I am pleased to announce a new beta release of Beyond411 that supports location based search using GPS. For example, you can do yellow page searches and get driving directions from your current location, wherever you are.

Update 2008-4-20: I am currently investigating some issues with the reverse geocoding service on geonames.org, this is is causing many GPS Lookups not to resolve.

This release retains the customary Beyond411 focus on performance. I use background GPS lookups and incremental location updates while the app is running to minimize the time that users spend waiting for results.

You can install the 4.20.3 release over-the-air from http://thebogles.com/beta/b411.jad.  Please note this is a beta release and you may encounter bumps in the road; let me know of any issues.

Of course GPS functionality is only enabled on Blackberries that support GPS, e.g. the 8800 series. To turn on GPS search mode, select GPS from the location drop down at the top right of the search screen.

Thanks to geonames.org for a reverse geocoding web service licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Note: Please note that the Blackberry Curve doesn’t support GPS. Some programs like Google Maps do “pseudo GPS” by figuring out which cell-phone tower you are communicating with, but Beyond411 does not have this capability.

I recently described Steve Jobs comments around iPhone openness as FUD, scaring users away from the concept of third party applications with threats of security and compatability nightmares.

Adam left a well thought out comment on that blog post.

You’re right, this isn’t really about security. It’s about controlling the user experience by keeping it pure (and just how Steve says it should be). I don’t think this is totally evil though. There’s a reason the iPhone will blow the user experience of other phones out of the water, just as the Mac does to the PC: it’s consistent and reliable. Microsoft OEMs put so much third-party crap onto their PCs and devices that no matter what Redmond, does the end product is going to suck.

Most of the Java apps I’ve used are sluggish, ugly, and frequently hang my phone (ok, this is a problem with the JVM, but most just aren’t up to the task). Look for a simpler web-like, widget-focused(?) third-party development story. Sure you can’t build more advanced apps with the environment, but most users won’t care.

I disagree with the assertion that JVM apps have to be slow and crappy, but more on that later.

Adam was right on about the web-like third party development story, although Apple took that direction a little too literally.  Third party apps are strictly limited to browser applications. 

True, it’s a full featured Safari implementation that can support AJAX, but applications built on this platform will be distinctly second class citizens compared with native phone apps, and are also limited by a much narrower and unreliable network pipe compared with PCs.

Macworld describes the iPhone platform announcement as going over like a lead balloon:

The iPhone runs a version of Mac OS X. And since the day it was announced, Mac developers have wondered: will there be a way for them to write software that runs on the iPhone, much as they do for the Mac?

Apple’s approach to the subject has evolved over time. In January, it all sounded quite unlikely. By early May, the company was “wrestling” with the matter. By the end of May, Steve Jobs was suggesting that Apple would find a way to let developers write software for the iPhone by the end of the year.

In that encouraging context, the announcement that Jobs made Monday at WWDC went over like a lead balloon. To be fair, the suggestion that anxious would-be iPhone developers can write snazzy Web applications that would work on the phone’s built-in Safari web browser isn’t a bad one — it’s actually a clever workaround that most developers would have suggested themselves if they had gotten the chance.

No, the problem is that as snazzy as Web applications can be these days, they’re still not a replacement for the real thing. If they were, why would Apple bother writing full-blown programs for the iPhone? Why convert Mail to run on the iPhone if Google Mail in a browser will work just as well? Because it won’t.

Applegazette calls the browser only announcement “phenomonally insulting” to third party developers and “anti-Apple” in terms of the simplicity possible with third party apps.

What I find phenomenally insulting is the constant mention of keeping the iPhone safe and secure. The way that it keeps being said makes it sound like developers have the plague or something. It seems , to me anyway, to be disrespectful to the developers that make the Mac so great.

I love my Mac. I love the Apple software on my Mac too…but part of what makes my Mac so great are the Applications that Apple had nothing to do with (Quicksilver, anyone?)…and I can’t understand why they wouldn’t want the same style of innovation on the iPhone.

This web based concept, at least in its current form, is also very anti-Apple from a simplicity standpoint. Instead of pressing a button to launch the application you need, you’re going to have to open a web browser, open your bookmarks, then click on the application you want - then (in most cases I would assume) you’re going to have to log in to said application.

That’s turning what should be a one button press process into a three button press (and a log in) process. I don’t believe that’s the right way to go about this. If they’re going to require that all applications be web based, they could at least allow you to have an icon on the screen that links directly to the website and stores your log in information. I don’t think that’s asking too much.

(If Apple were to a build extended browser platform that retained the advantages of browser based applications while adding offline/async support and participations as first class iPhone apps, that would be far more interesting.  Thus far there are no signs that they plan to do this.  Perhaps Adobe or some other third party partner will build such an application with Apple and AT&T’s blessing?)

I also believe that if Apple wanted to, they could produce a JVM implementation that offers good performance, deep integration with OSX, and security. Sure, there are underpowered phones and crappy JVM implementations out there, but it doesn’t have to be that way, especially on hardware of the iPhone’s caliber.

A good case study is the Blackberry. The Blackberry and all of its applications are built in Java and offer snappy performance and good stability on relatively lowe end hardware. Third party apps like GMail and Google Maps are also snappy and offer good usability. 

I imagine that Apple has both extended browser models and JVM solutions in progress, and are adopting FUD strategies because they need to buy some time while they get these platforms in place. Developers need to exert continued pressure to make sure that these platforms are open as they ought to be, and so that Apple doesn’t place undue constraints over third party innovation in the name of “security”. 

The authors of the scraping framework scrubyT have constructed an automated list of the top 10 Ruby and Rails blogs based on a combination of Technorati and Alexa rank.  (See the link for screenshots and commentary on each blog.)

10. weblog.jamisbuck.org by Jamis Buck.
9. weblog.rubyonrails.org by the Rails core team
8. slash7.com by Amy Hoy.
7. errtheblog.com by PJ Hyett and Chris Wanstrath
6. nubyonrails.com by Geoffrey Grosenbach
5. redhanded.hobix.com by _why the lucky stiff.
4. hivelogic.com by Dan Benjamin.
3. mephistoblog.com by Rick Olson and Justin Palmer
2. rubyinside.com by Peter Cooper.
1. loudthinking.com by David Heinemeier Hansson.

This post describes how the list was constructed using scrubyT (by aggregating a set of aggregators and hitting Alexa and Technorati for the rankings.)

Steve Jobs has descended into classic Microsoftian FUD mode regarding iPhone openness.  Either he’s been spending too much time around Bill Gates, or perhaps FUD is the inevitable resort of market leaders seeking to maintain control.

Check out the blatant contradictions in Apple’s messages regarding the security of OS X and the danger of running third party apps on your iPhone.

On the one hand, Apple touts the security of OS X:

Mac OS X delivers the highest level of security through the adoption of industry standards, open software development and wise architectural decisions. Combined, this intelligent design prevents the swarms of viruses and spyware that plague PCs these days.

Apple also boasts that the iPhone runs a full version of OS X:

It’s REAL Safari, REAL OS X. We put a different user interface on it to work with a multi-touch screen… it’s an amazing amount of software.

Yet almost in the same breath Steve Jobs says–

This is an important tradeoff between security and openness. We want both. We’re working through a way… we’ll find a way to let 3rd parties write apps and still preserve security on the iPhone. But until we find that way we can’t compromise the security of the phone.

I’ve used 3rd party apps… the more you add, the more your phone crashes. No one’s perfect, and we’d sure like our phone not to crash once a day. If you can just be a little more patient with us I think everyone can get what they want.

“Until we find a way to run third party software reliably on OS X”– as if Macs hadn’t been been running third part software reliably for years. Is the iPhone’s version of OS X uniquely vulnerable to bad software, contrary to Job’s claims that the iPhone runs “real” OSX?

3rd party apps should not be able to crash OS X. As for security, Java based phones have long demonstrated a sandbox and signing model that protects user security. By and large sandboxes and signing have worked quite well to protect users.

Job’s FUD has little to do with protecting users and everything to do with protecting Apple and Cingular’s AT&T’s profit margins and control over users.