People proclaimed that traditional Client/Server apps were passe
I don't remember anyone saying it like that at all. Of course, I'm really rusty on what "traditional client/server app" means.
Quote:
and now all we see is people bitching for REAL applications.
Are these the same people?
Quote:
What Real Apps do you want?
IM?
Quicken Lite?
What?
A lot of the apps in the directory would be good starters. Webapps undoubtedly have their strengths, but it would be nice to have simple apps that aren't affected by weak signal strength, latency and low bandwidth, which I feel might hit me pretty hard. For me, I get just above barely usable voice signals for all the major carriers, but I fear data is another questioni if I leave my hotspot then I'm out of luck. Any app that would otherwise not need a network connection at all are saddled with these concerns.
Creating a stripped-down website and applying a little Ajax styling does not an application make. Websites are fine for viewing infrequently-accessed information (like restaurant addresses or opening hours), but pretty lame for anything processor or data intensive, or for actions the user may want to perform when not within range of a data network.
Web "apps" and native apps both have their place. I'm perfectly happy to access news and sports by surfing to a website or via a web app "aggregator." However, if I want to play a game, access a large database of specialist information (e.g. medical, legal, engineering), or dictate into a voice recorder, I would want to do it through a native application. Speed, responsiveness and lack of network overhead are important in such circumstances, and web apps just can't deliver. The problem is made even worse when these apps have to squeeze themselves through the horribly outdated EDGE network. If Apple was really serious about Web apps, they would have insisted the iPhone had 3G capability.
As it stands, web apps look like a real afterthought. It's almost as if the phone was fully designed and in production when someone mentioned to His Steveness, "Ya know, just about every other smartphone can install and run applications. Aren't people going to wonder why ours can't?" It was too late to do anything about the problem, so some bright spark thought up the idea of calling websites "applications" and hoping nobody would notice.
People proclaimed that traditional Client/Server apps were passe and now all we see is people bitching for REAL applications.
What Real Apps do you want?
IM?
Quicken Lite?
What?
Your logic is just daft. Yes, there's an industry buzz about moving away from client server for desktop based users- i.e. where you have a persistent network connection. Doesn't work quite so well on a MOBILE DEVICE. The only time I have a persistent wifi connection for my iPod Touch is when I'm at home or in the office- those being the only times I have b*gger-all need to use my iPod Touch since I have a laptop to pass my time on.
Might be nice if Apple gave some thought to how people are actually going to use these Apps. In my case, I'd like to use them during the 2 hours a day I spend bored out of my mind underground on the Tube which, for the unaware, has zero wifi connectivity whatsoever. Making all of these apps (I need wifi to write a friggin' todo list before work???) less than worthless. I'm guessing a lot of Apple's customers who commute to work by bus or train feel the same way. And who knows, it might just be a nice little marketing tool if bored London commuters got to see people playing games on an iPod Touch next to them on the Tube. Gee, it's a win-win for Apple and their customers...
Your logic is just daft. Yes, there's an industry buzz about moving away from client server for desktop based users- i.e. where you have a persistent network connection. Doesn't work quite so well on a MOBILE DEVICE. The only time I have a persistent wifi connection for my iPod Touch is when I'm at home or in the office- those being the only times I have b*gger-all need to use my iPod Touch since I have a laptop to pass my time on.
Might be nice if Apple gave some thought to how people are actually going to use these Apps. In my case, I'd like to use them during the 2 hours a day I spend bored out of my mind underground on the Tube which, for the unaware, has zero wifi connectivity whatsoever. Making all of these apps (I need wifi to write a friggin' todo list before work???) less than worthless. I'm guessing a lot of Apple's customers who commute to work by bus or train feel the same way. And who knows, it might just be a nice little marketing tool if bored London commuters got to see people playing games on an iPod Touch next to them on the Tube. Gee, it's a win-win for Apple and their customers...
Give us offline Apps dammit!
Couldn't agree more!
The need for these mini-apps is when you don't have Wi-Fi access (particularly for the iTouch) - who wants to have to have a Wi-Fi connection to play Sudoku?!
Web-Apps are cool for certain apps that need the resources of the Web, but for most of these, a native app is what's wanted/needed.
- the people at Apple aren't crazy/dumb enough not to realise this
- so they must have their own reasons for disallowing the obvious...
- maybe it's just His Steveness wants to keep control
- or maybe they're having trouble figuring out what should be in a proper SDK (C++?, Java?)
- whatever, they seem to be missing out on a great opertunity to make the iTouch, and the iPhone, really useful, compelling devices.
Apple couldn't even be bothered to create an iPhone-formatted version of this directory - or, put another way, they didn't optimize their optimized web apps for iPhone web page for iPhone.
Apple lately reminds me of Sideshow Bob stepping on rakes.
Now just a little bit of hatred for web "apps":
Anything useful will require a signon and password. That's just incredibly lame - Apple should make an authentication portal for single sign-on.
Or, they could just admit that what they really created is a handheld computer, and let people write REAL PROGRAMS for it. Hey whatever.
you think even at&t would want to keep people off thier data network as much as possible so the whole web app thing would be making things worse for thier puiny edge connection . Who cares all is good on the apptap side of the fence anyways!
I'd check the latency of higher speed networks as they often increase throughput at the expense of higher latency. Too many people look at the wrong spec. and with multiple users in the cell all checking out the latest videos a data system which doesn't pretend to be all that good may be the better option. Especially if the product and network have a symbiotic alignment because of, let's say, a tie-in
McD
I'm browsing AI on 3G now. The latency is noticeable if you look for it, compared with ADSL broadband, but not a big inconvenience. I don't notice it in a normal browsing session, as often I'm loading multiple pages in tabs anyway rather than wanting instant feedback on clicking a link.
It's worse for things like SSH, because there's a small lag between keystroke and character appearing. That may be due to the multitude of proxy servers I'm going through to get around a stupid port 80 only limitation, though.
I'm browsing AI on 3G now. The latency is noticeable if you look for it, compared with ADSL broadband, but not a big inconvenience. I don't notice it in a normal browsing session, as often I'm loading multiple pages in tabs anyway rather than wanting instant feedback on clicking a link.
It's worse for things like SSH, because there's a small lag between keystroke and character appearing. That may be due to the multitude of proxy servers I'm going through to get around a stupid port 80 only limitation, though.
Amorya
Does you phone/plan also allow you to use SSH over EDGE? (for comparison)
I take it 3G allows you to load all the adds on AI quicker!
yeah, imagine that, it's EXACTLY like you were told it would be LONG before it was released.
i bet you bitch at the clouds when it rains, too.
What we were told is the iPhone runs OS X, not a stripped down OS like other smart phones has the real internet and email, and that it was going to be better than other smart phones in all ways. Most of us expected it to be less limited than other smart phones, but what we got was a toy with limited capabilities.
I wish Apple would unlock the full potential of the phone.
I wish Apple would unlock the full potential of the phone.
Apple never unlock the 'full potential' of any of their products on account of it also opening the potential to ruin slick & usable design replacing it with load of functions few people will ever use. Prohibition has taught us that ground conceded can rarely (if ever) be re-taken so they have to be extremely careful. It can be annoying, especially as the others curry favour through choice, but ultimately they make better products for it.
Does you phone/plan also allow you to use SSH over EDGE? (for comparison)
I take it 3G allows you to load all the adds on AI quicker!
McD
I don't think my phone or network can do EDGE at all, to be honest. The fallback (for where there is no 3G) is GPRS, which is even slower. I haven't tried the net on that much, so I don't know, but I suspect SSH is blocked there too -- it's just a stupid restriction by the wonderful company that is Three UK.
I don't think my phone or network can do EDGE at all, to be honest. The fallback (for where there is no 3G) is GPRS, which is even slower. I haven't tried the net on that much, so I don't know, but I suspect SSH is blocked there too -- it's just a stupid restriction by the wonderful company that is Three UK.
I think we're always going to have these restrictions from providers to protect their own interests. My ISP throttles traffic that it believes o be 'illegal' making them the judge & jury even though I can create an identical digital copy of a TV show 'legally' by buying a DVR from my local retailer.
There's another thread going about opening the iPhone so developers can try their own software. I think the proposal is to break the fundamental design so they can play around adding software (skype's been mentioned a few times) only then to find the ISP will throttle it? Not the brightest, I guess if they were they'd be real developers!
Apple never unlock the 'full potential' of any of their products on account of it also opening the potential to ruin slick & usable design replacing it with load of functions few people will ever use. Prohibition has taught us that ground conceded can rarely (if ever) be re-taken so they have to be extremely careful. It can be annoying, especially as the others curry favour through choice, but ultimately they make better products for it.
McD
OK, I would be happy with 80% of its potential. With Steve's announcement about the SDK we will finally get what we want so it doesnt matter anymore.
Comments
People proclaimed that traditional Client/Server apps were passe
I don't remember anyone saying it like that at all. Of course, I'm really rusty on what "traditional client/server app" means.
and now all we see is people bitching for REAL applications.
Are these the same people?
What Real Apps do you want?
IM?
Quicken Lite?
What?
A lot of the apps in the directory would be good starters. Webapps undoubtedly have their strengths, but it would be nice to have simple apps that aren't affected by weak signal strength, latency and low bandwidth, which I feel might hit me pretty hard. For me, I get just above barely usable voice signals for all the major carriers, but I fear data is another questioni if I leave my hotspot then I'm out of luck. Any app that would otherwise not need a network connection at all are saddled with these concerns.
Web "apps" and native apps both have their place. I'm perfectly happy to access news and sports by surfing to a website or via a web app "aggregator." However, if I want to play a game, access a large database of specialist information (e.g. medical, legal, engineering), or dictate into a voice recorder, I would want to do it through a native application. Speed, responsiveness and lack of network overhead are important in such circumstances, and web apps just can't deliver. The problem is made even worse when these apps have to squeeze themselves through the horribly outdated EDGE network. If Apple was really serious about Web apps, they would have insisted the iPhone had 3G capability.
As it stands, web apps look like a real afterthought. It's almost as if the phone was fully designed and in production when someone mentioned to His Steveness, "Ya know, just about every other smartphone can install and run applications. Aren't people going to wonder why ours can't?" It was too late to do anything about the problem, so some bright spark thought up the idea of calling websites "applications" and hoping nobody would notice.
Totally hilarious.
People proclaimed that traditional Client/Server apps were passe and now all we see is people bitching for REAL applications.
What Real Apps do you want?
IM?
Quicken Lite?
What?
Your logic is just daft. Yes, there's an industry buzz about moving away from client server for desktop based users- i.e. where you have a persistent network connection. Doesn't work quite so well on a MOBILE DEVICE. The only time I have a persistent wifi connection for my iPod Touch is when I'm at home or in the office- those being the only times I have b*gger-all need to use my iPod Touch since I have a laptop to pass my time on.
Might be nice if Apple gave some thought to how people are actually going to use these Apps. In my case, I'd like to use them during the 2 hours a day I spend bored out of my mind underground on the Tube which, for the unaware, has zero wifi connectivity whatsoever. Making all of these apps (I need wifi to write a friggin' todo list before work???) less than worthless. I'm guessing a lot of Apple's customers who commute to work by bus or train feel the same way. And who knows, it might just be a nice little marketing tool if bored London commuters got to see people playing games on an iPod Touch next to them on the Tube. Gee, it's a win-win for Apple and their customers...
Give us offline Apps dammit!
Your logic is just daft. Yes, there's an industry buzz about moving away from client server for desktop based users- i.e. where you have a persistent network connection. Doesn't work quite so well on a MOBILE DEVICE. The only time I have a persistent wifi connection for my iPod Touch is when I'm at home or in the office- those being the only times I have b*gger-all need to use my iPod Touch since I have a laptop to pass my time on.
Might be nice if Apple gave some thought to how people are actually going to use these Apps. In my case, I'd like to use them during the 2 hours a day I spend bored out of my mind underground on the Tube which, for the unaware, has zero wifi connectivity whatsoever. Making all of these apps (I need wifi to write a friggin' todo list before work???) less than worthless. I'm guessing a lot of Apple's customers who commute to work by bus or train feel the same way. And who knows, it might just be a nice little marketing tool if bored London commuters got to see people playing games on an iPod Touch next to them on the Tube. Gee, it's a win-win for Apple and their customers...
Give us offline Apps dammit!
Couldn't agree more!
The need for these mini-apps is when you don't have Wi-Fi access (particularly for the iTouch) - who wants to have to have a Wi-Fi connection to play Sudoku?!
Web-Apps are cool for certain apps that need the resources of the Web, but for most of these, a native app is what's wanted/needed.
- the people at Apple aren't crazy/dumb enough not to realise this
- so they must have their own reasons for disallowing the obvious...
- maybe it's just His Steveness wants to keep control
- or maybe they're having trouble figuring out what should be in a proper SDK (C++?, Java?)
- whatever, they seem to be missing out on a great opertunity to make the iTouch, and the iPhone, really useful, compelling devices.
Apple couldn't even be bothered to create an iPhone-formatted version of this directory - or, put another way, they didn't optimize their optimized web apps for iPhone web page for iPhone.
Apple lately reminds me of Sideshow Bob stepping on rakes.
Now just a little bit of hatred for web "apps":
Anything useful will require a signon and password. That's just incredibly lame - Apple should make an authentication portal for single sign-on.
Or, they could just admit that what they really created is a handheld computer, and let people write REAL PROGRAMS for it. Hey whatever.
Totally hilarious.
People proclaimed that traditional Client/Server apps were passe and now all we see is people bitching for REAL applications.
What Real Apps do you want?
IM?
Quicken Lite?
What?
Well I would like a password manager that lives on my iPhone and not the web.
I'd check the latency of higher speed networks as they often increase throughput at the expense of higher latency. Too many people look at the wrong spec. and with multiple users in the cell all checking out the latest videos a data system which doesn't pretend to be all that good may be the better option. Especially if the product and network have a symbiotic alignment because of, let's say, a tie-in
McD
I'm browsing AI on 3G now. The latency is noticeable if you look for it, compared with ADSL broadband, but not a big inconvenience. I don't notice it in a normal browsing session, as often I'm loading multiple pages in tabs anyway rather than wanting instant feedback on clicking a link.
It's worse for things like SSH, because there's a small lag between keystroke and character appearing. That may be due to the multitude of proxy servers I'm going through to get around a stupid port 80 only limitation, though.
Amorya
I'm browsing AI on 3G now. The latency is noticeable if you look for it, compared with ADSL broadband, but not a big inconvenience. I don't notice it in a normal browsing session, as often I'm loading multiple pages in tabs anyway rather than wanting instant feedback on clicking a link.
It's worse for things like SSH, because there's a small lag between keystroke and character appearing. That may be due to the multitude of proxy servers I'm going through to get around a stupid port 80 only limitation, though.
Amorya
Does you phone/plan also allow you to use SSH over EDGE? (for comparison)
I take it 3G allows you to load all the adds on AI quicker!
McD
yeah, imagine that, it's EXACTLY like you were told it would be LONG before it was released.
i bet you bitch at the clouds when it rains, too.
What we were told is the iPhone runs OS X, not a stripped down OS like other smart phones has the real internet and email, and that it was going to be better than other smart phones in all ways. Most of us expected it to be less limited than other smart phones, but what we got was a toy with limited capabilities.
I wish Apple would unlock the full potential of the phone.
I wish Apple would unlock the full potential of the phone.
Apple never unlock the 'full potential' of any of their products on account of it also opening the potential to ruin slick & usable design replacing it with load of functions few people will ever use. Prohibition has taught us that ground conceded can rarely (if ever) be re-taken so they have to be extremely careful. It can be annoying, especially as the others curry favour through choice, but ultimately they make better products for it.
McD
Does you phone/plan also allow you to use SSH over EDGE? (for comparison)
I take it 3G allows you to load all the adds on AI quicker!
McD
I don't think my phone or network can do EDGE at all, to be honest. The fallback (for where there is no 3G) is GPRS, which is even slower. I haven't tried the net on that much, so I don't know, but I suspect SSH is blocked there too -- it's just a stupid restriction by the wonderful company that is Three UK.
I don't think my phone or network can do EDGE at all, to be honest. The fallback (for where there is no 3G) is GPRS, which is even slower. I haven't tried the net on that much, so I don't know, but I suspect SSH is blocked there too -- it's just a stupid restriction by the wonderful company that is Three UK.
I think we're always going to have these restrictions from providers to protect their own interests. My ISP throttles traffic that it believes o be 'illegal' making them the judge & jury even though I can create an identical digital copy of a TV show 'legally' by buying a DVR from my local retailer.
There's another thread going about opening the iPhone so developers can try their own software. I think the proposal is to break the fundamental design so they can play around adding software (skype's been mentioned a few times) only then to find the ISP will throttle it? Not the brightest, I guess if they were they'd be real developers!
McD
Apple never unlock the 'full potential' of any of their products on account of it also opening the potential to ruin slick & usable design replacing it with load of functions few people will ever use. Prohibition has taught us that ground conceded can rarely (if ever) be re-taken so they have to be extremely careful. It can be annoying, especially as the others curry favour through choice, but ultimately they make better products for it.
McD
OK, I would be happy with 80% of its potential. With Steve's announcement about the SDK we will finally get what we want so it doesnt matter anymore.
OK, I would be happy with 80% of its potential. With Steve's announcement about the SDK we will finally get what we want so it doesnt matter anymore.
Fair point
McD