On 23 Sep 2009, at 11:53, Brian Kelly wrote:
> One related application area in which the Android is ahead of the
> is augmented reality.
right. we're keen to get stuck into that too. excellent potential
> devices. And this is an example of where I would disagree with the
> that all applications must be universally accessible on all
> devices. If you
> have a large potential user base of iPhone users and development is
> affordable (as Paul Boag speculates is the case) then I think it
> would be
> mistaken not to develop a native app from a point of principle.
I don't think I'd say its a principle, more a business decision about
where to spend money.
Plainly we can't accord to write native apps for all of (at least)
iPhone, Android, BBerry, WinMo;
so we need a web app. If we _can_ do a better experience for the
iPhone folks, then obviously
do so - but not if it doubles the budget?
Our current strategy is rapid development on the simplest platform
(web) in order to win hearts and minds of people with power and data.
If they get onside, we're home and dry. If we don't excite them cos
our app is not well sexed-up and shiny, then we lose the gamble.
Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431
Sólo le pido a Dios
que el futuro no me sea indiferente