[besson3c]

I'm working on a web app that will make heavy use of Google Calendar services. I was entertaining supporting MobileMe as well, but when I came to discover that there was no documented MobileMe API or any sort of developer documentation for communicating with their services, I quickly decided against wanting to support it. I can't see any developer being particular interested in supporting something by the way of hacks and tricks that are not explicitly documented and explained by Apple.

When I look back at the history of the calendar thing, Apple was definitely a pioneer with this starting with iTools, later .Mac. Apparently there was some sort of SDK for .Mac, so it appears that Apple at one point flirted with this notion but abandoned it. At the end of the day this appears to be another sort of half assed attempt of theirs.

It's not just calendaring either. How many times have people come in here asking about syncing stuff, about a .Mac/MobileMe replacement, about sharing this and sharing that? Apple totally missed the web services boat. Not only did they have a unique opportunity, but it was also a money making opportunity. If MobileMe didn't suck I have no doubt that there would be plenty of Mac users willing to fork over their dough for these services.

Maybe Apple made a strategic decision that web services is not going to be where they focus resources, but then why deliver these half-assed products like MobileMe? Shit or get off the pot. Still, I'd argue that web services would add a tremendous amount of value and profit to the Apple ecosystem, and wouldn't necessarily be a liability.

To Apple's credit they may have done a good job with iwork.com (although I haven't tried it out), and there are pieces of MobileMe which I like a great deal, particularly their web-based email app. They may have done a good job with the Mac App store, I haven't researched that. The iTunes Music Store URLs that redirect to the store in iTunes work well, but last I checked the ability to pull track info and provide track previews and such with links to buy the music in iTunes is awkward.

This is the same old walled garden story that is nothing new, and I'm hardly the first to complain in this fashion. Still, I just don't get it why missed opportunity after missed opportunity Apple just doesn't seem to get it. In many cases, such as my initial example of allowing web-based calendar integration with MobileMe, Apple wouldn't even have to give up their walled garden approach, but simply provide some damn documentation and perhaps a simple API so that users can access *their* content (not Apple's content, like in my iTMS example, I can understand the walled garden strategy there) and do cool stuff with it that improves the value of this service for them. In the days of mobile computing this is going to become even more important.

Couple all of this with Apple enjoying touting their openness and support of open protocols and such. Great, you support the iCal format and WebDAV/CalDAV, but nobody can actually reap these benefits, so who cares?

I'm not sure what you are complaining about. CalDAV and WebDAV are documented all over the web. They're an open standard. Why should Apple write documentation that already exists?

CalDAV Home
WebDAV Resources

That took less than 10 seconds to find on Google.

[besson3c]

Let's look at some of the major technological players:

Amazon: they get the web-services thing, they have leveraged this to become the web's top retail store
Facebook: they get it as well, the web is being infiltrated with their social plugins and other Facebook widgets
Twitter: likewise
Google: very much get it, for obvious reasons
Yahoo: their entire business is based on web services, pretty much. They provide great developer tools including YUI and their own CDN.
YouTube: they get it
Microsoft: they historically haven't gotten it, although Bing/Bing maps appears to be a great web service
Flickr: they get it as well

This leaves Apple, which is probably at the bottom of this list. Sure they don't have to get it, they're doing well, yadda yadda, but this is definitely a missed opportunity for them.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

I'm not sure what you are complaining about. CalDAV and WebDAV are documented all over the web. They're an open standard. Why should Apple write documentation that already exists?

CalDAV Home
WebDAV Resources

That took less than 10 seconds to find on Google.

I'm aware of this. That's not my point. How do we as Apple users benefit from this? Apple could have made their calendar publishing to MobileMe proprietary and it wouldn't have made a difference to us. The documentation I'm referring to pertains to utilizing MobileMe using these protocols.

[indigoimac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm aware of this. That's not my point. How do we as Apple users benefit from this? Apple could have made their calendar publishing to MobileMe proprietary and it wouldn't have made a difference to us. The documentation I'm referring to pertains to utilizing MobileMe using these protocols.

It's consumer oriented and half-baked like the rest of MobileMe... did you really expect better?

As far as getting it -- can we let Apple get back to hardware and OS's and a few select actual apps and leave the web stuff to others? If you really want an all in one beautifully integrated suite of this shit Google has got that market cornered in my opinion, including great documentation. Could the suite be better? Sure, but I don't think Apple has the stomach for it... after all, how will they make money without charging?

I'll add something else too, if Apple takes down their wall... it's going to end up like facebook which is just apocalyptically shitty when considering all the 3rd party "apps" -- that would truly be catastrophic, as much as I am not a fan of them restricting the App Stores, but they don't really have a choice if they want to maintain the brand.

[imitchellg5]

I agree that MobileMe is a very disappointing product, especially for what's included at the price. If my @me email wasn't my main email for so long, I'd happily cancel the service.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by indigoimac 

It's consumer oriented and half-baked like the rest of MobileMe... did you really expect better?

Yes. Sometimes in order to be consumer oriented you need to be developer friendly so that developers can integrate your products in ways that make life better for consumers. You can't be everything to everybody, sometimes options and flexibility is what is called for to be truly consumer oriented.

As far as getting it -- can we let Apple get back to hardware and OS's and a few select actual apps and leave the web stuff to others? If you really want an all in one beautifully integrated suite of this hush money Google has got that market cornered in my opinion, including great documentation. Could the suite be better? Sure, but I don't think Apple has the stomach for it... after all, how will they make money without charging?

I think they could continue to charge for using MobileMe while building the web service. I don't think any of what I'm disappointed in is at odds with the ability for the product to make a profit, providing of course that the development costs make sound business sense for them.

I'll add something else too, if Apple takes down their wall... it's going to end up like facebook which is just apocalyptically shitty when considering all the 3rd party "apps" -- that would truly be catastrophic, as much as I am not a fan of them restricting the App Stores, but they don't really have a choice if they want to maintain the brand.

I'm talking about support for external applications and allowing customers to share their data hosted by MobileMe (or whatever, MobileMe is a good example to use though) with other services in a way that increases the value of both Apple's product and the external application. I'm not talking about allowing the world to create plugins for MobileMe that will change the user experience of using Apple's app, but to play nicely with other systems.

Because of these decisions, Google Calendar has no doubt leap-frogged MobileMe for the best all-round calendaring solution, particularly with non-Apple OSes and phones.

[turtle777]

No doubt: Apple either step up their MobileMe game, or MobileMe will die a slow death.

The service would have been impressive if it was 2004.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

No doubt: Apple either step up their MobileMe game, or MobileMe will die a slow death.

The service would have been impressive if it was 2004.

-t

I agree, although to be clear, my post wasn't only about MobileMe, but that is the obvious example. It would be nice if there was some sort of API for the App Store and iTunes Store as well (including Ping), but in these cases I guess I can understand Apple wanting to not share that content. In the case of MobileMe however, that is a different story.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I agree, although to be clear, my post wasn't only about MobileMe, but that is the obvious example. It would be nice if there was some sort of API for the App Store and iTunes Store as well (including Ping), but in these cases I guess I can understand Apple wanting to not share that content. In the case of MobileMe however, that is a different story.

Personally, I don't need an API.

I need a MobileMe service that's reliable, and has features that are worthy of my $100.
In both areas, MobileMe is lacking.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Personally, I don't need an API.

I need a MobileMe service that's reliable, and has features that are worthy of my $100.
In both areas, MobileMe is lacking.

-t

Well yes, that goes without saying!