4 ms·

I'm firmly convinced that the app model is a dead end, which makes the whole article pointless.

by Qz 16y ago

icefox 16y ago
Yah, but every platform will give it a try anyway
fauigerzigerk 16y ago
What would it mean for the app model to be dead? The app model is basically the outsourcing of deployment and billing to a service provider. It's not a specific technology. You can do that with web apps just as well and I don't think this idea will ever be dead. The question is whether this model is as suitable for business apps as it is for consumer apps. I think the IT department is not dead, because someone has to integrate all the various apps and services and analyse the growing quantity of data in ways that are specific to each company. These functions are too heterogenous to be cast into yet another app.
- Qz 16y ago
  I'm not talking about the app store model, I'm talking about the app model.
kikibobo69 16y ago
The app store gold rush is certainly cause for cynicism, but I do find myself missing it on other platforms. A known point of discovery; a community rating system; and streamlined purchasing is convenient, as is not engaging the cognitive overhead to figure out how to buy something, pay for it, worrying about credit card details, registering for new sites, etc. Maybe this is Amazon's future, instead of a separate one per platform.
- Qz 16y ago
  I'm not talking about the distribution method. An online marketplace for digital products is not what defines the app model. The app model is the idea of small individual programs for each individual task/need/amusement/whatever, with minimal interoperability or extensibility.
  - Someone 16y ago
    That is a matter of definition. Another way to look at that "small individual programs" and "minimal interoperability" are just a historical side-effect of iPhone (hardware, software, and licensing) limitations. With iPad, nobody forbids you from selling an office suite as one tool. In fact, Apple's Pages for iPad may be an early example of this, with its limited charting capabilities. Looking ahead, I would hope that we do not go that way, but that, instead, evolution will be towards a component store, where editors are sold, and viewers are free downloads (backed by the app store, something like Opendoc on iPad could be a killer)
    - Qz 16y ago
      Yes, I think components rather than apps is where things will be going.
beaumartinez 16y ago
The two main benefits I see of the app store model: - Centralised program repository. (Users can go to one site and find programs listed in a consistent format, with related services provided alongside, like ratings and reviews.) - Program "quality control". (Spam, malware, and unusable programs aren't admitted: developers must make their programs good.) Googling for programs, then having to find out how good they are on Wikipedia, forums, and blogs is a pain. The app store model means users can easily find good programs. (Admittedly the app store model has some flaws but I'm playing devil's advocate here.) As for the app model, making every little function its own program can seem overkill, but this allows them to be tailored to a device and have greater consistency with the device's look and feel.
- piguy314 16y ago
  I use ubuntu casually on one of my laptops and I really like the synaptic package manager. I can imagine a scenario where app stores become integrated with package managers that keep all your software managed/updated in one place, similar to the way Firefox manages extensions only you have to pay before you can download the xpi (or analogous) file.
risotto 16y ago
Wrong. Hardware provider => platform provider => application provider. This is the hierarchy of the cloud-era Internet. Think AWS => Engine Yard Cloud => Zendesk. Hardware is becoming a utility. AWS is billed exactly like electricity: pay for what you use, use it however you see fit. Platforms follow this model too, with a healthy markup. Apps are what really matter, and what drive value from a platform and hardware. Money comes from customers paying for apps.
- Qz 16y ago
  Maybe my comment was a bit ambiguous. These days 'App' can cover a wide variety of concepts. I'm referring to the 'App' focus of things like the iPhone and the iPod (bite size, one-off programs), not 'Web Apps' (which are more like services).

I'm firmly convinced that the app model is a dead end, which makes the whole article pointless.

by Qz 16y ago

I'm firmly convinced that the app model is a dead end, which makes the whole article pointless.

icefox 16y ago

Yah, but every platform will give it a try anyway

fauigerzigerk 16y ago

What would it mean for the app model to be dead? The app model is basically the outsourcing of deployment and billing to a service provider. It's not a specific technology. You can do that with web apps just as well and I don't think this idea will ever be dead. The question is whether this model is as suitable for business apps as it is for consumer apps. I think the IT department is not dead, because someone has to integrate all the various apps and services and analyse the growing quantity of data in ways that are specific to each company. These functions are too heterogenous to be cast into yet another app.

Qz 16y ago
I'm not talking about the app store model, I'm talking about the app model.

kikibobo69 16y ago

The app store gold rush is certainly cause for cynicism, but I do find myself missing it on other platforms. A known point of discovery; a community rating system; and streamlined purchasing is convenient, as is not engaging the cognitive overhead to figure out how to buy something, pay for it, worrying about credit card details, registering for new sites, etc. Maybe this is Amazon's future, instead of a separate one per platform.

Qz 16y ago
I'm not talking about the distribution method. An online marketplace for digital products is not what defines the app model. The app model is the idea of small individual programs for each individual task/need/amusement/whatever, with minimal interoperability or extensibility.
- Someone 16y ago
  That is a matter of definition. Another way to look at that "small individual programs" and "minimal interoperability" are just a historical side-effect of iPhone (hardware, software, and licensing) limitations. With iPad, nobody forbids you from selling an office suite as one tool. In fact, Apple's Pages for iPad may be an early example of this, with its limited charting capabilities. Looking ahead, I would hope that we do not go that way, but that, instead, evolution will be towards a component store, where editors are sold, and viewers are free downloads (backed by the app store, something like Opendoc on iPad could be a killer)
  - Qz 16y ago
    Yes, I think components rather than apps is where things will be going.

beaumartinez 16y ago

The two main benefits I see of the app store model: - Centralised program repository. (Users can go to one site and find programs listed in a consistent format, with related services provided alongside, like ratings and reviews.) - Program "quality control". (Spam, malware, and unusable programs aren't admitted: developers must make their programs good.) Googling for programs, then having to find out how good they are on Wikipedia, forums, and blogs is a pain. The app store model means users can easily find good programs. (Admittedly the app store model has some flaws but I'm playing devil's advocate here.) As for the app model, making every little function its own program can seem overkill, but this allows them to be tailored to a device and have greater consistency with the device's look and feel.

piguy314 16y ago
I use ubuntu casually on one of my laptops and I really like the synaptic package manager. I can imagine a scenario where app stores become integrated with package managers that keep all your software managed/updated in one place, similar to the way Firefox manages extensions only you have to pay before you can download the xpi (or analogous) file.

risotto 16y ago

Wrong. Hardware provider => platform provider => application provider. This is the hierarchy of the cloud-era Internet. Think AWS => Engine Yard Cloud => Zendesk. Hardware is becoming a utility. AWS is billed exactly like electricity: pay for what you use, use it however you see fit. Platforms follow this model too, with a healthy markup. Apps are what really matter, and what drive value from a platform and hardware. Money comes from customers paying for apps.

Qz 16y ago
Maybe my comment was a bit ambiguous. These days 'App' can cover a wide variety of concepts. I'm referring to the 'App' focus of things like the iPhone and the iPod (bite size, one-off programs), not 'Web Apps' (which are more like services).