6 ms·

Implementing syncing as an independent developer kind of sucks. You have to deal with the huge support burden of an audience that's going to run into every edge

Implementing syncing as an independent developer kind of sucks. You have to deal with the huge support burden of an audience that's going to run into every edge case in it and complain very publicly. They're taking their time and trying to get it right. I did a presentation once on the topic: http://iphone2009.crowdvine.com/talk/presentation_file/5104/Grover_Syncing.pdf http://iphone2009.crowdvine.com/talk/presentation_file/5104/... Also, if you bought a product, you've signaled that the current feature set was worth the price. If the developers want to add new features for free, that's a nice bonus.

siglesias 16y ago
>>Also, if you bought a product, you've signaled that the current feature set was worth the price. I question whether this is the consumer expectation for iOS apps. Updates for apps are fast and free, and oftentimes apps are sold with the explicit promise of future updates that will contain various anticipated features. This and the fact that many apps are platforms that consumers expect will be maintained over a reasonable amount of time verses those of competitors.
- evbart 16y ago
  I think you're spot on. With the top apps, you're buying into a platform. Evernote is web, desktop, ios, etc, etc Remember the milk is everywhere... so is Simplenote
Psyonic 16y ago
That isn't exactly true. Part of the reason I went ahead and bought minecraft the other day was because buying it in alpha gives all updates (and expansions!?) for free.
generalk 16y ago
> Implementing syncing as an independent developer kind of sucks. But they have syncing. You can sync between your iPhone and Desktop copies of Things just fine with a cable. Extending that to work over a network connection with a third pseudo-device in the cloud shouldn't be two years worth of work.
- sp4rki 16y ago
  Wifi/Cable syncing of a desktop and phone app is a completely different beast to doing so over the internet. The difference is that when you connect your iphone to your laptop and sync, the app determines which one has the last state and updates accordingly. Over the air syncing would imply the possibility of different mediums having different states and having to consolidate all the data into a definite final state, preferably by updating, deleting, or creating single objects instead of a complete store of the data. Trust me, it's not that easy and lot's of implementations done already on other apps are not quality implementations. Actually a lot of implementations are really a hack plugged in to deliver the functionality asap. That being said, it's not something that should take two years in the making. Nevertheless, Things is already a great application in it's current state and well worth the money.
  - generalk 16y ago
    > the app determines which one has the last state and updates accordingly Have you used Things' desktop sync? I have. It didn't do that. I frequently updated items on my phone while I was out, then did some work and added/completed other items on the desktop before I sync'd. It handled everything well. I'm not saying Things isn't worth the money; I bought a copy and frequently recommend it.

siglesias 16y ago

>>Also, if you bought a product, you've signaled that the current feature set was worth the price. I question whether this is the consumer expectation for iOS apps. Updates for apps are fast and free, and oftentimes apps are sold with the explicit promise of future updates that will contain various anticipated features. This and the fact that many apps are platforms that consumers expect will be maintained over a reasonable amount of time verses those of competitors.

evbart 16y ago
I think you're spot on. With the top apps, you're buying into a platform. Evernote is web, desktop, ios, etc, etc Remember the milk is everywhere... so is Simplenote

Psyonic 16y ago

That isn't exactly true. Part of the reason I went ahead and bought minecraft the other day was because buying it in alpha gives all updates (and expansions!?) for free.

generalk 16y ago

> Implementing syncing as an independent developer kind of sucks. But they have syncing. You can sync between your iPhone and Desktop copies of Things just fine with a cable. Extending that to work over a network connection with a third pseudo-device in the cloud shouldn't be two years worth of work.

sp4rki 16y ago
Wifi/Cable syncing of a desktop and phone app is a completely different beast to doing so over the internet. The difference is that when you connect your iphone to your laptop and sync, the app determines which one has the last state and updates accordingly. Over the air syncing would imply the possibility of different mediums having different states and having to consolidate all the data into a definite final state, preferably by updating, deleting, or creating single objects instead of a complete store of the data. Trust me, it's not that easy and lot's of implementations done already on other apps are not quality implementations. Actually a lot of implementations are really a hack plugged in to deliver the functionality asap. That being said, it's not something that should take two years in the making. Nevertheless, Things is already a great application in it's current state and well worth the money.
- generalk 16y ago
  > the app determines which one has the last state and updates accordingly Have you used Things' desktop sync? I have. It didn't do that. I frequently updated items on my phone while I was out, then did some work and added/completed other items on the desktop before I sync'd. It handled everything well. I'm not saying Things isn't worth the money; I bought a copy and frequently recommend it.