Actually, to date that revenue does not seem to be very significant at all. Apple hasn't been making very much on apps as far as anyone can tell and Steve Jobs went so far as to tell shareholders the model was to run the App store at slightly more than break even as a way to promote sales of iPhones. As for ad revenue, time will tell, but again I don't think Apple is planning on it being a big revenue stream compared to the piles of cash they make selling iPhones.
This statement seems to have no basis in reality. Apple made $300k (30% of $1 million) per day in the first month of the App Store's existence alone. I am pretty sure that is over the break even point. I am pretty sure that is also a significant amount of revenue, equal to the gross sales total for around 100,000 iPhones per day. As for advertisements, I feel relatively certain that iAds were not developed and released to simply break even and improve end user experience or out of some feeling of benevolence, but rather to do quite a bit better than break even.
How do you read "remove MS's lock-in" as "commoditize the operating system market"? That simply does not follow. Apple uses their OS as a differentiator, but they build it mostly on open standards for file and protocol interoperability. As a smaller player in the market, that makes them more money. The idea that breaking MS's lock-in in the OS market by supporting standardized Web technologies makes absolutely no sense to me. Please explain your reasoning.
Microsoft has no lock-in on iOS devices, for one thing. To remove Microsoft lock-in would be remove the tethering between applications and the Microsoft Windows operating system with HTML5 applications. These applications developed in HTML5 would be available on any platform with an HTML5 compliant browser. Regardless of whatever strategy you prefer to believe Apple is taking, Windows and also other operating systems would become a commodity (hint: this includes Apple's operating systems), i.e. any operating system with a HTML5 compliant browser would do. It's just my opinion, but I doubt very seriously that Apple, or any other profit maximizing firm would prefer that.
No, but the fact that they've been promoting it for many years, have developed tools to let users do just that, have committed to projects like PhoneGap, etc. does indicate it is highly likely. Do you have any evidence that they're changing direction
As I said, what I am doing is speculation. Just as you would speculate they will not change direction. All I have to suggest it is possible is how they transitioned from suggesting web apps as the way to develop for the iPhone originally, which was then supplanted by the iPhone SDK. That, and the fact that they could increase revenue by creating a simple environment for developing iOS applications. Whether that increase in revenue and the less tangible mindshare is worth the investment of time they would have to outlay for it is, again, speculation.
You make it sound as though their actions were insulated from one another. You could just as easily say Apple will ditch all the open source projects they contribute to, since those don't directly make them money. The thing is, having better dev tools and more apps and lowering costs for developers sell iPhones, and Apple is really, really in the business of selling iPhones right now. They're not about to try to gain a small amount of revenue from developers now, while risking long term sales of devices. That would be idiotic. That's the reason why their developer program was so cheap in the first place.
I really don't know where to begin with this. I am not saying their actions are insulated from one another, you are just inferring it. I am saying their motive is singular, to maximize profit, just like every other firm. The second bit seems to be some strawman argument, so I won't address that further. As far as where to make money, I think I addressed the profitability of the App Store above. Further, remember, Apple's goal, like every other profit maximizing firm, is not to make money, it is to make more money. The whole reason they got into the cell phone market in the first place. The whole reason they introduced the App Store and now the reason for iAds. You cannot seriously believe that advertisements were introduced to iOS to sell more devices. That would be idiotic. Further, if they had no interest in making money from the App Store (they do) and they wanted to make the developer program "so cheap" (they don't) why have a charge for the SDK at all? Also, how would creating a tool for developing simple iOS applications devalue the device?
Then allow me to explain. It sells phones and Macs and together that's the lion's share of Apple's profit.
Allow me to explain, that statement is one with which I was taking issue. Just saying it does not make it so.
Umm, I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. It can access the location service for GPS use, and many other of the offered services via the Webkit APIs. What is it missing that simple apps need?
Umm, how about anything that the SDK provides that the Webkit APIs do not? Umm, how about the ability to access that application when offline? Umm, certainly all that can be defined as simple is equivalent to the definition of HTML5 and the Webkit APIs. Umm, did you think about this question before you asked it?
