NPR and Wall Street Journal Preparing to Launch iPad-Optimized Sites

Scottsdale said:
In addition, all of these iPad buyers will have to BUY every bit of content that they could get for free via ad-based sites like hulu.com.
Click to expand...

I'm sure this is what Flash advocate hope for, but it doesn't seem likely at all.

Scottsdale said:
I don't believe Apple is going to get away with just saying html5 and h.264 is the answer, when it's multiple years off from providing widescale usage and integration into the web.
Click to expand...

Don't expect some great uprising from iPad buyers demanding Flash. Video delivery is really the only key here. Most people don't need Flash for anything else. You wouldn't be seeing these larger sites moving to something more iPad-friendly if they weren't betting on the success of Apple.
 
Darkroom said:
RIM devices, Android OS devices, the HP-Slate, even Windows Phone 7 Series who will push their own Silverlight technology supports Flash. i didn't know about Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. if you have more examples i'm all ears.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that most of these are testing flash or talking about flash in the future.

Which of them are actually selling phones today that support flash. That's the actual thing that matters. If someone tests flash for 2 years then decides to not put it on the phone then they really don't belong on your list.

So do you know which ones are for real? I don't know.
 
Confused......

i always fail to understand the purpose of making iPhone-iPad "Optimized Sites"

I understand that this solves the flash and other navigation problems. But the iPad for example is being marketed as having "the full website in the palm of your hand".

What good is to have an "optimized website" (which im sure its just a dumbed down version of the site with just shortcut links and an ad on the top)?

Isn't the whole point of the iPad to be able to browse the full web and see a website in its entirety? :confused:
 
Xtremehkr said:
NPR and the New York Times yes, those services are worth paying for or making a donation to.
Click to expand...

NEWS ALERT: "NYT worth paying for...", news at 11. Weather forecast, It's a a cold day in hell... a very cold day! :D

(And with Global Warming, not in our lifetime!) :rolleyes:
 
Rot'nApple said:
NEWS ALERT: "NYT worth paying for...", news at 11. Weather forecast, It's a a cold day in hell... a very cold day! :D

(And with Global Warming, not in our lifetime!) :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Breaking News: Trolls infesting thread, local experts concerned with having to cull the troll population.
 
Twenty5 said:
Isn't the whole point of the iPad to be able to browse the full web and see a website in its entirety? :confused:
Click to expand...


A site that is designed to be the exact width of the iPad...so you can scroll up and down but not left and right without missing anything...would be FAR better than a real site where you have to sroll all over the place.

You may be confused about what they mean. On an iPhone you may encounter an actual "mobile site" which is where stuff is put into a VERY simple page with no graphics or anything. Those were the pages designed for 2005 Blackberries. You're right. Those suck.

But "iPhone optimized" sites tend to have all the same content as the main site, it's just formatted better.

Here's 3 examples:

1) Washington Post Full Site: What most sites are. Ok, but I'm doing a lot of zooming and scrolling.

2) Washington Post Mobile Site: Ugh. Lame

3) Wikipedia's iPhone Site: THIS is great. It's everything from the real site, but it's locked down to iPhone dimentions. Everything is there, but made to fit my screen without having to zoom.

If these sites are doing what the Washington Post did then, yeah. Blech. But if they're following Wikipedia's lead for the iPad then this is awesome news.
 

Attachments

  • photo.jpg
    photo.jpg
    73.9 KB · Views: 93
  • photo 2.jpg
    photo 2.jpg
    47.8 KB · Views: 94
  • photo 3.jpg
    photo 3.jpg
    49.5 KB · Views: 112
MR (and Apple?) has to promote/advertise articles like this in order to sell/promote the iPad?! Seriously?! This is totally lame...and I am sickened that I had to even GLANCE at this headline while coming here today. I am not exaggerating with the word sickened.

This is like Honda announcing that 6 new gas stations are opening up in New York next month.

Sheeeeez.


-Eric
 
CFreymarc said:
People still listen to NPR?
Click to expand...
NPR's The Morning Edition and All Things Considered rank amongst the top three most popular radio programs in the U.S.A.

NPR stations reach over 30 million listeners. The demographic tends to be white, older, affluent college graduate.
 
Twenty5 said:
i always fail to understand the purpose of making iPhone-iPad "Optimized Sites"

I understand that this solves the flash and other navigation problems. But the iPad for example is being marketed as having "the full website in the palm of your hand".

What good is to have am "optimized website" (which im sure its just a dumbed down version of the site with just shortcut links and an ad on the top)?

Isn't the whole point of the iPad to be able to browse the full web and see a website in its entirety? :confused:
Click to expand...

I agree completely...with any "optimized" website for any hardware. Continuing to do these optimizations just holds us back...you telling me a $500+ web surfing device won't display the page 100% the same as my 6 year old laptop? Or my 3 year old $299 netbook. The iPad is the same size as many 1+ year old netbooks...get with the program, Apple!! It's, um, like 2010.

-Eric
 
I have a feeling that more than anything else, Apple's iPad will be treated as a mobile advertising device and nothing more. NPR's iPhone app is great, but I don't use it since it contains ads and I don't permit ads on my iPhone. Furthermore, NPR redirects iPhone users to an "optimized" mobile site, which is pure junk. It won't let users interact with the features of the "full" site. Their techies told me they did this due to lack of Flash support on the iPhone. Of course they didn't respond when I told them I block Flash on desktop browsers. We users don't matter as much as NPR and Apple would have us believe.
 
mabaker said:
I think the spite from other mac users is all apparent in this thread just cuzz Apple didn’t update their favorite toys to these heat-factories containing the new i7 CPU! :D

I’m fairly excited about the iPad, it’s a new day in Apple’s history and we all have seen it coming - they ARE shifting to the mobile computing, as much as I and the other fellows forumers here hate it.

One has to look at the bright side, though - Apple now is more potent than it ever was and is making history even with such an feature-underpowered device like the ipad.
Click to expand...

Look, they're not "shifting" as much as they're expanding. Would you have Apple NOT innovate just to please you myopic whiners when they don't happen to conform to your schedule?

I've been waiting for a new Mac Pro, too. But from recent rumors about a 12-core machine and knowing that Snow Leopard with 64-bit and Grand Central was made for multi-core, I'm sure the next Pro will be worth the wait.
 
jo0 said:
love NPR! can't wait to see it on the apple tablet device
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm not really a fan of the iPad but the one reason I would buy one is to sit at the table reading NPR, NYT and Nat Geo while drinking some coffee.
 
ericinboston said:
you telling me a $500+ web surfing device won't display the page 100% the same as my 6 year old laptop? Or my 3 year old $299 netbook. The iPad is the same size as many 1+ year old netbooks...get with the program, Apple!! It's, um, like 2010.
Click to expand...

Actually, they aren't telling you that. Other than Flash, it will display the entire website. I'm sure the optimizing isn't only concerned with fitting the content on the screen.
 
Darkroom said:
i'm not sure what this story is suppose to represent. iPhone specific sites without Flash are numerous and have been around for a long time. is this story suppose to imply that Adobe should suddenly prepare for the great wrath of iPad? please. the advancements of ActionScript 3.0 and Flash Player 10.1 are far more interesting than a larger iPod touch.
Click to expand...

Larger iPod touch?

You sir, fail.
 
DominikHoffmann said:
What about those of us who aren't salivating over an iPad? It's a nice device alright, but a MACrumors site should have some news about, for example, the next MacBook Pro updates every so often.

I think it's time to rename this site "iPadRumors."

Dominik
Click to expand...
I have a solution for you When you see "iPad" in the title, just don't click on it. That way you will not be tortured so. I do that for many subjects I do not care to read about. You are welcome!
 
ericinboston said:
This is like Honda announcing that 6 new gas stations are opening up in New York next month.

Sheeeeez.

-Eric
Click to expand...

No. This is like Honda announcing a new liquid hydrogen powered car and Shell announcing that they'd be adding hydrogen pumps to half their gas stations.

And if you can't see why THAT would be important news then I really can't help you.
 
satcomer said:
As a Mac user I am starting to hate the iPad. Before you discard me just think the last time you have seen updates on Mac book Pros & Mac Pros. It seems the iPad is delaying the updates to these two Macs.
Click to expand...

Just what in the world would the iPad have to do with MBP and MP updates? Apple updates products when they're ready. They are not using MBP employees to make iPads.

a.gomez said:
exactly what will go on, they not going to change their main site (just like Disney wont) for the ipad (or the iphone, droid, pre) just make a water down version for it... No reason to dump a site that works on 96% of the worlds computer if you register good number of eyes on it every month.
Click to expand...

If you have only a short term view, that might make some sense. In reality, though, the number of hits from mobile devices is growing like crazy and accelerating. At some point, the developer says "I can make one site that reaches everyone" and switches to html 5.

cvaldes said:
It's not just Apple either. For example, the Mozilla Foundation yanked Flash support right before they MR'ed Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. This is not Steve Jobs' personal vendetta against Adobe.
Click to expand...

Not to mention Windows 7 which won't have Flash - at least at launch. Plus the fact that Flash 10.1 is extremely limited and delayed once again.

Darkroom said:
RIM devices, Android OS devices, the HP-Slate, even Windows Phone 7 Series who will push their own Silverlight technology supports Flash. i didn't know about Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. if you have more examples i'm all ears.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. Windows 7 will not have Flash at launch (which is exactly the same thing Apple said at the start). And even Flash for Android is significantly delayed, slow, and limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top