Apple toys with developers. Allowing them to develop things and then removing apps at their own whim. I'm looking to apple to say that they have their own videos to show and that a youtube app will duplicate the showing of videos so the app is not allowed anymore. You know it's for the sake of the kids that only approved apps that show videos show only videos from Apples storehouse of videos.

Not like we used it anyway (2)

Supp0rtLinux (594509) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898913)

The app has always been somewhat restricted. It was good back in 2007. Since 2010 the web app has been better. Considering its impossible to delete stock apps unless you JB, I'm glad to see this one go. It won't be missed and free's up space.

Re:Not like we used it anyway (3, Insightful)

Supp0rtLinux (594509) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898953)

Ironically, since the Safari web app came out, people have been asking for this especially since many of the videos won't play in the native app anyway you need the web app or Vevo, etc. Yet as soon as they pull it, people start making a big deal out of it. Sure Apple is distancing themselves from Google a bit, but its not like this broke something. It would be different if Google Voice was built into IOS like it is on Android and then Apple removed it. That would have some impact. But simply removing the YouTube app? Not so much.

Re:Not like we used it anyway (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899025)

free's

Holy shit, here comes an s!

Re:Not like we used it anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40899033)

This is what killed them on the mac. SAME exact mistakes. "not invented here we can do better". Many times they could. However, they are whimsical and remove things at the drop of a hat. Without a thriving eco-system they will die. They are going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They did it with the apple II, then the Mac, then the Newton... They will stranglehold their 3rd parties. They always do.

Least this time I will be ready for it and can make some cash 'converting' people from ipad/iphone to whatever the current toy is...

Huh? There's an app for that? Really? (1)

zarmanto (884704) | more than 2 years ago | (#40898991)

Levity is tempting and all... but in all seriousness, YouTube is most definitely not one of my most frequented apps, and I don't sense much loss at it's removal from the default set. No loss at all, in fact... since Google will almost certainly roll out a non-bundled version of the app to coincide with the release of the final version of iOS 6. Oh, I'm sure I'll download the new YouTube app, alright, right after I install iOS 6... but it'll still sit buried in a folder, used once every few months or so when I hit an Angry Birds level that I simply can't figure out on my own -- just like the current version of the YouTube app.

Re:Huh? There's an app for that? Really? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899109)

but it'll still sit buried in a folder, used once every few months or so when I hit an Angry Birds level that I simply can't figure out on my own -- just like the current version of the YouTube app.

Haha, this is pretty much THE only thing I've used YouTube for in the last six months!

I don't see a problem here. (5, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899007)

The proper place for Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, and all the rest would seem to be as optional downloads from the iOS App Store.

The only fair alternatives are to pre-load all competing media players and give them the same prominence as iTunes or introduce a purely bureaucratic solution like the European "browser ballot" for media play.

customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser? (0)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899079)

Since when? Only about 10% of youtube works with HTML5. Everything else is Flash.

Re:customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser (0)

PeanutButterBreath (1224570) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899283)

Since when? Only about 10% of youtube works with HTML5. Everything else is Flash.

The rest are encoding it wrong.

Re:customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899341)

The only YouTube content I haven't been able to view on my iPhone is specifically disabled for mobile (some media company, which I now cannot recall, that mainly does music videos).

YMMV.

Re:customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser (3, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899373)

I don't have flash on my computer. In my experience, 100% of youtube videos are html5 compliant on Safari/h.264. With Firefox/ogg/webm, a large number don't work.

burned bridges? (1)

dicobalt (1536225) | more than 2 years ago | (#40899511)

I think so, but that's how Apple does business.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?