Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google: The Web, Not App Stores, is the Future Of Mobile Development
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't know about you, but i didn't come to anything close to that statement. Keep the banner waving to yourself
I would disagree that the technology is not ready, in fact i would say that right now depending on the size of your network, this is something that can be done now. How many people really are working on worldwide networks, international or even interstate networks? This is something 100 percent could be leveraged with today's infrastructure and hardware, i just don't think people have realistic expectations as to what that infrastructure should cost, albeit the service providers do a bit of gouging
See google wave which has already been released to developers
http://wave.google.com
Doesn't mean a whole lot until it's on our desktops and we're actually using it and critiquing it. As of now it's a nice idea in theory. Pretty meaningless until I can use it. A lot of great ideas fail when they have to stand up to hands-on use.
i say again, its in developers hands right now, to test, improve and implement in the future, this i don't think would constitute vaporware. I don't recall any google products myself that didn't come to fruition, maybe not the best product but indeed a product.
Thin clients would for sure have their place, especially in the classified space. Just because your work flow doesn't require it, doesn't mean that it wouldn't make sense. Not everyone's business can operate from home or off WiFi
Before the iphone I would of said the web.
But that is based on years of experience dealing with client server and web applications.
Web applications are much more easier to distrubute, deploy and redeploy.
Wait a minute....
That describes the apps store too.
One central location, were apps can be deployed and redeployed.
Add hoc distribution is web deployment.
But the app store also provides secure transactions for purchases, publicizing.
That said , the future is actually native apps that are hybrids.
Uiwebview makes that possible.
But that is based on years of experience dealing with client server and web applications.
Web applications are much more easier to distrubute, deploy and redeploy.
Wait a minute....
That describes the apps store too.
One central location, were apps can be deployed and redeployed.
Add hoc distribution is web deployment.
But the app store also provides secure transactions for purchases, publicizing.
That said , the future is actually native apps that are hybrids.
Uiwebview makes that possible.
This thread tickles me.
While Cloud computing and storage is going to become more popular, a thin client is not like the full app.
Just the other day I was in a building where the iPhone 3Gs could not get a signal. Had that device been dependent on the Internet for the full app experience, I could not have done anything with it.
I would suggest that those who think everything will be web based, need to consider some things:
- Connectivity. This cannot be stressed enough. Connectivity varies so much around the world.
- Robustness of the applications. Web apps are no where near as robust as desktop apps. Google Docs let you do spreadsheets and word processing for example. However, neither of these comes close to the power of Excel and Word. Same will hold true for Microsoft Office 2010 on the web.
- HTML5 is not the end all solution. It HTML. It's not a programming language like Assembly, C++, etc. Rather it's Hypertext Markup Language which renders pages -- albeit very capable pages.
I could go on, but hopefully I've illustrated my point in that there are issues with everything being in the Cloud.
Will we get there someday? Who knows. According to projections 30-40 years ago, were were supposed to be paperless by now. Seems to me we haven't arrived there yet in that area.
So we'll see.
Amazingly all those HTML pages require a C/C++/ObjC/Java compiled web browser to run underneath which actually does the rendering.
Webcentric developer point of view - obviously
We have seen the 'Web will dominate everything' and the web is the only way to deliver applications for several years now. It will not happen in the next 10 years or 20 years.
The web does not provide the user experience that a application can provide. Web 2.0 with several of the nice features of HTML 5 still do not come close to providing the experience of a well written application.
The statement that one only needs to write to the web once, is still very laughable. The issue of all the different browsers and all the different platforms is a nightmare still. We support Windows 95 through Windows 7, and MacOS 10.2 through 10.6. We do that without much effort, yet the nightmare for us is all the different browsers.
How many sites does one go to that don't support all browsers - many.
It is understandable that Google would have this opinion. No doubt they do a good job of supporting many different OSes, and platforms. Still they don't have feature rich applications. I have to use Google's applications for an organization I volunteer for. Using those applications is the most frustrating computing experience I have had for years.
We have seen the 'Web will dominate everything' and the web is the only way to deliver applications for several years now. It will not happen in the next 10 years or 20 years.
The web does not provide the user experience that a application can provide. Web 2.0 with several of the nice features of HTML 5 still do not come close to providing the experience of a well written application.
The statement that one only needs to write to the web once, is still very laughable. The issue of all the different browsers and all the different platforms is a nightmare still. We support Windows 95 through Windows 7, and MacOS 10.2 through 10.6. We do that without much effort, yet the nightmare for us is all the different browsers.
How many sites does one go to that don't support all browsers - many.
It is understandable that Google would have this opinion. No doubt they do a good job of supporting many different OSes, and platforms. Still they don't have feature rich applications. I have to use Google's applications for an organization I volunteer for. Using those applications is the most frustrating computing experience I have had for years.
the statement was that web apps would dominate the future of the mobile space. It has nothing to do with your personal preference. And i would say again, the hardware and infrastructure is in place to leverage the mobile web based apps.
Couple of problems...
There are a couple of problems with this Webcentric idea of application development not the least of which is Microsoft owns 90%+ of the computer market and probably 60% of the mobile/embedded market, they aren't interested in webcentric application development anymore, for obvious reasons. They tried really hard and failed with the .NET agenda and their various Web company acquisitions to shift to a webcentric application development paradigm I they're over it. At this point MS can and probably will shift and transmorph their OS to wholly or partially reject complex Web apps built with Java or Html5 faster than Google can transmorph web apps in these languages to work with it.
The main issue is that while the mobile market is somewhat homogeneous in terms of hardware with the release of the iPhone 3GS that's going to begin to change and web development isn't going to be specific enough to cater to all of the various hardware configurations. It's been tried before and prior to the release of the iPhone Steve Jobs aptly coined the term "Baby Internet" as describing the results of the pre iPhone attempts at a mobile web experience and a web centric application development for mobile devices. Also, the proliferation of the ChromeOS/Android obviously won't convert enough users to become a formidable competitive platform anytime soon.
I don't think Google really had many directions it could go to grow it's business, but I don't think this one is going to give them the results they're looking for either.
There are a couple of problems with this Webcentric idea of application development not the least of which is Microsoft owns 90%+ of the computer market and probably 60% of the mobile/embedded market, they aren't interested in webcentric application development anymore, for obvious reasons. They tried really hard and failed with the .NET agenda and their various Web company acquisitions to shift to a webcentric application development paradigm I they're over it. At this point MS can and probably will shift and transmorph their OS to wholly or partially reject complex Web apps built with Java or Html5 faster than Google can transmorph web apps in these languages to work with it.
The main issue is that while the mobile market is somewhat homogeneous in terms of hardware with the release of the iPhone 3GS that's going to begin to change and web development isn't going to be specific enough to cater to all of the various hardware configurations. It's been tried before and prior to the release of the iPhone Steve Jobs aptly coined the term "Baby Internet" as describing the results of the pre iPhone attempts at a mobile web experience and a web centric application development for mobile devices. Also, the proliferation of the ChromeOS/Android obviously won't convert enough users to become a formidable competitive platform anytime soon.
I don't think Google really had many directions it could go to grow it's business, but I don't think this one is going to give them the results they're looking for either.
What's totally weird is that Google believes their own propoganda.....
As do all the companies without the Apple Apps Store and iTunes
Actually Microsoft doesn't have anywhere near 60% of the mobile market, they are a bit player. Nokia/Symbian is the largest.
The iPhone (especially when you add iPod Touch) have by far the most usage even though their actual market share isn't that high. Yet.
http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/05/27/comparing-smartphone-market-share-by-operating-system
and i would say almost all the apps are nothing special. The software and the medium to interact and add applications to me is really the exciting part, not the ifarts etc
I agree completely. He knows the difference between HTML and a powerful OS. He knows his minions on the business channels and WS would chime in. Repeat a lie often enough...
Not News .
If this crap has you in a bad way ...WITH FEELINGS !
Try www.startpage.com
.....and leave big brother behind
If this crap has you in a bad way ...WITH FEELINGS !
Try www.startpage.com
.....and leave big brother behind
I agree... native apps are here for the long haul....
If you think about it, the first big "advance" people really made on interactive web sites was using plug-ins like Flash or Java so they could launch apps running on the local workstation. Working within the confines of the browser's own HTML language is too limiting.
I know they keep extending what can be done with HTML -- but native apps will always have an advantage, in both speed and flexibility.
Google seems to really be pushing the idea of using their online "Google Apps" suite via any web-enabled device, and it's not a bad solution at all. But there's SO much more than the typical "office" type applications that people will want to do with their phones.
If you think about it, the first big "advance" people really made on interactive web sites was using plug-ins like Flash or Java so they could launch apps running on the local workstation. Working within the confines of the browser's own HTML language is too limiting.
I know they keep extending what can be done with HTML -- but native apps will always have an advantage, in both speed and flexibility.
Google seems to really be pushing the idea of using their online "Google Apps" suite via any web-enabled device, and it's not a bad solution at all. But there's SO much more than the typical "office" type applications that people will want to do with their phones.
What the hell is that? It couldn't find anything I searched for.
On a side note. I can't say I want to or will rely on web based programs. Could a web based program of iMovie work as well as the one on my HDD? Possibly. I prefer my physical discs and programs but like others have said, it's a good idea but it may never catch on.
Its just a stupid start page
I don't know what you were looking for but at least this site will not keep tabs on EVERYTHING YOU DO !@!!
I don't know what you were looking for but at least this site will not keep tabs on EVERYTHING YOU DO !@!!
so far cloud computing just rots, ask any mobileme power user. well, perhaps just ask me, as some folks may be perfectly fine with the abysmal performance and sync errors. they have been talking about cloud since 1980 when i was working the zerox/ibm gigs, and it's never really taken off, no matter what the platform was. but companies need to tell shareholders they are innovating something, and cloud is always a good scapegoat. in this case its just google barking to generate some buzz, as its gunna need it to sell its new os. just give me good apps that work (without bugs) locally on a fast box (and fast mobile) with super fast internet access and i will be happy till the day that i die. forget subscription scams, and just bill me one time for a major version, i don't have a problem with that. but call me old fashioned...
The web sucks as a platform for the range of applications required.
It was never designed for that, and it has just been hodge-podged and mish mashed on top of.. There are all kinds of drawbacks to doing things with the web as the foundation and this is simply not likely to change.
They would need to evolve a totally new protocol from the ground up designed to be this kind of framework.
It was never designed for that, and it has just been hodge-podged and mish mashed on top of.. There are all kinds of drawbacks to doing things with the web as the foundation and this is simply not likely to change.
They would need to evolve a totally new protocol from the ground up designed to be this kind of framework.
