Engadget App

basesloaded190

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Oct 16, 2007
2,691
5
Wisconsin
Engadget has just released their own App today. Its free and after playing around with it for a few minutes, it looks well done. Why can't macrumors do something similar to this!?
 

hitekalex

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2008
1,625
0
Chicago, USA
Completely pointless.

All that Engadget needed to do is to develop a decent mobile version of its website. As opposed to developing a custom "app" for iPhone, Android, WebOS, WinMo, etc.

There no need for iPhone app for every website. MacRumors is perfectly accessible via Safari.
 

Prospekt

macrumors regular
Jul 5, 2009
242
16
Cool app, though I hate the icon...I really don't understand why developers make the background of the icon black it is horrible
 

Clete2

macrumors 65816
Sep 20, 2008
1,069
24
USA
Cool app, though I hate the icon...I really don't understand why developers make the background of the icon black it is horrible
This is the first time I have seen it. I think it looks nice. Engadget's logo is awesome.
 

TraceyS/FL

macrumors 601
Jan 11, 2007
4,047
185
North Central Florida
I loaded this last night - i was trying to read a few things from my Twitter feed, and they were crashing (i think this is related to my safari crashing problem). After 4 times of the same story crashing in the same spot, i downloaded the app.

I really like it - way easier to read stories and pick what i might want to read. THe app is on my extra pages - so i can't comment on the icon! LOL!!
 

zhenya

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2005
6,360
2,826
Completely pointless.

All that Engadget needed to do is to develop a decent mobile version of its website. As opposed to developing a custom "app" for iPhone, Android, WebOS, WinMo, etc.

There no need for iPhone app for every website. MacRumors is perfectly accessible via Safari.

Agreed. This (along with no facility to demo expensive apps) is one of my major complaints with the App store. I don't WANT an app for every website I visit!! Just make the freaking site work on a mobile browser. Same thing for books - the entire point of in-app purchases is that you can buy one app and then extend it. Why are they allowing the app store to be cluttered up by tens of thousands of book apps that are really just one book? Especially with no reasonable way to search. (And no, Search doesn't work - try searching descriptively for something you are looking for but don't know the name of. If the name doesn't partially match your search, oh well.)
 

superflush

macrumors 6502a
Apr 6, 2009
508
3
Completely pointless.

All that Engadget needed to do is to develop a decent mobile version of its website. As opposed to developing a custom "app" for iPhone, Android, WebOS, WinMo, etc.

There no need for iPhone app for every website. MacRumors is perfectly accessible via Safari.
Not true. This app gives us the availability to cache the posts to read them offline ... very useful for people without a data plan or with an iPod Touch.
 

hitekalex

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2008
1,625
0
Chicago, USA
Not true. This app gives us the availability to cache the posts to read them offline ... very useful for people without a data plan or with an iPod Touch.
Use an RSS reader.. which will also work for all/many websites, not just Engadget/Macrumors/etc. What a concept, eh?

Let me say it again.. the iPhone apps like Engadget's are pointless. They are nothing more than a marketing gimmick and "gee look at me - I too have an iPhone app". I hope MacRumors don't fall into the same trap.
 

superflush

macrumors 6502a
Apr 6, 2009
508
3
Use an RSS reader.. which will also work for all/many websites, not just Engadget/Macrumors/etc. What a concept, eh?

Let me say it again.. the iPhone apps like Engadget's are pointless. They are nothing more than a marketing gimmick and "gee look at me - I too have an iPhone app". I hope MacRumors don't fall into the same trap.
Not everyone puts their full articles in RSS feeds. The New York Times for example ... so having their app is really useful.
 

redboxcar

macrumors 6502
Oct 20, 2009
260
32
Agreed. This (along with no facility to demo expensive apps) is one of my major complaints with the App store. I don't WANT an app for every website I visit!! Just make the freaking site work on a mobile browser. Same thing for books - the entire point of in-app purchases is that you can buy one app and then extend it. Why are they allowing the app store to be cluttered up by tens of thousands of book apps that are really just one book? Especially with no reasonable way to search. (And no, Search doesn't work - try searching descriptively for something you are looking for but don't know the name of. If the name doesn't partially match your search, oh well.)
I kinda disagree - I like the idea of an app for every website I visit. They're like better bookmarks. :D
 

iTeleport

macrumors member
Jul 11, 2008
66
0
Use an RSS reader.. which will also work for all/many websites, not just Engadget/Macrumors/etc. What a concept, eh?
There's nothing pointless at all about such an app, which adds value to a website. Here is what my RSS reader had this morning on a MR article:

What is the Ultimate Role of the Apple Tablet?
from MacRumors : Mac News and Rumors
While we normally avoid purely speculative pieces here on MacRumors, John Gruber has posted a particularly interesting opinion piece on what void or need the Apple Tablet might fill. Gruber acknowledges that this is not based on inside knowledge, bu...
Pretty pointless huh? A MacRumors app should download all the stories so I can read them offline before they're snipped. It's not just MR that does this snipping in RSS feeds so I would use individual apps to download and save articles.

Let me say it again.. the iPhone apps like Engadget's are pointless. They are nothing more than a marketing gimmick and "gee look at me - I too have an iPhone app". I hope MacRumors don't fall into the same trap.
They're not pointless at all, as described above. It's a nice piece of marketing, but so long as the app is feature rich and offers at least one additional difference to the website then it's not a gimmick.

I sincerely hope MacRumors does jump onto the App Store. It has to integrate the forums though, and download X number of threads from my favourite forum sections. Would be great for reading offline. Doesn't seem so pointless! :)
 

strike1555

macrumors 6502
Jun 29, 2009
326
0
Completely pointless.

All that Engadget needed to do is to develop a decent mobile version of its website. As opposed to developing a custom "app" for iPhone, Android, WebOS, WinMo, etc.

There no need for iPhone app for every website. MacRumors is perfectly accessible via Safari.

God, you fail at life. (Pretty amazing that im an atheist and I found your comment so stupid, I invoked Gods name - LOL)

Have you even ever tried to use MR on an iPhone? Accessibility != usability.

Epic fail.
 

Vandam500

macrumors 68000
Sep 29, 2008
1,822
41
God, you fail at life. (Pretty amazing that im an atheist and I found your comment so stupid, I invoked Gods name - LOL)

Have you even ever tried to use MR on an iPhone? Accessibility != usability.

Epic fail.
I agree. Using MR in Mobile Safari isn't so fun.
 

zhenya

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2005
6,360
2,826
It is better than most forums, however, and I'd still rather see the developers spending their time on improving the website on mobile devices rather than on individual apps. I've still not used an app for any website that was really all that much of an improvement over the actual site. It may render certain content better, but because they don't generally provide direct access to all site functions, I still end up just visiting the site.
 

basesloaded190

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Oct 16, 2007
2,691
5
Wisconsin
while i don't mind accessing macrumors via safari, but when i use engadgets new app, i find it to be much easier and a lot slicker.
 

hitekalex

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2008
1,625
0
Chicago, USA
It is better than most forums, however, and I'd still rather see the developers spending their time on improving the website on mobile devices rather than on individual apps. I've still not used an app for any website that was really all that much of an improvement over the actual site. It may render certain content better, but because they don't generally provide direct access to all site functions, I still end up just visiting the site.
Exactly right.

As I said.. websites like Engadget (and MR) would be much better off putting their limited development resources on creating proper mobile versions of their websites.. sites that are AJAX-enabled, friendly to 480x320 screens, etc. Anyone who uses Google mobile apps on the mobile Safari knows what I am talking about. With HTML5, websites can support offline caching (even without RSS), for those who for some reason need to read web content offline.

Instead, web publishers feel compelled to release "me too" iPhone apps, that usually lack functionality of a full website.. and you end up going to the "real" website anyway.

I know it may come as a shock to some people on this forum, but the Internet doesn't revolve around iPhone and App Store apps! A good mobile website can be developed once, and used on ANY smartphone - no need to create proprietary apps for iPhone, WebOS, Android, WinMo, etc.

But instead of developing a proper mobile site, Engadget will be in the business of developing and maintaining 5 versions of proprietary "apps" for each competing smartphone platform. Complete idiocy.. but oh well!
 

sinsin07

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2009
3,434
2,275
Thanks OP for the heads up. I like the app. A company can do whatever they want as far as how they want to get there product across to the public. Right now it seems the thing to do is be represented on the iphone with an individual app. I think for a business this is a good idea. It gives them another avenue of exposure to users who may not be familiar with them which just having a properly formatted website does not. They just might stumble upon them in the App Store.

This appears to be in line with the commercials, "There is an app for that.":D
 

superflush

macrumors 6502a
Apr 6, 2009
508
3
As I said.. websites like Engadget (and MR) would be much better off putting their limited development resources on creating proper mobile versions of their websites.
I'm pretty sure a lot of the work done for the Engadget app was done by people at AOL.