Products
Rob Brooks-Bilson's Blog
The one thing I still don't get about Apollo, Adobe's upcoming RIA desktop platform, is this: am I really going to want to have potentially dozens of new applications installed on my desktop to do a lot of what I do now in my browser? The offline piece of the technology I totally understand, and as a developer, I think the technology and possibilities are pretty amazing, but I'm still not convinced that the average user (like my mom) is going to get it. Help convince me I'm wrong.
Copyright 1995-2010 Rob Brooks-Bilson. All rights reserved.
Aura skin for Raymond Camden's BlogCFC inspired by Joe Rinehart & Steven Erat. This blog is running version 5.9.004.
Aura skin for Raymond Camden's BlogCFC inspired by Joe Rinehart & Steven Erat. This blog is running version 5.9.004.
The few things that standalone can do the web app can't are local file caching, drag and drop, and native access to QuickTime library to playback videos in fullscreen. But w/ Apollo, we should be able to wrap the existing AJAX code around existing web app and not have to maintain two separate core code for our product.
Another option we're looking at right now is XUL / XPCOM with mozilla. But that limits our customer to use mozilla/firefox. And we need to make a decision on what platform to build the new version of standalone with... and I am refreshing labs.adobe.com every 30 minutes to see if the beta will indeed be released soon follow the apollo MAX session...
They want occasionally connected with webservices. They want the power of a pc and the elegance of an RIA.
They want ease of use and fast turn around times for developers.
They want the software they use to be 'open' with branding options.
They like real-time, trackable, update friendly, easily prototyped, and secure software that's accessible and powerful.
Is there anything else out there that is remotely close to what I'm describing? Apollo could be those things to me if done right.
That is why I'm at least interested, if yet, convinced.
I guess what I'm bracing myself against is "everything being redone for Apollo", kind of like there is always a rush to redo things using the latest tools/technologies. I do think Apollo is really cool for doing the things everyone has been describing - I'm just wondering (out loud, mind) how many new desktop apps we all need? I guess it depends on what programming/networking model people subscribe to.
Don't take what I'm saying as a knock on Apollo - that's not my intention. I just want to "get it" from the perspective of distribution and usage.
<i>am I really going to want to have potentially dozens of new applications installed on my desktop to do a lot of what I do now in my browser?</i>
Right now, there are thousands of cool apps available for free download from the web, yet I'm guessing there are only a few apps you actually use a lot. There will no doubt be a period where you want to try every new app, but that will pass.
<i>I'm still not convinced that the average user (like my mom) is going to get it.</i>
I'm betting your mom couldn't develop an email client either, but she probably uses one. In other words, the only thing the average user is going to care about is whether the application is something they want to use. They don't care if it is a Java app, a C++ app, or an Apollo app. They only need to download it and run the installer.
Apollo seems uniquely positioned to open the world of desktop application development to the average web developer, so that should spur the development of a lot of new apps. It's up to the developer to create applications that make people's lives better and that are easy enough for the average user.
Thanks for the comments. Regarding your first comment, my thinking is heading the same way - that initially there will be a ton of new apps, but at the end of the day, we'll all only be using a small number of them.
I'm wondering whether Apollo will spur more desktop development in the Enterprise, where for the past 10 years now, the push has been to move away from desktop apps to browser based applications. Granted the browser isn't appropriate for all applications, but the push was certainly there.
How easy is it to update Apollo apps? If a new version of an app comes out, is there a mechanism built into the platform to allow an app to update itself? For IT departments, rolling out applications across the corporation is always an issue, and given how quickly web based apps tend to be updated, I'm wondering what the model is ther.
http://www.brandonellis.org/#entry_126
http://teknision.blogspot.com/2006/10/apollo-they-...
Cheers,
-Brian
According to the Apollo FAQ (http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Apollo:develo...), there will indeed be an application update mechanism.
Matt Woodward's MAX notes on the Apollo demo (http://mattwoodward.com/conference_notes/max2006/m...) are also interesting - he points out an "install desktop version" button below the web app. I'm still piecing all the details together, but the whol Apollo picture is becoming clearer...
I appreciate the pointers!
Thanks for the link to the FAQ entry - I somehow managed to miss that.
Longterm, I think there will eventually be a reaction against central servers holding and datamining your personal data. Lots of web developers adopted Gmail, even though Google already has their search record and cross-site history via advertising and IP logging... it may take awhile for this sensitivity to gain momentum, but keeping control of our own data is a longterm attraction too.
I'm still thinking about this new stuff, though, and don't have the full picture yet myself.
I think it's too early to ask if Apollo is useless (I know you didn't say useless, but that's the gist from a few folks). Instead, consider asking the question after it gets released if no one makes anything amazing and new. I think Flash's strong ability to create cool "flashy" effects could bring interesting new applications to the desktop. Sometimes that's just too hard with regular application frameworks. Of course, we might see too much of that, like with some "experience" websites, but I'd still like to see folks come up with cool stuff.
What actually worries me is Adobe switching focus from the development of Flash and Flex into Apollo. Some of the most talented developers inside Adobe have switch from Flash to the Apollo team and I don't think this is a good idea. As I said Apollo is great for some stuff, but most of the action will continue to be with Flash so hopefully Adobe will not loose its edge with it.
First a little context: I have been doing a lot of desktop Flash development for some time now, mainly for Digital Signage applications, using Director and now Zinc. Apollo may or may not bring some advantages to this area of our work, but for us is not that much of a revolution. It may offer a better workflow than Zinc, but then it may lack some of the features the Zinc has. It is going to be that kind of compromise decision. We will have to test it and see but it is not that kind of night before Christmas feeling. On the other hand there is the upcoming Flash release. I don’t think I have ever been more excited about a new version of Flash. It is not only going to change how we do Digital Signage, it is going to change how we do everything, games, cms, shops, etc. It is so important! So when Adobe decides to take people like Mike Downey, one of the most smart guys in the business, in the middle of the development cycle and switch them to Apollo, well it makes me a little uneasy. Apollo is not the revolution, the revolution is Flash and it already started, and I hope Adobe doesn’t lose track of this.