Home – New Forums Tech talk Mobile App’s are they up to scratch.

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #991235
    bb1
    Participant
    • Total posts: 4,485
    Up
    0
    ::

    Ok, there have been a few threads on here about google apparently changing its rankings based on mobile responsiveness for web sites, which is great.

    Just a general comment about some of the apps available for even some of our bigger organisations.

    Had a weekend away, and couldnt take my laptop, so was limited to using the tablet and resorting to some of the app’s of the big players like Ebay, my big 4 bank, and a couple of others.

    Not only were the app’s very gludgy (english??) to use, they just did not have the same functionality as you can get from the normal website. I know it is an app and as such people say they are not the same. But in the next breath it is said we will all be doing business via our mobile devices in the not to distant future.

    Well app developers if that is the case can we please have functionality and “user friendliness” to the standard web front ends offer.

    Just my winge, and see what responses come back.

    #1180583
    Greg_M
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,691
    Up
    0
    ::

    I’d agree it’s a pretty mixed bag out there.

    Just to clarify, were these “apps” – “native” i.e. you downloaded and installed them, or were they the sites dished up via the web, that detected the device you were viewing on?

    Usually a native app has access to the underlying device hardware acceleration, gestures etc … and as such shouldn’t be gludgy (I’m making assumptions about your meaning for gludgy) beyond that they can still very well be crap.

    Some bigger sites (I know ebay is one) dish up mobile specific sites, rather than a full site in a responsive format … in my experience they are usually pretty ordinary.

    Also if your relying on the sim in the actual device and your not in a very good reception area a even lot of responsive sites are awful. Where I live a phone or tablet will never get to 4G (even though our favourite provider says there’s full coverage), so a site that takes say 4 seconds or more on WiFi (did I say WordPress) will probably be intolerable on a phone.

    I don’t use a lot of native apps, but some are brilliant. The one for the Guardian newspaper is one I use a lot, ABC radio is another good one … don’t use it for banking though, surprisingly for a “Cloud” advocate I don’t trust the security on my phone. I understand how to secure my computer (well as well as anyone can) but I don’t trust something I don’t understand the inner workings of.

    I reckon, just like the web once was, mobile stuff is in it’s infancy and we’ll continue to get a mixed bag for a while … consumers seem to want it though.

    Cheers

    #1180584
    bb1
    Participant
    • Total posts: 4,485
    Up
    0
    ::
    estim8, post: 210590 wrote:
    I’d agree it’s a pretty mixed bag out there.

    Just to clarify, were these “apps” – “native” i.e. you downloaded and installed them, or were they the sites dished up via the web, that detected the device you were viewing on?

    Usually a native app has access to the underlying device hardware acceleration, gestures etc … and as such shouldn’t be gludgy (I’m making assumptions about your meaning for gludgy) beyond that they can still very well be crap.

    Some bigger sites (I know ebay is one) dish up mobile specific sites, rather than a full site in a responsive format … in my experience they are usually pretty ordinary.

    Also if your relying on the sim in the actual device and your not in a very good reception area a even lot of responsive sites are bloody awful. Where I live a phone or tablet will never get to 4G (even though our favourite provider says there’s full coverage), so a site that takes say 4 seconds or more on WiFi (did I say WordPress) will probably be intolerable on a phone.

    I don’t use a lot of native apps, but some are brilliant. The one for the Guardian newspaper is one I use a lot, ABC radio is another good one … don’t use it for banking though, surprisingly for a “Cloud” advocate I don’t trust the security on my phone. I understand how to secure my computer (well as well as anyone can) but I don’t trust something I don’t understand the inner workings of.

    I reckon, just like the web once was, mobile stuff is in it’s infancy and we’ll continue to get a mixed bag for a while … consumers seem to want it though.

    Cheers

    Tried both the site dished up (which for Ebay was appalling) and the downloaded app’s, they have a long way to go. At least with my bank I could go back to the web based interface, whereas no matter what I tried Ebay forced me to use the dished up site.

    I didnt even consider performance in my thinking, because my laptop at home is getting a little ancient so I am used to slowness (bit like me I guess), I was more considering usability.

    And I agree users want it, and I am all for it if I can go away and not have to take a laptop, and just throw in the tablet, its a bonus, but you have to be able to do the same, and as efficiently with both approaches.

    #1180585
    Greg_M
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,691
    Up
    0
    ::
    bb1, post: 210595 wrote:
    Tried both the site dished up (which for Ebay was appalling) and the downloaded app’s, they have a long way to go. At least with my bank I could go back to the web based interface, whereas no matter what I tried Ebay forced me to use the dished up site.

    I didnt even consider performance in my thinking, because my laptop at home is getting a little ancient so I am used to slowness (bit like me I guess), I was more considering usability.

    And I agree users want it, and I am all for it if I can go away and not have to take a laptop, and just throw in the tablet, its a bonus, but you have to be able to do the same, and as efficiently with both approaches.

    There’s a lot of effort and $ going into trying to get it right ATM, check out the demand for UI and UX designers and every week there seems to be some new framework hitting the market to make it simpler to build apps.

    Mozilla are creating tools so any one can do it … maybe if you build your own, you’ll like them.

    I didn’t keep the link :o, but after reading this post a couple of days ago I copped an article off Twitter that highlighted some of the usability issues on small screens.

    The author was apparently a UI guru … his claim is that we are slowly learning to identify standardised icons for many tasks on a mobile which greatly reduces the need for screen space (and text explanation instructions and navigation links).

    I think for people that are mobile junkies this is already true.

    A personal observation is that many mobile users are “scanners”, compulsive multi taskers that don’t really want to “drill down” into detail content, they are also very fast doing it … not my preferred option, being an old school type, I tend to want to read the fine print (and comprehend it) before I commit, but I think I’m becoming a rare breed.

    My next observation is that many app developers are young … technically brilliant, but caught up in the social media paradigm and often lacking in real world experience of what a business is really looking for … guess that won’t change until they get a few more kilometres on the clock.

    I actually had some exposure to a team of developers who were onto this, and were looking for venture partners with this real world business process experience but didn’t have the tech skills to drive it.

    Demand will drive it all in the right direction eventually is my guess.

    #1180586
    bb1
    Participant
    • Total posts: 4,485
    Up
    0
    ::

    I think also the rapid development approach doesnt help, you dont really get the full user requirements, testing and all that used to be involved in the development lifecycle.

    Its more get something out there than see what people complain about and patch on the run.

    The approach makes sense in some ways (quick to market), but it can also turn users away

    #1180587
    Greg_M
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,691
    Up
    0
    ::
    bb1, post: 210781 wrote:
    I think also the rapid development approach doesnt help, you dont really get the full user requirements, testing and all that used to be involved in the development lifecycle.

    Its more get something out there than see what people complain about and patch on the run.

    The approach makes sense in some ways (quick to market), but it can also turn users away

    True.

    Current thinking/trend seems to be MVP (minimum viable product). Get to market quickly, continue to iterate if you get some traction, otherwise, dump and run.

    From what I’ve read the thinking is that the user is the best judge, rather than lots of in house expenditure and sophisticated guessing, only to find out an apps a dud with no real demand.

    Google seem to be masters at throwing mud at the wall and seeing what sticks.

    The developers I mentioned before had all sorts of smoke and mirror processes for testing demand and monetisation before they committed to any serious coding or design.

    I think the better shops do plenty of actual code testing but maybe not user experience. Good programmers aren’t necessarily good designers, hence the rise in standardised front end frameworks for visuals and layout.

    I don’t think releasing to market too early is a new phenomenon in software development … remember reading a book on system development that claimed one of the earlier versions of Windows OS went to market with 60,000 known bugs.

    The upside is there’s plenty of scope for profit if you get it right.

    Cheers

    #1180588
    bb1
    Participant
    • Total posts: 4,485
    Up
    0
    ::
    estim8, post: 210785 wrote:
    I Good programmers aren’t necessarily good designers,

    or testers

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.