Tengo and Cache

This project was born from a desire to push on from some work of creating iPhone applications using only web technologies that I had done some time ago. That work can be seen http://github.com/robb1e/iWeb. This first project was a way of deploying a HTML/CSS/Javascript application onto an iOS device and have it run as a native application.

The issue with that was the only way to change HTML, CSS, Javascript, images or other data was to depend on a live internet connection or do an application update. I was looking for a way to make it easier to cache those resources with a specific eye on offline experience.

After some thought, the lightbulb switched on and it became an immediate choice to use the HTML5 Cache Manifest file as a basis of discovering what resources should cached. This project aims to do just that.

Between the application bootstrapping and a webpage being rendered, the cache manifest is read and each file is downloaded and stored in the iOS application sandbox directory. After all files have been saved, the UIWebView will render an index.html file in that sandbox.

Check it out: http://github.com/robb1e/Tengo-and-Cache

Apple, standards and plugins

I hate to sound dramatic but with Apple sounding off about web standards over plugins with their latest products I was wondering just how much Apple was dragging he industry forward, or if it was doing the opposite.

Some years ago, developing web applications meant having to know the details about the browsers your audience were using. We're still suffering from this today with discussion over different box models and questions about just when are Microsoft going to release a standards compliant browser. One example of this is anyone who uses Exchange for email. They might know the pain of using the web client given how rich it is in Internet Explorer and how average it is in any other browser.

The advent of cross browser JavaScript libraries helped reduce many of these pains and it's great to see a lot of work going into the new HTML5 specs that are taking lessons direct from these libraries. However, whilst singing the praises of a few websites that are using the new HTML5 audio and video elements, Apple seem to be creating their own events for touch that I can't see anywhere in the specs. It seems Mozilla are also playing the same game also and I'm worried that we're returning to a world where we have to tailor lots of code to target specific browsers.

You only have to go to Nike.com or log into Gmail to see iPad websites that have orientation and swipe support. It's all very nice but how much extra work is going to have to take place to get a website to work in different browsers and different devices? What happens when a new device comes out with different events, or even as with the new iPhone and it's different screen resolutions, how will that change the work already in the wild?

This raises further questions for me, especially after reports of JavaScript execution speed on the iPad , even though some frameworks claim this isn't so much of a problem, such as Spoutcore Touch
and others go further saying that no framework should be used at all to ensure performance

Although Apple have created fairly complete documentation about building web content for their devices, it does beg the question why there should be differences if we are supposed to live in a standards world? How long will it be before you hit a webpage and have it say "The website is best viewed with iPad", or any other device or browser for that matter?

Should we ignore the devices ad go for standards like the BBC iPlayer for big screens like PS3 and iPad , use libraries to augment sites like how apple.com/iphone allows the user to swipe the image carousel, tailor something specific for each device such as Nike.com or should we just be building native applications?

How should we progress? Should we let our analytics decide? Should we take the standards route or device specific route? This will certainly be one to keep an eye on.

Convergence, Divergence, Convience and Quality

When I got my first job, I was really keen to get a great stereo. At the time the thinking was that to get quality music playback, hi-fi separates ware the way forward. Each component was stand alone, loosely joined by standard interconnects (phono, coaxial or fibre optics), and was easily replaced, upgraded or repaired without affecting the rest of the product. This was opposed to a hi-fi that when, say the CD player breaks, you need to replace the whole damm thing.

Now the trend is convergence, as Dr. Pep mentions, I have been tempting him, and myself, into buying an iPhone. The obvious comparison is the iPhone is convergence personified. It's a mobile phone, a 3G device, it's wifi enabled, a MP3 player, a GPS receiver and a pseudo computer that fits in your pocket.

What happens if one of those features breaks, or you need to change the battery? Well, it seems your in trouble. But that's the price for convenience. The alternative is a mobile phone (with or without 3G access), a laptop with wifi and a 3G dongle, a MP3 player and a GPS receiver. You can of course get other devices than the iPhone that do many of these things, but let's face it, they not an iPhone.

So here's the dilemma, I want to upgrade/get new features like GPS and 3G access. But I already have an iPod, a mobile phone and a wifi enabled laptop. If I were to buy the iPhone, do I throw this all away? If so, it becomes an expensive upgrade.

Does it follow that, more convergence means less devices, means more time on a single device, means wearing that divice out sooner, means expensive upgrades more often? How does having one be and end all device affect my battery life, I don't want to be have to plug something in every four hours.

Steven Fry, Techo Blogger

I grew up watching Steven Fry in Blackadder and always found him funny. When ever I'd read an article from him I'd always found myself chuckling. I had no idea that he wrote a gadget column in the Guardian until they printed an article about the iPhone on the front page on the Saturday edition. You can read it here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/nov/10/iphone1?gusrc=rss&feed=media

This is probably the most convincing article I've read about the iPhone for the UK, worth a read.