 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Country Specific / UK Mac Group / August 2007The OS doesn't matter... then what?
There has been talk over the last few years about how Internet apps are going to render the choice of operating system irrelevant. Now, I think that many people here will share my belief that internet apps aren't a patch on desktop apps for useability or features, yet a very high percentage of people consider webmail (for example) to be the best/easiest/only way to check email. In fact, this post was inspired by a friend - using Hotmail - asking me how I got the various quotes at the bottom of my emails; I'm not even sure that Hotmail can do random sigs. So, what I'm thinking is, if Mac people generally choose the Mac because it's easier to use, surely they will generally be more inclined to use local applications (and the superior user experience that this offers) rather than web apps? Whereas people who don't care or don't know that things could be better are more likely to both use Windows and web apps instead of local ones. I haven't used the Google spreadsheet / word processing / calendaring apps, and neither have I used iWork... but I suspect that people who usually use Office would slide into using the Google apps more easily than those used to iWork. So (finally getting to my point) assuming all the above to be true rather than just guesswork and assumption, what would be the logical conclusion? It seems to me that the whole "OS doesn't matter" idea will mean that, over time, local software available for Windows will decline and web apps will increase. However, Mac users will shun web apps in favour of local apps, so the Mac software world will remain healthy. In turn, that implies that those people who prefer local apps will shift away from Windows, with its dwindling number of local apps, and move to the Mac, which still has decent local apps. Those people who don't really care about user experience will be more likely to move to Linux because it's cheaper than Windows and they don't care if the interface sucks, so long as they can open a web browser. So, the 'OS doesn't matter' concept seems bad for Windows and good for both the Mac OS and Linux. What do other people think? -zoara-  Signature"The only way to have fun with a Mac is to poke its insufferable owner in the eye." - Charlie Brooker > So, the 'OS doesn't matter' concept seems bad for Windows and good for > both the Mac OS and Linux. What do other people think? I can't see web apps _in general_ as ever being a serious threat to desktop apps, no matter what the OS. By their very nature they have to play to the lowest common featureset and can't make use of underlying OS features. They're also restricted by the fact that you have to be connected to the 'Net in order for them to work (and yes I know about Google Gears). For some apps (email, calendar) they're very useful as they're the sort of thing it's handy to be able to access anytime/anywhere. Jim SignatureFind me at http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk PAPWORTH EVERARD (n.) Technical term for the third take of an orgasm scene during the making of a pornographic film. > > So, the 'OS doesn't matter' concept seems bad for Windows and good for > > both the Mac OS and Linux. What do other people think? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > For some apps (email, calendar) they're very useful as they're the sort of > thing it's handy to be able to access anytime/anywhere. I agree, I have never found webapps to be anything more than a PITA. Google apps are good, but they are slow to use, and not as well featured as a desktop app, as you mention. The big problem I find is when your net connection is down, then you can't use anything at all. I do find that using the web to sync things is useful though, and I still find the .Mac method to be the best for my purposes. Sharing calenders, bookmarks and keychains is definitely useful with more than one Mac in use. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > There has been talk over the last few years about how Internet apps are > going to render the choice of operating system irrelevant. There is a lot of bollocks spoken. Normally by people who will put up with anything. > Now, I think that many people here will share my belief that internet > apps aren't a patch on desktop apps for useability or features I would agree with that for most applications that involve user input. > yet a > very high percentage of people consider webmail (for example) to be the > best/easiest/only way to check email. If you have multiple computers or travel a lot it is certainly easier. > So, what I'm thinking is, if Mac people generally choose the Mac because > it's easier to use, surely they will generally be more inclined to use > local applications (and the superior user experience that this offers) > rather than web apps? I dont see it as a Mac thing. Windows apps running on windows are also generally superior to web apps. > Whereas people who don't care or don't know that > things could be better are more likely to both use Windows and web apps > instead of local ones. well, tenuous link. Yes, they are more likely to use windows as they are more likely to be using windows anyay. > I haven't used the Google spreadsheet / word processing / calendaring > apps, and neither have I used iWork... I have used both (well not all the google ones). > but I suspect that people who > usually use Office would slide into using the Google apps more easily > than those used to iWork. depends who you mean by the people using office. The people using office that would be as well using any other word processor yes, ie, the people that write notices for the coffee machine in bright pink comic sans text with unrelated clip art, then yes. The people writing books or long documents with office, then no. > So (finally getting to my point) assuming all the above to be true rather > than just guesswork and assumption, what would be the logical conclusion? When it comes to operating systems, word processors, google and microsoft I can guarantee that there will not be a lot of logic in the conclusion. > It seems to me that the whole "OS doesn't matter" idea will mean that, > over time, local software available for Windows will decline and web apps > will increase. Yes. that is why all the apps we run these days a written in java, the write-once, run everywhere system that pretty well killed all platform specific applications overnight about 10 years ago. > In turn, that implies that those people who prefer local apps will shift > away from Windows, with its dwindling number of local apps, and move to > the Mac, which still has decent local apps. err.. no. Your premice that more people will move from windows to the mac (talking percentages here) I agree with, as windows has peaked percentage-wise and the only way it can go is down. however, I don't see that that would benifit the mac at all. For the people who the apps dont matter, probably linux would be the easiest place because of the cost. For the people who the apps do matter to, they want the apps to be like they were, so mac owners want their apps like mac apps, windows users want their apps like windows apps, and linux people want all their apps to be different from each other. > Those people who don't really > care about user experience will be more likely to move to Linux because > it's cheaper than Windows and they don't care if the interface sucks, so > long as they can open a web browser. Ahh yes - should have read that bit. Agreed with that. > So, the 'OS doesn't matter' concept seems bad for Windows and good for > both the Mac OS and Linux. What do other people think? only in the sense that a lot of people to whom the os doesn't matter use windows because it is there. Ultimately linux will be the home for them, rather than web apps. Until we have fiber optic systems next to free in all houses and unmetered megabit wireless, the web app cannot be as useful. SignatureWoody > So, what I'm thinking is, if Mac people generally choose the Mac because > it's easier to use, surely they will generally be more inclined to use > local applications (and the superior user experience that this offers) > rather than web apps? Yes, but sometimes you don't have a choice. One of my clients, for example, has an anally-retentive network policy (nothing except http/https through their proxy server, not even DNS, is allowed out) so webmail is the only way to get my mail when I'm there. I think most people would only use webapps if they had to, whatever desktop OS they were used. SignatureSak Wathanasin Network Analysis Limited http://www.network-analysis.ltd.uk > I think most people would only use webapps if they had to, whatever desktop > OS they were used. I think you underestimate the sheer dumbness of many users. For some "the Internet" is the browser and they have no idea that email is not the WWW. It's all the same to them: Pages in a window where you click around and look for useful things hidden in all the crap. Even the concept of "applications" is often hardly understood -- they see just windows they have to fight with and learn where to click to reach something by plain repeating what they did the last time they got to it. Jochem Signature"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > > I think most people would only use webapps if they had to, whatever desktop > > OS they were used. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jochem ah yes "what os are you running? office 98? i love those convesations.... roger Signaturewww.rogermerriman.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.