
DHH: we're already overloaded with connectivity - pg
http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/347-youre-not-on-a-fucking-plane-and-if-you-are-it-doesnt-matter
======
vlad
Sorry, PG, but I think you are wrong in the article description. I think
everybody is missing the point of the article:

Summary: "Offline web app access is getting too much publicity. I can't
control myself. For example: if I had online access on a plane, I'd have no
choice but to use it to work on my site. Cherish the plane, because people
don't need even more internet access, we're already connected too much."

The article was more about his inability to control his behavior, thinking
that a plane is special because he doesn't have to be online while he's on it.

While David did mention that offline web apps are getting an undue amounts of
attention in the first sentence, the rest of the article was a rant about his
inability to control his behavior. He didn't say they are overrated. He's just
saying he's glad planes don't have internet access so he can read a book or
enjoy a coffee, because otherwise, he would be online working on his company
site.

I think he just needs to control his own behavior better, such as by taking
less electronic devices with him so that Internet access doesn't suck up his
life.

In fact, I would say offline web apps would actually be a plus in his
situation, because he could focus on just the tasks he's trying to accomplish,
without feeling overwhelmed by connectivity. If his goal is to savor time away
from internet connectivity, he should leave his devices at home, or take a
laptop to an area without internet access and work with software and web-apps
offline.

~~~
pg
Hmm, maybe so; I changed the title.

~~~
vlad
Wow, what fast tech support. Happy to post something found useful. Thank you
for this web site, for accepting me to startup school, and advice to move to
SF. And the articles.

Although David added the first sentence about offline apps to get reader
attention, his whole post was about his embarrassment about not being able to
control himself. I think offline web apps would actually help him, not hinder
him, to work on the things he needs to accomplish in a remote area without
AIM, trillian, skype, cell phones, etc to bother thim.

------
boomstrap
I think its always dangerous to make overarching statements that are meant
encompass a whole category of applications. (this goes for multi-column keys
too..)

I have found myself many times with my laptop in my car but unable to check my
work's webmail to double check my calender because I'm offline.

Just to expand a bit I think its necessary for anyone building a webapp to
look at how and why people need to access their app and develop accordingly.

------
nickb
Web apps are so successful because you don't have to instal anything: no
setups, no runtimes, no permission requirements on corporate sites, no need to
run updates etc.

This new wave of "we need to be offline" is undermining all of that with a
non-existing problem. I have no need to have offline GMail, for example. I
might have a need to have offline Google Docs (if their site is down) but
that's so low on my list of requirements since Google.com is up 99.99% of the
time.

I believe that every one of these "web app on your desktop" movements will
ultimately fail for being unnecessary.

------
volida
I somehow agree and I wondered why all this excitement for offline access of
applications. Of course syncing and having offline backup of your information
is good but, nowadays, they only way to escape being online is by choosing it.
I am aware of flights over atlantic that have wifi...

Really, how many times in your life did you find yourself offline and needing
to use a web application? And if you did find yourself offline most probably
you are without your pc or your mobile which means you end up using another
device.

Oops! That means no access to that trendy offline application you installed
the other day!

Everyone is moving inside the web, not outside it.

Go Grid!

P.S And I think now I am getting it! Thaaat was the sarcasm from Google with
GMail Paper!

~~~
vlad
The author writes that there is way too much connectivity, and hard to escape
it (except for a plane ride, which he thinks is awesome.) I think that's an
argument FOR offline web apps, and FOR self-control.

~~~
volida
but being unable to escape connectivity makes useless for most users offline
web apps...and i think having to use offline web app (a term that really
sounds wrong) would just add frustration

~~~
vlad
No; people just need to take control of themselves and use offline web apps or
desktop apps when they want to work on just one thing without distractions.
Plus, the battery is going to last much longer for both phones and laptops
that way.

------
inklesspen
Oh, yay, DHH. The same guy who insists that you never need a multiple-column
primary key.

I currently work for a company (yeah, yeah; the startup is gonna be next year,
once I graduate) that produces software for health care agencies. We're
writing the next version of our app in Rails, but the problem is that a
significant number of our customers need to be able to use the app out in the
boonies. Out where if they're lucky, they have _analog_ cell phone service.

There is a real need for offline capability for webapps; you just don't see it
when you keep your eyes on 37Signals-type apps.

~~~
RyanGWU82
_There is a real need for offline capability for webapps; you just don't see
it when you keep your eyes on 37Signals-type apps._

What kind of apps do you think are more suited for this? Just curious.

~~~
inklesspen
Well, as I said, my company's app needs it. And if you follow the link to
DHH's site, you see many people in the comments talking about their apps that
need offline support; companies working with Australian ag businesses, for
example.

Another thing might be 30Boxes or whatever favorite calendar app you have.
Sure, you can sync the feed to iCal, but you can't do everything off a feed.

------
felipe
I think people in general are missing the point about rich-client web-apps. It
is _NOT_ about offline access, but about leveraging web-app skills (HTML,
Javascript) to access hardware resources that otherwise would be blocked by
the browser.

Web-based apps and RIA are here to stay, but there's still space for client-
side apps. Example: Skype and iTunes.

~~~
volida
Someone already could deploy the user interface of their application using
HTML/CSS, using either the awesome IWebBrowser2 COM interface from Microsoft,
or the Mozzila Browser. Norton Antivirus is using IWebBrowser, Skype i think
is uzing Mozzila's... Applications like Skype could never be developed using
anything else than the perfomance of native compiled C/C++. And if not
compiled, they could never use tricks to stop you from debugging Skype...

~~~
felipe
Skype uses Qt, not Mozilla:
[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q;=skype+qt&btnG;=Google+Search](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=skype+qt&btnG=Google+Search)

I agree that a Javascript-based client-app might not perform as well as a
native C/C++ app, but I would not say "could never be developed"...

Adobe Apollo does generate a compiled package (aka "air"). I believe Apollo
also generates a native executable file after the app is installed.

PS: I'm not an Apollo evangelist. I just wanted to point out that web-based
client apps are not about off-line features.

