[Vincent Ferrari]

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/13...s-in-app-store/

"Yesterday Apple began approving third party Web browsers for distribution via the iTunes App Store reports MacRumors. Previously to this sudden about-face iPhone Web browsers wanting to compete with Mobile Safari, Apple's bundled and pre-docked Web browser, were considered off limits because they "duplicated functionality" already on the iPhone."

Shown above is a new replacement browser called Incognito, which is designed to not keep history of any kind.  Browse what you want, close the app, and adios history!  Great for browsing "those site," if you know what I mean (wink wink).  Pretty interesting that Apple's changed their stance on this one, seeing as browsers interpret code and duplicate functionality, both of which are reasons other apps have been rejected from the iTunes Store.

[Vincent Ferrari]

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/13...s-in-app-store/

"Yesterday Apple began approving third party Web browsers for distribution via the iTunes App Store reports MacRumors. Previously to this sudden about-face iPhone Web browsers wanting to compete with Mobile Safari, Apple's bundled and pre-docked Web browser, were considered off limits because they "duplicated functionality" already on the iPhone."

Shown above is a new replacement browser called Incognito, which is designed to not keep history of any kind.  Browse what you want, close the app, and adios history!  Great for browsing "those site," if you know what I mean (wink wink).  Pretty interesting that Apple's changed their stance on this one, seeing as browsers interpret code and duplicate functionality, both of which are reasons other apps have been rejected from the iTunes Store.

[crimsonsky]

IIRC, Opera had submitted an iPhone version of their mobile browser and it was rejected. I wonder if they'll resubmit it now given that they are an established and well known player in the field.

This whole thing hi-lights the entire madness of the App Store and why I hate it. The App Store is full of junky apps that serve no real purpose but decent apps get rejected for some capricious whim of Apple. The arbitrariness of the whole App Store is a humongous turn-off for me.

When Laridian's Pocket Bible standalone app is finally available I'll probably buy another Touch. That program and eReader are compelling reasons to me to own the Touch. But the App Store is a disaster to me. If I had to put up with this mess buying Windows Mobile apps, I would have abandoned WM years ago. Sheesh.

[ucfgrad93]

I have to say, I'm very surprised by this. I wonder how long it will last.

[Macguy59]

Are these really new "browsers" or just a different UI for Safari ?

[Vincent Ferrari]

Originally Posted by crimsonsky

IIRC, Opera had submitted an iPhone version of their mobile browser and it was rejected. I wonder if they'll resubmit it now given that they are an established and well known player in the field.

Doubt it; I heard somewhere today that Apple will allow Webkit-based browsers only, so Opera wouldn't apply (although Opera technically isn't a browser, it's a remote window to the Opera servers). This is still good news, though.

[marvi1]

Why would I want to pay for a browser? A game? Sure. A browser, though?

[crimsonsky]

Originally Posted by Vincent Ferrari

Doubt it; I heard somewhere today that Apple will allow Webkit-based browsers only, so Opera wouldn't apply (although Opera technically isn't a browser, it's a remote window to the Opera servers). This is still good news, though.

You're thinking Opera Mini. The full version of Opera is a standalone browser, although it's not based on WebKit. I don't recall which version Opera had submitted.

No biggie. I found mobile Safari alone to be more than good enough and when I do get another Touch, I'll probably just stick with it.