Web Worker Daily

ajaxus says: March 15th, 2007 11:29pm

New stuff and ideas are still to come as nowadays we have some web applications behaving as desktop ones and some desktop applications integrationg as many web functionality as they can.

Its left to user to decide where to go, which one to choose.

Pete Johnson says: March 15th, 2007 11:37pm

It’s a little weird for me to see this trend move the way it has given that back in the day, this is exactly what applets were supposed to do and Microsoft desktop apps were supposed to die a horrible death. Java got moved to the back end and now Javascript is becoming the key to making reactive web pages that behave like desktop apps. Does anybody else remember that applet-based desktop environment that I think WordPerfect was supposed to use to slay Bill Gates?

I posted a comment pretty late in Jeff’s comment cycle that wondered about where this might be going given accessibility and cross-device issues:

The thing I struggle with when it come to more desktop-like web user experiences is how to serve all the masses. If you pin your hopes on Javascript, you alienate at least 10% of the browser market based on the W3C estimates on the number of people who turn it off. Then there’s the browser compatibility and accessibility issues to deal with.

Flash, as several people have pointed out, is a good cross-browser environment, but it can be slow and you sell your soul to Adobe. Disney recently went almost all-Flash and their implementation looks really slick, unless you don’t speak English or if you are accessing it over a handheld device.

And that’s the other thing to consider. Depending upon where your market is, handheld can be huge. In places like Korea, there are more handheld users than wired users, so how do you have a great user experience for both browser and handheld without alienating either one or having to build your stuff twice?

Maybe you can’t have it all. Gmail went the route of going huge on AJAX for the browser experience and built a completely separate client for handheld. The didn’t tackle the accessibility issues, but maybe they are leading the way with this too.

—Pete
http://nerdguru.net

Aaron Forgue says: March 16th, 2007 4:45am

I believe that most applications will be (and already have been) shifted to web-based interfaces. I think this makes sense on a number of levels:

- Data Backup Becomes a Non-Issue — If my applications and associated data are stored online with the service provider, there is less of a need for me to worry about backing up my data. For example: I can be reasonably assured that Google will always take good care of my data.

- Location is Irrelevant — I don’t want to worry about what computer I am using at any particular time. The files I need are on my computer at work? Damn, guess I can’t do any work from home today… Web applications solve this problem by providing me access anywhere, anytime, and from any computer.

- Updates and Patches are Transparent — When a new version of Office comes out, I have to plop down another few hundred dollars and get it installed/upgraded. Web applications do this transparently, meaning that I can always be assured that I am using the most up-to-date version of the software without the hassle of upgrading.

- Web Development is Advancing — With the onslaught of coding advancements in JavaScript and HTML (think AJAX and DHTML), web applications are becoming increasingly indistinguishable from desktop applications. UI feedback in web apps is becoming instantaneous, giving way to all sorts of creative online interfaces.

As web-based applications improve, I believe there will be a fundamental shift in the definition of “Operating System”. Is there a point where the only thing a person needs on their computer is a web browser? I sure hope so…

Aaron

Zoli's Blog says: March 16th, 2007 8:15am

Desktop Software: A Failed Model

I’ve been planning this post for quite awhile, when a disastrous McAfee update over the weekend pushed it to top priority. However, Phil Wainewright beat me to it in DST spells disaster for shrinkwrap software. He describes the nightmare scenario: lot…

Mark Murphy says: March 16th, 2007 8:16am

@Aaron: your first and third points have nothing to do with Web-based applications. They have everything to do with Internet-aware applications. Rich Internet applications, made in Flash/Flex, XUL, or whatever, can store data at providers and can be automatically updated. Your second point (available from any PC) isn’t 100% true even for Web-based applications (many places restrict where Web browsers can go via proxy servers), and Flash/Flex and XUL work as well as HTML/AJAX from that standpoint as well.

daveconrey says: March 16th, 2007 8:40am

I believe that most are correct in that web apps will become more pervasive in the very near future, but just like I don’t ever see us going to a paperless society, certain desktop apps will never go away. I can’t possibly imagine doing Photoshop work on the web because of file sizes and the progams own heft, but even small apps like calculators and calendars are better on the desktop. My OSX Dashboard, albeit web related, is essential for me and I don’t necessarily want to open a browser just to find out the date, weather or look up the spelling of a word.

MODE - A Vehicle For Change says: March 16th, 2007 9:05am

[...] Anne is in a zone today with this post about web apps vs. desktop apps. Some argue that the Semantic Web is the future and I tend to agree, but not everything we do will [...]

Koby says: March 16th, 2007 1:25pm

I love the concept of web applications. I think they are really becoming powerful competition for desktop equivalents when it comes to the AVERAGE user.

I recently reinstalled my OS on my home PC and I did not install an IM client or an office suite. Instead I’m using Google Docs for word processing and Meebo for IMs. I am wondering how long I can go before I do someething that requires me to install one of those two kinds of applications onto my desktop.

GigaOM » What’s on GigaNET says: March 16th, 2007 3:37pm

[...] VLIPGigaGamez: XBox hackers give Microsoft street credGigaGamez: Gaming.Wikia…enuff said!WebWorkerDaily: Smackdown – Web vs. Desktop appsWebWorkerDaily: Six tools for post Email era Share/E-mail | [...]

Ray Rippey says: March 16th, 2007 5:25pm

We make POS and Video rental software. Although we’re doing things that are web aware, sending and receiving email, transmitting files… that kind of thing, most of our stores don’t want the internet even in their stores (mostly because they don’t have the expertise to stop their clerks from getting on the net).

And they sure don’t want to have to worry about their store shutting down because of a problem with their ISP or a cable.

I have noticed some apps on the web are getting very sophisticated. And for certain apps the web is the only place to be.

But the desktop has it’s place, and I believe a balance will be struck at a certain point to where people will understand when they should have a desktop app or a web app.

I for one don’t trust putting my customers personal data on the internet, even though I put my info out there all the time. Can you imagine a rental store that rents adult video’s and they tell their customers they are being stored on the net!

No, the desktop isn’t going the way of the dodo bird anytime soon IMHO.

jccodez says: March 16th, 2007 6:11pm

That depends on what side your bread is buttered on. What I like, and my preference ,is desktop integrated or blended with web, similar to skype. I would like to see more office win32 client stuff blended with p2p channels and social networks. I want my data, I want to move my data without limits of smpt, and I want it streamed in a single encrypted package…I want hybrid p2p that uses a super node to transmit to multiple users with a singe upload , a huge bandwith savings. I want to be able to drag and drop tables, objects, and anything else in my workspace to groups of users, all streamed and packages nicely with a little rijnadel for security…all this in a web app? The desktop is the center of my universe as I still write code with a compiler.

Technogeekboy says: March 16th, 2007 8:36pm

I agree with daveconrey that some apps like Photoshop or video-editing will likely remain on the desktop, but I’m all for web apps that do spreadsheets, word processing, web development, etc. I like that the limitations of web-based apps often reduce the software to what’s really important. I recently used Zoho writer to take class notes and I thought it was terrific. Later, while on a different PC at the library, I was able to call up my notes and continue working in a new location. That holds great deal of appeal for people on the go.

Peter says: March 16th, 2007 8:59pm

I consider myself to be a “run of the mill” user of MS Word and Excel in my job. I recently installed Google Docs and Spreadsheets for a test drive. Prognosis: they are toys. I could not get to first base in re-building typical spreadsheets that I use. The word processor was a joke. MS has now raised the bar higher with Office 2007 — I took to the new “Ribbon GUI” like a duck to water two weeks ago when I was issued a Vista laptop at work.

It’s not clear to me that Google will be able to improve these apps enough to be useful in their current html/javascript technology. Perhaps they will do a Flash/Flex version of Docs and Spreadsheets someday to get some richness into these apps…

Jodi Gaines says: March 17th, 2007 12:57pm

The use of Web Apps in the last few years has skyrocketed because of infrastructure improvements like faster Internet connections and more powerful PC’s. But even more importantly, I think that the need to colloborate among many users that no longer share the same office space is becoming an even more important factor in the popularity of Web Apps.

In our company, we have employees across the US and in Latin America, so Web Apps are really important to us. We use WebEx for all of our calendar and time tracking needs and our company created an email management tool to address handling large amounts of role-based email.

Great blog, BTW. We link to it for our customer releated blog at emailmanagement.blogspot.com.

Logical Extremes says: March 17th, 2007 11:56pm

Today most non-media connections still revolve around static web, email, and messaging. Mobile work, remote collaboration, and a variety of specialized needs will always drive some cutting edge web applications, but I’m also interested in the kinds of web applications that address everyday needs and will gain wider appeal due to low cost, accessibility, and ease of use. Hopefully these will be open architectures that will provide a base for innovation, but allow for some standardization in look and operation.

Personally, I’m big into the web for customizing my incoming information. I also think the web is great for bringing a new vector of competition to entrenched desktop applications. So far for a number of applications, I still prefer my trusty local executables and data, but that will change as features and interfaces improve and get more integrated.

Derek says: March 20th, 2007 6:32am

I also find that web-based apps are often enough to get the job done.

Personally, I would LOVE to see more integration of IM in my web-based apps. ANY collaboration-enabled app should also include IM.

That being said, I have a few (too many perhaps) widgets in my Google homepage, and as it updates, it slows w a a y y y down. So many calls back to the Google mothership or some other api or another. Web-based apps greatest strength is the sharing that can take place over a network, but they have that very same achille’s heel of being slave to it as well.

Paul says: May 28th, 2007 3:14pm

Desktop apps may not need to be re-written, came across this on vnunet, nivio.com, they have moved the entire windows desktop into a web browser, so now you dont use new apps, just the traditional excel like you used to before. Anyonw tried it, seems to be in beta.

Paul Woodford

tamira Herzog says: June 13th, 2007 8:45pm

I’m trying to build something, and can’t resolve the debate over whether it should be desktop software (i want cross-platform, of course) or a web-hosted app.

Here’s my problem: let’s say you love the idea of building a web app for a million reasons. it’s easier to build, a cinch to update the UI….. and desktop apps are obsolete, right? (everyone keeps telling me so)
So anyone building anything could only entertain web apps as the solution.

But now let’s add that the app is going to house private data which cannot be compromised under any circumstance.

How do you reconcile those two conflicting realities?

If you’re on the verge of developing something, and its purpose involves storage of anything that must not be breached, which road do you take in the modern world?

how do you afford people the highest level of privacy and security (and control) without pedaling back to the Dark Ages by building desktop software????

is there such a thing as a desktop application that is truly cross-platform in how it was developed, which can remain local to one’s own computer (with data stored ONLY on the desktop), but which behaves like a web app in that it can seamlessly update itself without risk of data-breach?

Ray Rippey mentioned (above) that the desktop will never really go away, and that people will make distinctions between when they can use a web app, and when they can’t. How many people agree with this? Enough to make it worth the expense, effort and maintenance of building a desktop app?

And just to make it interesting, maybe you have a point of view on the notion (which i have stumbled over repeatedly, though i still don’t understand how/why this can be true) that web-hosted data is safer than data stored locally on one’s own computer at home.

thanks so much.
warmest,
tamira

Zoli’s Blog » Blog Archive » Desktop Software: A Failed Model says: July 27th, 2007 8:47am

[...] Smackdown: Web vs. Desktop Apps [...]