3 ms·

not sure I get this appjet concept..If I have to do that much coding to build an app using appjet, what makes it better than the 200 million ways that already e

by nanijoe 19y ago

not sure I get this appjet concept..If I have to do that much coding to build an app using appjet, what makes it better than the 200 million ways that already exist to do this?

vegashacker 19y ago
I had the same question, but my interpretation of the claims on their site (http://appjet.com/about/ http://appjet.com/about/) was that you'd save time if the app was simple enough, because you wouldn't have to configure a server and do all that nonsense. This is fair, I think, but the question becomes, how big is the set of applications that are both interesting and not so complicated that it'd be more appropriate to use a more traditional environment/language where you have more power/control.
- aston 19y ago
  how big is the set of applications that are both interesting and not so complicated that it'd be more appropriate to use a more traditional environment/language where you have more power/control. Basically every Facebook app, for one. There's also a big niche for hobby programmers who want to make one-off online tools. The code sharing makes that even easier.
- bls 19y ago
  The key is the trivial deployment. If a user wants a little app, and he has no server and no hosting provider, and he doesn't know how to install software or configure a shared hosting account anyway, then he is likely to just give up before he even gets started. This at least gives him a chance. There are a lot of business people that have become programmers by building increasingly sophisticated Excel spreadsheets or Access databases. This type of "casual" programming is becoming increasingly common. That said, I think that DabbleDB might have a more successful approach--data first, instead of code first. That approach made MS Access very successful. Casual programmers care a lot about their data, but code is just a nuisance that is tolerated to get the data to "work." People want assurance that their data is always there, even when the code is broken. In MS Access it is trivial to back up your database and view/hand-edit your data.
  - edw519 19y ago
    "Casual programmers care a lot about their data, but code is just a nuisance that is tolerated to get the data to "work."" So do 99.9% of all users. And they're right.
- aaroniba 19y ago
  I don't see any practical limit to the set of interesting apps that can be written in 100 lines of an expressive programming language like JavaScript. Of all the programs I have ever written in python, for example, I would wager that most were fewer than 100 lines. I wish these were all online instead of trapped on my hard disk. Random thought: how big is the set of interesting essays you can write in 100 lines of English? Our prediction is that there is a long-tail of web apps. We want to be kind of like the pen and paper of web apps. Maybe not great for writing a novel, but excellent for smaller works.
bls 19y ago
I think it is brilliant. Client-side Javascript is the QBasic of this decade--it is the first language of a lot of (most?) self-taught programmers. It makes a lot of sense to offer these people a place to expand into server-side software. And, Server-side Javascript is spiking in popularity and utility. I am working on a project in this space as well.
michaelneale 19y ago
well, this way someone else hosts you app, holds it to ransom and you have no way of getting at the code (really). I hope I am wrong. Would be cool if you could "pull down" your app if you wanted (perhaps for a ransom fee?). Dabble db anyone? it looks nice.

by nanijoe 19y ago

not sure I get this appjet concept..If I have to do that much coding to build an app using appjet, what makes it better than the 200 million ways that already exist to do this?

vegashacker 19y ago

I had the same question, but my interpretation of the claims on their site (http://appjet.com/about/ http://appjet.com/about/) was that you'd save time if the app was simple enough, because you wouldn't have to configure a server and do all that nonsense. This is fair, I think, but the question becomes, how big is the set of applications that are both interesting and not so complicated that it'd be more appropriate to use a more traditional environment/language where you have more power/control.

aston 19y ago
how big is the set of applications that are both interesting and not so complicated that it'd be more appropriate to use a more traditional environment/language where you have more power/control. Basically every Facebook app, for one. There's also a big niche for hobby programmers who want to make one-off online tools. The code sharing makes that even easier.
bls 19y ago
The key is the trivial deployment. If a user wants a little app, and he has no server and no hosting provider, and he doesn't know how to install software or configure a shared hosting account anyway, then he is likely to just give up before he even gets started. This at least gives him a chance. There are a lot of business people that have become programmers by building increasingly sophisticated Excel spreadsheets or Access databases. This type of "casual" programming is becoming increasingly common. That said, I think that DabbleDB might have a more successful approach--data first, instead of code first. That approach made MS Access very successful. Casual programmers care a lot about their data, but code is just a nuisance that is tolerated to get the data to "work." People want assurance that their data is always there, even when the code is broken. In MS Access it is trivial to back up your database and view/hand-edit your data.
- edw519 19y ago
  "Casual programmers care a lot about their data, but code is just a nuisance that is tolerated to get the data to "work."" So do 99.9% of all users. And they're right.
aaroniba 19y ago
I don't see any practical limit to the set of interesting apps that can be written in 100 lines of an expressive programming language like JavaScript. Of all the programs I have ever written in python, for example, I would wager that most were fewer than 100 lines. I wish these were all online instead of trapped on my hard disk. Random thought: how big is the set of interesting essays you can write in 100 lines of English? Our prediction is that there is a long-tail of web apps. We want to be kind of like the pen and paper of web apps. Maybe not great for writing a novel, but excellent for smaller works.

bls 19y ago

I think it is brilliant. Client-side Javascript is the QBasic of this decade--it is the first language of a lot of (most?) self-taught programmers. It makes a lot of sense to offer these people a place to expand into server-side software. And, Server-side Javascript is spiking in popularity and utility. I am working on a project in this space as well.

michaelneale 19y ago

well, this way someone else hosts you app, holds it to ransom and you have no way of getting at the code (really). I hope I am wrong. Would be cool if you could "pull down" your app if you wanted (perhaps for a ransom fee?). Dabble db anyone? it looks nice.