Kobo's sticking it to to Apple.

[stonetools]

MP's analysis nails it , and really there isn't much to add. It is instructive that his opponents can only respond with Ad hominems.
Two companies - Financial Times and Playboy- have done web apps for IOS , and i have looked at the sites and the reviews. The reviews have praised these apps as promising 1.0 efforts, but apparently, they still are not as good as the native apps in terms of UX. IANAIT person, but my understanding is that HTML 5 is an evolving standard and that it will be five years or more before web apps can provide the same experience as native apps.
Kobo has said in it's press release that it's HTML 5 effort is intended to be complementary to it's iOS app, not a substitute for it. Nevertheless, I believe that Apple's action will prompt Kobo and other companies to invest more heavily in HTML 5 apps, which will be a good thing. My expectation is that those investments will lead, not so much toward web app replacements for native apps, but toward offering streaming subscription services a la Netflix.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by stonetools

they still are not as good as the native apps in terms of UX.

Sorry, what is "UX"?

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, what is "UX"?

UX=User Experience. Sorry for the jargon

[HarryT]

Thank you.

[fbrII]

Which cheek did you tattoo your Apple logo to? Not that it matters, just curious.

Actually my critics are right - the comment was uncalled for - my apologies

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by stonetools

but apparently, they still are not as good as the native apps in terms of UX.

That might have something to do with websites you visit from a home screen bookmark running javascript slower than those you visit from a bookmark within the browser (and that's not forgetting that apple hobbles the execution speed in 3rd party browsers too)

If it replicates the native app experience, Apple don't want it imo, maybe they'll charge 30% to lift the speed restrictions on home screen bookmarks

When HTML 5 reaches a point where people are making games in it, I imagine apple will do what they can to get money out of it.

Granted it might be just a bug, but I doubt apple will want to rush to fix it as a high priority unless there's suddenly a surge in bad PR about it.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by stonetools

In an earlier thread, I speculated that booksellers would create a service where they would host books " in the cloud" and stream the books to e-reader devices in return for a monthly subscription fee. People were horrified at the very thought of this . They condemned me as a tool of the publishers, told me that this scheme would destroy the " rights" of ebook consumers and declared that the user experience would necessarily be awful. Now HTML 5 reader apps are viewed as the salvation of ebook consumers, rescuing them from Apple's evil new policies.
Maybe I was just ahead of my time, or something .

HTML 5 is like a web page on steroids, and like any other web page, once it is viewed in a browser, it can be locally stored (cached) and can then be accessed without having to download it again. HTML 5 has the power to do a lot of things, and resembles regular apps in capabilities. It also has the power to locally store the content (ebook in this case) that it uses/displays.

So what webapp developers do is write their apps in HTML 5 instead of Java, and use the local browser to execute those, similar to using an interpreter to run a Basic programme in the olden days. They can even create icons on the desktop to run them whilst hiding all the browser stuff. To the average user (and even power user) it looks exactly like running a native app. The browser overhead might slow things down a bit, but for something like an ebook reader it would not be noticeable.

[Harmon]

I tend to agree with MP that Apple's behavior points toward their not really caring about ebooks. And I suspect that Apple is correctly reading their market.

For myself, I never read ebooks on my iPad. I do read a subset of books on my iPhone, mainly things I'm already reading on my Kindle. I buy ebooks to read on the Kindle. At that point, it's just a matter of seconds for me to send a duplicate copy on my iPhone in case I'm somewhere without my Kindle & want to read on.

I very strongly doubt that the iPad or the iPhone is very many serious readers' primary EBR. The devices simply don't lend themselves to extended periods of time reading. I'm not saying it isn't done - I've read entire books on my iPhone. I'm just saying it isn't done much.

So I suspect that it really doesn't make much difference to Apple, nor probably to Amazon or Kobo or anyone else, if the customer has to go to an internet browser to purchase ebooks.

[DAHayden]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

A web-based application for reading books?
Sounds awful, frankly.

Amazon's Kindle Online Beta is fairly nice, actually.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Harmon

So I suspect that it really doesn't make much difference to Apple, nor probably to Amazon or Kobo or anyone else, if the customer has to go to an internet browser to purchase ebooks.

It makes a difference to Apple. Otherwise, they wouldn't have done this.

[tomsem]

What you cannot do with a web app is side-load content, or register for opening a particular file type (email attachments, Dropbox etc.), which Kobo app allows. And offline storage is fixed, rather than equal to 'available free space'.

But at least the basic reading experience could be pretty much equal to a native app, and they could have a tightly integrated storefront, and Apple could not do anything about it.

[L.J. Sellers]

Here's a recent article on Kobo's plans... and a quote from the piece.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/...-restrictions/

"Nobody but nerds install web-apps."
L.J.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

It makes a difference to Apple. Otherwise, they wouldn't have done this.

Yeah, but the difference it makes has to do with apps other than ebook apps - with magazines & newspapers - as someone mentioned earlier in the thread.

I think that the impact on ebook apps is collateral damage.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by tomsem

What you cannot do with a web app is side-load content, or register for opening a particular file type (email attachments, Dropbox etc.), which Kobo app allows. And offline storage is fixed, rather than equal to 'available free space'.

But at least the basic reading experience could be pretty much equal to a native app, and they could have a tightly integrated storefront, and Apple could not do anything about it.

Well, Amazon is keeping an app on the iPhone/Pad, not a webapp, so presumably Kobo could continue to offer an app which would do those things.

I don't understand what you mean about offline storage.

[readingglasses]

"Nobody but nerds install web-apps."
L.J.

Nobody but listless losers install web apps. And nerds.

THere might be a lot of those (I'm one). But most people will be happy to bypass the process if they can.

Kobo is going to make a LOT of money. They clearly know what they're doing.
The idea of them as a "little canadian competitor" is going to fade fast and they'll be just as evil in their success as anyone else. They "fight" apple today. And tomorrow apple will be fighting a just fight against them.