[Humanist] 24.352 iPad apps by us

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Wed Sep 22 22:19:18 CEST 2010


                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 24, No. 352.
        Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                      www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
               Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

[1]   From:    James Rovira <jamesrovira at gmail.com>                      (12)
Subject: Re: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us

[2]   From:    Desmond Schmidt <desmond.schmidt at qut.edu.au>              (42)
Subject: RE: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us

[3]   From:    Constantinescu Nicolaie <kosson at gmail.com>                (10)
Subject: Re: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us

--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 16:49:48 -0400
From: James Rovira <jamesrovira at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us
In-Reply-To: <20100921200955.986D97F48C at woodward.joyent.us>

Right -- I am thinking of it as part of a set of annotations or
facsimiles or part of an annotated document.  An app that can manage
very hi res images and handle the zooming on a hi res document with
annotations.  I see a lot of iPad apps that crash, especially some of
those that handle images.

Very sorry to hear it's not something that you'd be doing, but I like
the product that you described even without these features.

Jim R

> That's encouraging, but I wouldn't sell it. If it's not free I don't want to do it.
> Thank you though for your suggestion that it provide a zoom facility and
> image elements - I presume you mean as part of a set of annotations
> as well as facsimilies. I agree that these are all desirable features.

--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 07:09:06 +1000
From: Desmond Schmidt <desmond.schmidt at qut.edu.au>
Subject: RE: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us



>        Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:02:37 +0100
>        From: Timothy Hill <timothy.d.hill at gmail.com>
>        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 24.343 iPad apps by us
>        In-Reply-To: <20100920212021.8FECC7D1EF at woodward.joyent.us>

>Ditto what Dave Postles said - and to claim that 'what the ipad [sic]
>offers is a more consistent platform than the web' is ridiculous. If
>you ignore all but one platform, then indeed that platform will be
>entirely consistent with itself. But I don't find that entirely
>surprising.

>If I developed all my sites solely for display using Safari/Mac 10.6
>with a 1440 x 900 resolution on the grounds that that's what I happen
>to own and prefer, I would then have an entirely consistent platform
>as well - *and* it would be web-based! Let's not allow the fact that
>we all have a bunch of shiny new iToys distract us from the fact that
>not everyone else does or can.

>Timothy Hill
>Centre for Computing in the Humanities
>  King's College London

Hi Tim,

I'm afraid I don't understand your argument. The iPad offers a consistent
development platform that works on every iPad, and yet provides the
application with access to the Internet. So it offers the user much the same
kind of interaction as a traditional web application, with the removal of
constraints on how I may layout out controls on the page, and what kind of
controls - constraints inherent in the HTML web standard. It is also much
more consistent, as you admit. Every version of every browser runs a
different version of Javascript and interprets CSS differently. This makes
development very difficult in a way that is simply absent on the iPad.

Your example, though, fails. It is not practical to write a web application
for one browser and one screen resolution. Such a tool would actually not be
a web application, in the sense of a program accessible by all. In your
example that would exclude not just a small percentage of users but nearly
all of them. An ipad application on the other hand is not accessible by all,
but it doesn't try to be.

As several people have said in this thread already the iPad offers
possibilities to developers and users that should be exploited by humanists.
It's not just a shiny new toy. Since a large number of people are buying it,
it becomes a new platform that we should explore and exploit to reach those
users. I say that not because I have an ipad (I don't) or because I like
Apple's products (I don't). The argument I believe transcends mere hype.

best
Desmond Schmidt
Information Security Institute
Queensland University of Technology

--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:09:33 +0300
From: Constantinescu Nicolaie <kosson at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Humanist] 24.347 iPad apps by us


Dear friends,

Please take into consideration the fact that the big wave of the
tablets is yet to come (September is the first wave starting with
ARCHOS products or Samsung). Wait for Android 2.2 based platform and
there you will have an open platform for development.

Kind regards,

--
Constantinescu Nicolaie
Information Architect
http://www.kosson.ro




More information about the Humanist mailing list