I spent 2 years writing enterprise class logistics applications in Java and WebObjects. I can assure you that there are plenty of security vulnerabilities with Java applications. Yes most phone applications are written in Java, but then again, most mobile phone applications are crap!
This is exactly what I was thinking for those who are trying to say Java is the way to go. My only experience with Java apps on my Samsung phones (not exactly smartphones, but still) is that they are horribly slow loading, and just not nearly as responsive as I would like. I may be unique here, but I doubt it, but I am even less patience with my phone than I am with my computer. I expect the screen to just pop when I click on something, I don't want any lag. Java does the opposite by giving you a good 10-20 second loading screen anytime you touch a java app, NOT the way to go.
errrr.... What? I can do almost anything on a WM phone that I can do on a desktop as far as the interweb is concerned. I understand somethings aren't particulary easy, but normal people won't use half the features and power a smart device gives them.
Of course that's the whole point of the iPhone - the reason its revolutionary
So if it has Wi-Fi and Safari, then who needs third party applications? Developers can do pretty much everything they want with web apps.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
Not necessarily true with Google's announcement of Google Gears. Gears is a 700kb html/javascript package that allows web applications to work offline. It remains to be seen how well it works but there's lots of thought going in to making web based applications work well without the internet being there. It's especially important if you're on a data package on a phone where you're paying by the byte rather than an unlimited data package.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app?
I think I'll be fine. Personally I don't use many 3rd party apps even on my desktop, aside from creative suite which I'm not expecting a mobile version of. I'm also near charging sources all day long as I go to and from office to car to home. It's not even that hard to get a plugin at the airport or coffee shop now days.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
A lot of this depends on just how portable the maker wants their app to be.
If they don't care as much, then speed can be increased by using features of the specific OS and hardware, even adding API's, the way MS tried to do with Java on Windows.
3G covers only 10% of the US, if even. And WiFi is growing a lot faster, and it's faster, and free in a lot of places. That's why the iPhone didn't need it in the US, yet. Europe is a different matter.
Geographically (i.e. square miles covered), US 3G coverage may be close to the 10% figure you cite, I'm not sure. But population-wise, its a very different matter. Both Sprint's and Verizon's 3G networks cover around 70% of the US population, and they should be well over 80% by the end of the year. Gotta remember, in the US, there are huge swaths of land that have very low population densities.
ATT/Cingular is a different matter... they're about a year behind Verizon in Sprint in 3G deployment. And they're so embarrassed about it that's its a bit hard to find out how many million people their 3G network currently covers (though as of last September, it was around 25% of US population). But their EDGE 2.5G network covers 90% of US population. Very good coverage, if you can handle the 'not much better than dialup' speeds.
Absolutely right! Those unsightly [Lane Bryant] behemoths were getting on my nerves, too. I had to refresh the page 3 or 4 times, before giving up and clicking ahead to the Comments just to avoid being tortured by their appalling corpulent carcasses.
Meh. Some guys like 'em thick. Who am I to judge?
Personally, I dig athletic women, the 'Jessica Biel' body type. But little stick-figure women like Nicole Richie or Calista Flockhart are a bigger turn-off than the Lane Bryant heifers (to me). It's like, "You've got the body of a 13-year old boy. Why am I supposed to be attracted to you again? It's not like I'm Michael Jackson."
Personally, I dig athletic women, the 'Jessica Biel' body type. But little stick-figure women like Nicole Richie or Calista Flockhart are a bigger turn-off than the Lane Bryant heifers (to me). It's like, "You've got the body of a 13-year old boy. Why am I supposed to be attracted to you again? It's not like I'm Michael Jackson."
.
But, but, since he's also in "parts unknown" right now, I naturally thought that the two of you were together.
I looked at your "location" and was thinking about your referral to Michael Jackson.
Ah, my apologies. Onlooker, who posted in this thread, is also listed as being 'from parts unknown'. That was the monkey wrench in your funny.
Yeah, sorry, I guess your MJ joke was just a lil' too 'mondo obscuro' for me, though your MJ observation is 100% true. Also, I'm not a 13-yr old boy, and MJ wouldn't be with anything else. I guess I'm just too literal/logical.
In any case, I'm out. All this talk of Calista Flockhart's boyish physique and Michael Jackson has added up to the most disturbing thread ever.
Ah, my apologies. Onlooker, who posted in this thread, is also listed as being 'from parts unknown'. That was the monkey wrench in your funny.
Yeah, sorry, I guess your MJ joke was just a lil' too 'mondo obscuro' for me, though your MJ observation is 100% true. Also, I'm not a 13-yr old boy, and MJ wouldn't be with anything else. I guess I'm just too literal/logical.
In any case, I'm out. All this talk of Calista Flockhart's boyish physique and Michael Jackson has added up to the most disturbing thread ever.
Funny, I get 3G service on Sprint nearly everywhere I travel in US metro cities.
Wifi is rarely free, you have to fork out $10/day at nearly every hotel, Starbucks or airport in the country, which is a huge ripoff. I know, I travel on business throughout the US, all the time! This seems like a ridiculous business model, if indeed Apple/iPhone is depending in wifi for internet functionality. 3G would have been MUCH better IMHO.
While it is rare, I've come across two major free public Wi-Fi networks. One in the middle of downtown Chicago, and the other in the airport in Portland. I'm wondering if it's less about the provider or phone manufacturer than it is about the need of third party companies to make money whenever and where ever they can.
Comments
I spent 2 years writing enterprise class logistics applications in Java and WebObjects. I can assure you that there are plenty of security vulnerabilities with Java applications. Yes most phone applications are written in Java, but then again, most mobile phone applications are crap!
This is exactly what I was thinking for those who are trying to say Java is the way to go. My only experience with Java apps on my Samsung phones (not exactly smartphones, but still) is that they are horribly slow loading, and just not nearly as responsive as I would like. I may be unique here, but I doubt it, but I am even less patience with my phone than I am with my computer. I expect the screen to just pop when I click on something, I don't want any lag. Java does the opposite by giving you a good 10-20 second loading screen anytime you touch a java app, NOT the way to go.
www.ITFinanceGuy.com
errrr.... What? I can do almost anything on a WM phone that I can do on a desktop as far as the interweb is concerned. I understand somethings aren't particulary easy, but normal people won't use half the features and power a smart device gives them.
Of course that's the whole point of the iPhone - the reason its revolutionary
So if it has Wi-Fi and Safari, then who needs third party applications? Developers can do pretty much everything they want with web apps.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
Not necessarily true with Google's announcement of Google Gears. Gears is a 700kb html/javascript package that allows web applications to work offline. It remains to be seen how well it works but there's lots of thought going in to making web based applications work well without the internet being there. It's especially important if you're on a data package on a phone where you're paying by the byte rather than an unlimited data package.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app?
I think I'll be fine. Personally I don't use many 3rd party apps even on my desktop, aside from creative suite which I'm not expecting a mobile version of. I'm also near charging sources all day long as I go to and from office to car to home. It's not even that hard to get a plugin at the airport or coffee shop now days.
But can you do them with the same latency as a local app? I know that Gmail and Gdocs are giong to be crap over EDGE. I'd also rather keep my RF activity to a minimum to preserve battery life. It would probably take a lot of processing to exceed the power consumption of using a radio as a substitute.
A lot of this depends on just how portable the maker wants their app to be.
If they don't care as much, then speed can be increased by using features of the specific OS and hardware, even adding API's, the way MS tried to do with Java on Windows.
3G covers only 10% of the US, if even. And WiFi is growing a lot faster, and it's faster, and free in a lot of places. That's why the iPhone didn't need it in the US, yet. Europe is a different matter.
Geographically (i.e. square miles covered), US 3G coverage may be close to the 10% figure you cite, I'm not sure. But population-wise, its a very different matter. Both Sprint's and Verizon's 3G networks cover around 70% of the US population, and they should be well over 80% by the end of the year. Gotta remember, in the US, there are huge swaths of land that have very low population densities.
ATT/Cingular is a different matter... they're about a year behind Verizon in Sprint in 3G deployment. And they're so embarrassed about it that's its a bit hard to find out how many million people their 3G network currently covers (though as of last September, it was around 25% of US population). But their EDGE 2.5G network covers 90% of US population. Very good coverage, if you can handle the 'not much better than dialup' speeds.
.
I actually am a female that reads the forums, however, I rarely post. I registered just to make you all aware there are some females!!!
No! Get out! GET OUT!!!
Just kiddin...
I actually am a female that reads the forums, however, I rarely post. I registered just to make you all aware there are some females!!!
Feeling like some Lane Bryant clothes lately?
Absolutely right! Those unsightly [Lane Bryant] behemoths were getting on my nerves, too. I had to refresh the page 3 or 4 times, before giving up and clicking ahead to the Comments just to avoid being tortured by their appalling corpulent carcasses.
Meh. Some guys like 'em thick. Who am I to judge?
Personally, I dig athletic women, the 'Jessica Biel' body type. But little stick-figure women like Nicole Richie or Calista Flockhart are a bigger turn-off than the Lane Bryant heifers (to me). It's like, "You've got the body of a 13-year old boy. Why am I supposed to be attracted to you again? It's not like I'm Michael Jackson."
.
Meh. Some guys like 'em thick. Who am I to judge?
Personally, I dig athletic women, the 'Jessica Biel' body type. But little stick-figure women like Nicole Richie or Calista Flockhart are a bigger turn-off than the Lane Bryant heifers (to me). It's like, "You've got the body of a 13-year old boy. Why am I supposed to be attracted to you again? It's not like I'm Michael Jackson."
.
But, but, since he's also in "parts unknown" right now, I naturally thought that the two of you were together.
You're not?
But, but, since he's also in "parts unknown" right now, I naturally thought that the two of you were together.
You're not?
No, actually its Onlooker who's from parts unknown. The guy I replied to is listed as being from Las Vegas.
Good attempt at a joke, though. I was right there with ya man. Really, I was.
.
No, actually its Onlooker who's from parts unknown. The guy I replied to is listed as being from Las Vegas.
Good attempt at a joke, though. I was right there with ya man. Really, I was.
.
I think we slid right by one another on this.
I looked at your "location" and was thinking about your referral to Michael Jackson.
"It's like giving a glass of ice water to somebody that's in hell."
I laughed out loud when he said that too. If the same statement came from Ballmer or Gates, it just wouldn't resonate.
I think we slid right by one another on this.
I looked at your "location" and was thinking about your referral to Michael Jackson.
Ah, my apologies. Onlooker, who posted in this thread, is also listed as being 'from parts unknown'. That was the monkey wrench in your funny.
Yeah, sorry, I guess your MJ joke was just a lil' too 'mondo obscuro' for me, though your MJ observation is 100% true. Also, I'm not a 13-yr old boy, and MJ wouldn't be with anything else. I guess I'm just too literal/logical.
In any case, I'm out. All this talk of Calista Flockhart's boyish physique and Michael Jackson has added up to the most disturbing thread ever.
.
Ah, my apologies. Onlooker, who posted in this thread, is also listed as being 'from parts unknown'. That was the monkey wrench in your funny.
Yeah, sorry, I guess your MJ joke was just a lil' too 'mondo obscuro' for me, though your MJ observation is 100% true. Also, I'm not a 13-yr old boy, and MJ wouldn't be with anything else. I guess I'm just too literal/logical.
In any case, I'm out. All this talk of Calista Flockhart's boyish physique and Michael Jackson has added up to the most disturbing thread ever.
.
Wait! We just got started!
Funny, I get 3G service on Sprint nearly everywhere I travel in US metro cities.
Wifi is rarely free, you have to fork out $10/day at nearly every hotel, Starbucks or airport in the country, which is a huge ripoff. I know, I travel on business throughout the US, all the time! This seems like a ridiculous business model, if indeed Apple/iPhone is depending in wifi for internet functionality. 3G would have been MUCH better IMHO.
While it is rare, I've come across two major free public Wi-Fi networks. One in the middle of downtown Chicago, and the other in the airport in Portland. I'm wondering if it's less about the provider or phone manufacturer than it is about the need of third party companies to make money whenever and where ever they can.