Optimised for screen
Storage of credentials
Optimised for data transfer - only the content - not the layout and the code every single time
Optimised for CPU, this will change as above as things become more powerful but the inefficiency of HTML does get to me, its like taking a Eurofighter to the local dairy. Sure its really quick to develop and deploy but it sucks down power and cpu time needlessly.
EDIT: Oh and it can count against you, favouring one platform. It counts against a product for me if it only supports Apple, less so if it Supports Apple and Android but unless it also supports WP I am less likely to get involved with a product that has gone to the effort for others but left out the one I use.
Last edited by SYNACK; 10th September 2012 at 01:32 PM.
The iplayer example is a very good one.
If I had the choice of using the website or the dedicated iPad app, I would choose the App every single time. Its so easy to use compared to having to log in each time and browse to the page. It also allows download shows now which is very cool!
No he's worried about his partners being publically slated. Especially one that makes them money at both ends (charge a license cost then they get a reseller money)
Not about functionality, ease of use, open accessibility for other systems or using technical means of getting rid of clunky old applications like SIMS and FMS, but money.
Ironically if more money was spent on SIM/FMS application development itself to make it more open our entire trust wouldn't be looking at alternatives.
Last edited by Theblacksheep; 10th September 2012 at 03:27 PM.
I thought that was every businesses number one objective, to make money. Otherwise they'll be a charity or public sector.
Seems to be a fact people forget sometimes when they think a company can do something the LA offer for less money.
EDIT: What do you mean by open? You have to draw a line between supportablility and open. Personally, they've got a good line.
Last edited by matt40k; 10th September 2012 at 04:23 PM.
Whilst I can protest at your suggestion @matt40k you won't believe me!
The market for apps supports my view I think - why would developers allow Apple to take 30% of the app revenue if they could produce an HTML5 one (and hope it works on all devices) and sell it directly?
Come on Phil, I'll give you the fact your pretty good at only backing stuff that may be useful to schools, like the new exams stuff, but come on, money is the main factor. I sat in one of your sales pitches about some power management software you guys were reselling and if we're being honest that would have been a nice feature of solus3. Will you add it to solus3 like hell you will.
We won't agree on the whole app vs html5. Your a good sales person and you know that means backing your product. We can both find positive and negatives to each side and unfortunately only time will tell which one is "right". Fortunately Capita would have bank rather a lot of money from the app before html5 wins.
You can of course prove me wrong and do a few "free" products/features
Edit: just to be clear, I mean throw extra resources at non-profiting areas, such as dbattach, I don't mean hassle the overworked devs about such features. They've got enough of a backlog already.
Last edited by matt40k; 10th September 2012 at 08:04 PM.
You also forget what that 30% covers - licensing, download servers, update management, ads, payment
Always the optimist
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)