4 ms·

Tablets already have their Movable Type. It's called... Movable Type. I understand that the current fad is to go back to native, from HTML5, but for very conten

Tablets already have their Movable Type. It's called... Movable Type. I understand that the current fad is to go back to native, from HTML5, but for very content-centric app (i.e. one designed to make text easy to read), it makes sense to write it as a webapp. You're not transferring massive amounts of data. You're not dealing with the same level of interactivity requirements as, say, a game. Your job is to display text in a clear, easy-to-read fashion. I think this is something that mobile browsers can already do quite well. There's no reason to reinvent the wheel with a native app, when we can build on Movable Type (or some other blogging platform) to make it more mobile friendly.

Adaptive 14y ago
I agree with this in almost every regard. I really don't like the drift towards sandboxed apps where HTML will do just as (or more) nicely. But: money. Solve subscriptions. This is what the apps do. Adobe DPS, which I mention below, is so totally geared to creating paid subscription content. The Readability fiasco was unfortunate since I'd like to see other non-ad based approaches to paying open content publishers/creators. Unfortunately, no one on the vested interest side of the fence (including Apple) has any real motivation to solve for this.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- quanticle 14y ago
  I don't see how apps solve subscription any more than a (paid-access) website. In fact, thanks to Apple's draconian 30% cut of all in-app purchases, it can be argued that apps are worse, when it comes to subscriptions. At least when you're serving content through the browser you're not automatically losing 30% of your revenue.
  - nc 14y ago
    1 tap (or 2) purchasing and lots of accounts with credit cards attached
bonaldi 14y ago
The job is not just "display text", it is to match the UX of the other newsstand apps: + Background Updating + Push Notifications + Works offline, always + Doesn't go down when your server does + Subscriptions without a credit card. I think all of these are something that mobile browsers can't do at all.

Adaptive 14y ago

I agree with this in almost every regard. I really don't like the drift towards sandboxed apps where HTML will do just as (or more) nicely. But: money. Solve subscriptions. This is what the apps do. Adobe DPS, which I mention below, is so totally geared to creating paid subscription content. The Readability fiasco was unfortunate since I'd like to see other non-ad based approaches to paying open content publishers/creators. Unfortunately, no one on the vested interest side of the fence (including Apple) has any real motivation to solve for this.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
quanticle 14y ago
I don't see how apps solve subscription any more than a (paid-access) website. In fact, thanks to Apple's draconian 30% cut of all in-app purchases, it can be argued that apps are worse, when it comes to subscriptions. At least when you're serving content through the browser you're not automatically losing 30% of your revenue.
- nc 14y ago
  1 tap (or 2) purchasing and lots of accounts with credit cards attached

bonaldi 14y ago

The job is not just "display text", it is to match the UX of the other newsstand apps: + Background Updating + Push Notifications + Works offline, always + Doesn't go down when your server does + Subscriptions without a credit card. I think all of these are something that mobile browsers can't do at all.