Ok, so couple of the Adobe guys got all wound up over my previous post about "welcome to the browser market", as they don't want the notion that Apollo only exist as a browser out there (fear of being typecast as a one-trick pony, which is perfectly fine to want to change messaging around).

On one hand "it's not a browser" slogan gets thrown out there (via raiding comments in other peoples sites etc via Adobe staff), but then when you watch Mike Chambers doing a "Channel 9 Scoble" style interview with Christian Cantrell’s, one of the first applications being spun up by Adobe is both Google Maps having vCard access  - and - Amazon.com being surfed within a browser like model.

Now, argue with all on semantics as much as you want, but when you see stuff like this in full view with Adobe staff as the ones running it.

It just sends mixed signals.

My take? I think positioning Adobe Apollo better if you don't like the browser arguments flowing, as it's primitive use can be forked easily enough. Apollo Trillian is an Application, Amazing.com + Apollo is a browser expansion pack.

I think the error in all of this is simple, when you bolt in a browser (WebKit) as being part of the Apollo runtime, its easy for people to associate it as that.

It's still alpha however and beta may adjust this perspective further, so sorry JD "Apps are in part still browsers".