Comments on: iWork for the iPad: Game changer for the software business http://mark.madsenlab.org/2010/01/iwork-for-the-ipad-game-changer-for-the-software-business.html#utm_source=feed&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=feed Scientia non habet inimicum nisi ignorantem Sun, 31 Jul 2011 00:01:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: admin http://mark.madsenlab.org/2010/01/iwork-for-the-ipad-game-changer-for-the-software-business.html/comment-page-1#comment-5866 admin Thu, 04 Feb 2010 06:35:38 +0000 http://mark.madsenlab.org/?p=1029#comment-5866 Oh, I think there's absolutely both an opportunity here and a sea-change in app design, as you mention. We'll build things in smaller pieces and for more specific functions, and rely on exchanging data. You already see this in some ways, but it'll become more prevalent on a larger device like the iPad. Though it's going to cause more of the complexity I talked about in a post today; apps that we used to think of as unitary things will now rely on distributed systems and data, and that means as developers we have to be much better about ensuring consistency and not relying on the next code down the line to do it... Oh, I think there’s absolutely both an opportunity here and a sea-change in app design, as you mention. We’ll build things in smaller pieces and for more specific functions, and rely on exchanging data. You already see this in some ways, but it’ll become more prevalent on a larger device like the iPad.

Though it’s going to cause more of the complexity I talked about in a post today; apps that we used to think of as unitary things will now rely on distributed systems and data, and that means as developers we have to be much better about ensuring consistency and not relying on the next code down the line to do it…

]]> By: Kelly Jones http://mark.madsenlab.org/2010/01/iwork-for-the-ipad-game-changer-for-the-software-business.html/comment-page-1#comment-5864 Kelly Jones Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:35:35 +0000 http://mark.madsenlab.org/?p=1029#comment-5864 Getting back to your point about the change in the cost structure of applications. Think of the old argument about your typical office suite of applications. A person will use only 5% of the available features, but it's a different subset for each person. Hence the need to buy the entire suite to satisfy the universe of customers. Think of your typical iPhone application where the application provides functionality to post photos to Flickr. The iPhone application provides specific functionality to do just a few things out of the entire functionality of Flickr. Now imagine that there are many Flickr applications, some that allow for posting of pictures, some that allow for following photos that have been posted by your friends, etc... Notice that an iPhone Flickr application is not required to know everything about Flickr in order to function properly. I would consider the entire Flickr API as the entire "Office Suite", but the client functionality has been decoupled. Hence the ability to offer an application for $9.99. In the old world the document format and the implicit functionality of the associated application defined the type of client that could use it in a meaningful way. With a typical iPhone/iPad app, the barrier to entry is lowered and the low price makes it a low risk for the end user to try out. Anyways, I haven't fully fleshed out my thoughts on this topic, but it's very interesting. Getting back to your point about the change in the cost structure of applications. Think of the old argument about your typical office suite of applications. A person will use only 5% of the available features, but it’s a different subset for each person. Hence the need to buy the entire suite to satisfy the universe of customers. Think of your typical iPhone application where the application provides functionality to post photos to Flickr. The iPhone application provides specific functionality to do just a few things out of the entire functionality of Flickr. Now imagine that there are many Flickr applications, some that allow for posting of pictures, some that allow for following photos that have been posted by your friends, etc… Notice that an iPhone Flickr application is not required to know everything about Flickr in order to function properly. I would consider the entire Flickr API as the entire “Office Suite”, but the client functionality has been decoupled. Hence the ability to offer an application for $9.99. In the old world the document format and the implicit functionality of the associated application defined the type of client that could use it in a meaningful way. With a typical iPhone/iPad app, the barrier to entry is lowered and the low price makes it a low risk for the end user to try out.

Anyways, I haven’t fully fleshed out my thoughts on this topic, but it’s very interesting.

]]> By: mark http://mark.madsenlab.org/2010/01/iwork-for-the-ipad-game-changer-for-the-software-business.html/comment-page-1#comment-5862 mark Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:56:26 +0000 http://mark.madsenlab.org/?p=1029#comment-5862 Indeed Kelly, you're absolutely right. Sharepoint is collaboration done 1995 style, with a thin veneer of web technology to obscure the fact that you're still using heavy desktop software. Not that heavy desktop apps will go away, in the slightest. It's hard to imagine in the short term anyone paying the performance penalty to run Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator, or Mathematica, in a web or hosted version. But it's time to admit that the *function* provided by a word processor, after five or six turns of Moore's Law, need not be tethered to the "form factor" of desktop applications, as you say. Indeed Kelly, you’re absolutely right. Sharepoint is collaboration done 1995 style, with a thin veneer of web technology to obscure the fact that you’re still using heavy desktop software.

Not that heavy desktop apps will go away, in the slightest. It’s hard to imagine in the short term anyone paying the performance penalty to run Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator, or Mathematica, in a web or hosted version. But it’s time to admit that the *function* provided by a word processor, after five or six turns of Moore’s Law, need not be tethered to the “form factor” of desktop applications, as you say.

]]> By: Kelly Jones http://mark.madsenlab.org/2010/01/iwork-for-the-ipad-game-changer-for-the-software-business.html/comment-page-1#comment-5861 Kelly Jones Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:59:27 +0000 http://mark.madsenlab.org/?p=1029#comment-5861 Mark, Interesting post. One thing the introduction of the iPad clearly shows is that computing for business purposes is being released from its earlier singular PC confines. Notice that I'm not saying a normal PC is unimportant. It also clearly shows that you don't need to store your entire universe on one device. Office is a jail. Sure, you can send files around to a bunch of people on a distro list, but who wants to do that??? As limited as Google Docs may be, I can access it from various mobile apps for various purposes. Surely there's a business opportunity there. Think of the popularity of Microsoft's *clunky* Sharepoint software, yet people use it in droves. The iPad and the underlying cloud infrastructure is a harbinger of things to come. Anyone who misses that is fooling themselves. Mark,
Interesting post. One thing the introduction of the iPad clearly shows is that computing for business purposes is being released from its earlier singular PC confines. Notice that I’m not saying a normal PC is unimportant. It also clearly shows that you don’t need to store your entire universe on one device. Office is a jail. Sure, you can send files around to a bunch of people on a distro list, but who wants to do that??? As limited as Google Docs may be, I can access it from various mobile apps for various purposes. Surely there’s a business opportunity there. Think of the popularity of Microsoft’s *clunky* Sharepoint software, yet people use it in droves. The iPad and the underlying cloud infrastructure is a harbinger of things to come. Anyone who misses that is fooling themselves.

]]>