Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
> From: Dan McGrath > Don't just find out 'what' the users want to achieve, > understand 'why' as well. Quite right, Dan. My poorly edited text intended to convey that developers shouldn't continue to question why they should do something with alternative user interfaces. It should be evident that after over a decade of GUI and now voice/mobile that learning how to do these things should be a given. I was talking about technology in general, not specific tasks. I'll note that when people ask questions here like "how do I connect to Universe with ODBC", my response here is frequently "why ODBC?" and "what are you ultimately trying to achieve?" Such responses are often met with hostility, though as you say, it's important to understand why so that we can provide better solutions. A guy just can't win in these forums... LOL It would be interesting to get some feedback from others here who has actually engaged in discussions about mobile interfaces to their U2 apps. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath That is, unless you have the holy grail of users that are able to perfectly articulate the solution that works for them each and every time. Ahh - never met those people yet ;) ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
While you have a lot of great points in here Tony.
I have to strongly disagree with the "Don't ask why, just get on the
bandwagon"
Asking "why" doesn't mean you won't do it. Asking why is fundamental to
understanding the real reasons. If you don't understand the real
reasons, you are doing no better than providing your own limited
interpretation of the users actually want and run the very real risk of
providing a solution that you "think" is what they want (for example, it
provides a GUI) as opposed to a solution the users really want.
Don't just find out 'what' the users want to achieve, understand 'why'
as well.
That is, unless you have the holy grail of users that are able to
perfectly articulate the solution that works for them each and every
time.
Regards,
Dan
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno
Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2011 8:19 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
> From: Symeon Breen
> Well what a conversation
>
> I think u2 has as much to do with mobile apps as sql server does.
> Completely divorced. As programmers we should take an interest in all
> sorts of technology , I don't call myself a picky i am a programmer,
> what language shall i use today ?
What a conversation indeed. Dove-tailing with Symeon's note, technology
is irrelevant, always is, it's the applications that are relevant. Find
some app worth creating, and generate revenue selling it. That's the
bottom line. Many of you are employed to provide intranet solutions but
many of you, or your companies, derive income by providing solutions to
a wider audience. We earn our income by selling what THEY want. Find
out what that is and sell it to them. If you work for a company, find
out what your management wants, and then provide it. This notion of
trying to come up with an app to sell is kinda backwards - especially if
the only thing you can think of (or know about) are games.
I haven't responded to this thread recently because I've been doing some
travelling around the country. One of my activities has been to do
demos and get field feedback for a new SMS/texting-based service I've
written backed by MV. (Universe may be used for international/unicode
support.) We're not using "apps" because I don't want to get involved
in the issues associated with Java or Objective-C, device-specific
limitations, or mobile OS release issues. I need to pick low-hanging
fruit.
I'm not even jumping on the HTML5/CSS3 bandwagon yet. With 7 billion
people on this planet, there are over 5 billion mobile devices in use.
A significant percentage does not have internet access. While all the
ads are for flashy app-driven devices, I believe most of the devices
used today are very basic, sold without internet service plans. Most
(I'll dare to say) users and devices make use of SMS/texting, and
statistics for billions of text messages per day worldwide support a
focus on that market.
There are two points here.
First, it all starts with the application, and all of us are involved
with business apps in one way or another. If anyone here can't come up
with a reason to use a mobile device, just ask "real users". In my
recent travels it was hard to keep up with the ideas that people had for
using my software (and they don't know or care that it's MV or BASIC on
the server). As a result of the feedback, we're planning of kicking off
several small "verticalized" businesses in addition to supporting a more
horizontal consumer offering. Users are in a better position than
technologists to express how they use devices for business.
People in this forum might not be able to come up with applications for
mobile devices, but end-users sure as heck can.
Talk to them! Find out what your users (or prospects) need!
Don't feed people with technology ("how can we use mobile?"), ask people
what problems THEY need to solve and ask if mobile would help.
Second, if you think more in terms of Data, what you deal with every
day, then the deployment method is totally irrelevant - and it's subject
to change over time anyway. The thing about Mobile is that it's Mobile,
not so much that it's pretty. Focus on the benefits and dynamics of
mobile computing first, and the specifics of the UI can be discussed
after you have designed a paradigm for retrieving server data from a
mobile client. We're starting with SMS - we might later introduce
device-specific apps as an enhancement, but we're Mobile first and app
developers second.
When GUI first arrived on the scene people in these MV forums were
asking "why GUI?" and "what would I do with a G
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
> From: Symeon Breen
> Well what a conversation
>
> I think u2 has as much to do with mobile apps as sql
> server does. Completely divorced. As programmers we
> should take an interest in all sorts of technology , I
> don't call myself a picky i am a programmer, what
> language shall i use today ?
What a conversation indeed. Dove-tailing with Symeon's note,
technology is irrelevant, always is, it's the applications that
are relevant. Find some app worth creating, and generate revenue
selling it. That's the bottom line. Many of you are employed to
provide intranet solutions but many of you, or your companies,
derive income by providing solutions to a wider audience. We
earn our income by selling what THEY want. Find out what that is
and sell it to them. If you work for a company, find out what
your management wants, and then provide it. This notion of
trying to come up with an app to sell is kinda backwards -
especially if the only thing you can think of (or know about) are
games.
I haven't responded to this thread recently because I've been
doing some travelling around the country. One of my activities
has been to do demos and get field feedback for a new
SMS/texting-based service I've written backed by MV. (Universe
may be used for international/unicode support.) We're not using
"apps" because I don't want to get involved in the issues
associated with Java or Objective-C, device-specific limitations,
or mobile OS release issues. I need to pick low-hanging fruit.
I'm not even jumping on the HTML5/CSS3 bandwagon yet. With 7
billion people on this planet, there are over 5 billion mobile
devices in use. A significant percentage does not have internet
access. While all the ads are for flashy app-driven devices, I
believe most of the devices used today are very basic, sold
without internet service plans. Most (I'll dare to say) users
and devices make use of SMS/texting, and statistics for billions
of text messages per day worldwide support a focus on that
market.
There are two points here.
First, it all starts with the application, and all of us are
involved with business apps in one way or another. If anyone
here can't come up with a reason to use a mobile device, just ask
"real users". In my recent travels it was hard to keep up with
the ideas that people had for using my software (and they don't
know or care that it's MV or BASIC on the server). As a result
of the feedback, we're planning of kicking off several small
"verticalized" businesses in addition to supporting a more
horizontal consumer offering. Users are in a better position
than technologists to express how they use devices for business.
People in this forum might not be able to come up with
applications for mobile devices, but end-users sure as heck can.
Talk to them! Find out what your users (or prospects) need!
Don't feed people with technology ("how can we use mobile?"), ask
people what problems THEY need to solve and ask if mobile would
help.
Second, if you think more in terms of Data, what you deal with
every day, then the deployment method is totally irrelevant - and
it's subject to change over time anyway. The thing about Mobile
is that it's Mobile, not so much that it's pretty. Focus on the
benefits and dynamics of mobile computing first, and the
specifics of the UI can be discussed after you have designed a
paradigm for retrieving server data from a mobile client. We're
starting with SMS - we might later introduce device-specific apps
as an enhancement, but we're Mobile first and app developers
second.
When GUI first arrived on the scene people in these MV forums
were asking "why GUI?" and "what would I do with a GUI?" Even
now people still ask "how do I create a GUI?". Overall, we're in
the business of Data Processing with a solid engine for
development and execution of business rules, not User Interface
Processing. UI's change continuously over time. Don't ask Why,
just get on the bandwagon and sell what people want, or your
competition will continue to earn the fees that you do not, while
you're still wondering what to do with the newfangled gizmo of
the day.
Regards,
T
Tony Gravagno
Nebula Research and Development
TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com
Nebula R&D sells mv.NET and other Pick/MultiValue products
worldwide, and provides related development services
remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog
Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute!
http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
On 24/05/11 00:59, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: > Oh yeah, this is fun stuff (given that I am not either party, that is). As I > recall from reading a while back, someone left some test code in the google > product that was taken directly from Sun/Oracle code, which greatly > complicated their defense when it was found that this code was deployed. > Oops. That was supposed to be removed before delivery. That poor programmer > in the trenches. He/She/They apparently did not grasp the big picture or > magnitude of deploying such code. --dawn It's also severely embarrassed Oracle :-) They presented the code to the Judge, saying "Google haven't got a licence". Turns out, iirc, that the code had a Free licence, but the version given to the Judge had the licence information stripped... Rumour has it that the code was actually the output of a decompiler, but that might not be true. Anyways, as far as I can make out, everything was legit but *appeared* illegitimate. And at least some of that *appearance* seems to be deliberate Oracle shenanigans. :-) Oops. Especially as the Judge seems to dislike corporate fun and games :-) Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Oh yeah, this is fun stuff (given that I am not either party, that is). As I recall from reading a while back, someone left some test code in the google product that was taken directly from Sun/Oracle code, which greatly complicated their defense when it was found that this code was deployed. Oops. That was supposed to be removed before delivery. That poor programmer in the trenches. He/She/They apparently did not grasp the big picture or magnitude of deploying such code. --dawn On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Wols Lists wrote: > On 23/05/11 18:35, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: > > As an aside, I told Java students that they could apply to work on an > > android app rather than a standard JRE app for a Programming II course > last > > semester. Two (out of 13) of them did and I was very impressed. One > deployed > > to a phone, the other to an emulator. It isn't a piece of cake, but it > has > > some good libraries (spec'ing of screens using xml, for example). It is > an > > entirely different run-time engine, written by Google but not as a JVM, > so > > the legal side of this should be interesting to watch. --dawn > > The Oracle vs Google lawsuit is currently being tracked by Groklaw, so > if anyone is interested, that's a good place to find stuff. > > Cheers, > Wol > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
On 23/05/11 18:35, Dawn Wolthuis wrote: > As an aside, I told Java students that they could apply to work on an > android app rather than a standard JRE app for a Programming II course last > semester. Two (out of 13) of them did and I was very impressed. One deployed > to a phone, the other to an emulator. It isn't a piece of cake, but it has > some good libraries (spec'ing of screens using xml, for example). It is an > entirely different run-time engine, written by Google but not as a JVM, so > the legal side of this should be interesting to watch. --dawn The Oracle vs Google lawsuit is currently being tracked by Groklaw, so if anyone is interested, that's a good place to find stuff. Cheers, Wol ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Thanks Symeon. When we get to this point (not really soon), this will be very helpful. I had heard at one point that Apple was going to clamp down on apps that were simply wrappers on web sites, but I have not heard more about that (and I don't live in that world at this point). As an aside, I told Java students that they could apply to work on an android app rather than a standard JRE app for a Programming II course last semester. Two (out of 13) of them did and I was very impressed. One deployed to a phone, the other to an emulator. It isn't a piece of cake, but it has some good libraries (spec'ing of screens using xml, for example). It is an entirely different run-time engine, written by Google but not as a JVM, so the legal side of this should be interesting to watch. --dawn On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:28 AM, Symeon Breen wrote: > Dawn FYI wrapping a browser in both android and iphone is very easy - and > actually similar code - they both use the webkit library so you just create > a minimal app that draws a browser and is set to a certain url - you can > then capture the back button etc so as to do what is required. - usually > only about 20 lines of code and it is similar code for each. It also scales > the site to the correct dimensions to fill the screen so works really well. > There are services that will actually do this for you like > https://build.phonegap.com/, tho if you want to do an ios one you still > need > your apple dev key. > > > Rgds > Symeon. > > > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis > Sent: 23 May 2011 00:50 > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > I agree. We will be migrating to html 5 soon but even where we are today, > the pages work on the iPhone family (including iPod touch, iPad) as well as > on android. So, while I can imagine preparing a Java wrapper for android > and > perhaps even an objective-c wrapper for apple to wrap the web site (not as > if I know just what that would take), I really do not want to write > separate > apps for each possible device. Writing a web application with a UI that is > good for a phone and also works well for a desktop/laptop/pad computer > should mean we can single-source an app for all such platforms (knock on > wood), even if specifying different css for different devices. > > I can imagine writing phone-OS-specific apps for something that can be run > without being on the web, but for many SaaS or old-fashioned data > processing > apps, html 5 pages seems like a good idea to me. --dawn > > On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Kevin King > wrote: > > > Symeon said "For mobile dev i think the way forward for many is html5 and > > css3". I wholeheartedly agree. > > > > While the bragging rights may be different for creating a webapp vs. a > > "true" mobile app in Java, C, etc., the features, portability, and > > maintainability available today with frameworks like jQuery Mobile are > just > > astounding. And the price ain't bad either. Then again, being able to > > create a respectable mobile webapp with nothing more than a simple editor > > is > > all so... Multivalue. > > > > -Kevin > > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > > ___ > > U2-Users mailing list > > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > > > > > -- > Dawn M. Wolthuis > > Take and give some delight today > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > - > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1509/3653 - Release Date: 05/22/11 > > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Dawn FYI wrapping a browser in both android and iphone is very easy - and actually similar code - they both use the webkit library so you just create a minimal app that draws a browser and is set to a certain url - you can then capture the back button etc so as to do what is required. - usually only about 20 lines of code and it is similar code for each. It also scales the site to the correct dimensions to fill the screen so works really well. There are services that will actually do this for you like https://build.phonegap.com/, tho if you want to do an ios one you still need your apple dev key. Rgds Symeon. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis Sent: 23 May 2011 00:50 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework I agree. We will be migrating to html 5 soon but even where we are today, the pages work on the iPhone family (including iPod touch, iPad) as well as on android. So, while I can imagine preparing a Java wrapper for android and perhaps even an objective-c wrapper for apple to wrap the web site (not as if I know just what that would take), I really do not want to write separate apps for each possible device. Writing a web application with a UI that is good for a phone and also works well for a desktop/laptop/pad computer should mean we can single-source an app for all such platforms (knock on wood), even if specifying different css for different devices. I can imagine writing phone-OS-specific apps for something that can be run without being on the web, but for many SaaS or old-fashioned data processing apps, html 5 pages seems like a good idea to me. --dawn On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Kevin King wrote: > Symeon said "For mobile dev i think the way forward for many is html5 and > css3". I wholeheartedly agree. > > While the bragging rights may be different for creating a webapp vs. a > "true" mobile app in Java, C, etc., the features, portability, and > maintainability available today with frameworks like jQuery Mobile are just > astounding. And the price ain't bad either. Then again, being able to > create a respectable mobile webapp with nothing more than a simple editor > is > all so... Multivalue. > > -Kevin > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1375 / Virus Database: 1509/3653 - Release Date: 05/22/11 ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
I agree. We will be migrating to html 5 soon but even where we are today, the pages work on the iPhone family (including iPod touch, iPad) as well as on android. So, while I can imagine preparing a Java wrapper for android and perhaps even an objective-c wrapper for apple to wrap the web site (not as if I know just what that would take), I really do not want to write separate apps for each possible device. Writing a web application with a UI that is good for a phone and also works well for a desktop/laptop/pad computer should mean we can single-source an app for all such platforms (knock on wood), even if specifying different css for different devices. I can imagine writing phone-OS-specific apps for something that can be run without being on the web, but for many SaaS or old-fashioned data processing apps, html 5 pages seems like a good idea to me. --dawn On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Kevin King wrote: > Symeon said "For mobile dev i think the way forward for many is html5 and > css3". I wholeheartedly agree. > > While the bragging rights may be different for creating a webapp vs. a > "true" mobile app in Java, C, etc., the features, portability, and > maintainability available today with frameworks like jQuery Mobile are just > astounding. And the price ain't bad either. Then again, being able to > create a respectable mobile webapp with nothing more than a simple editor > is > all so... Multivalue. > > -Kevin > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- Dawn M. Wolthuis Take and give some delight today ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Symeon said "For mobile dev i think the way forward for many is html5 and css3". I wholeheartedly agree. While the bragging rights may be different for creating a webapp vs. a "true" mobile app in Java, C, etc., the features, portability, and maintainability available today with frameworks like jQuery Mobile are just astounding. And the price ain't bad either. Then again, being able to create a respectable mobile webapp with nothing more than a simple editor is all so... Multivalue. -Kevin http://www.PrecisOnline.com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Well what a conversation I think u2 has as much to do with mobile apps as sql server does. Completely divorced. As programmers we should take an interest in all sorts of technology , I don't call myself a picky i am a programmer, what language shall i use today ? For mobile dev i think the way forward for many is html5 and css3 - there are many frameworks to make compelling ui's for the phone distributed by the browser, - sencha touch, jqtouch are two great examples. I have recently used sencha for a couple of apps, one on sql server the other for some system admin functions internally. It would be no harder to sit it in front of a u2 database as it would any other, so long as you have the web services in place. As for real apps - well yes i am in the process of writing a number of apps, android and windows phone are fairly easy as they are java and .net based so that comes naturally to me. Iphone a bit harder as you need to dev on a mac (urgghh) and it is in c, and it is a while since i did any c tbh. These are just hobby projects. I will let you into a secret here - i have dealt with a number of phone app development companies recently - they were all rubbish, none of them understood enterprise technology, software release cycles etc all the stuff we live and breathe as seasoned developers. But they are all writing stupid little apps that get downloaded by thousands of kids at 50p a go. So use your enormous brains and get out there and write some apps !! ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
We have started using an App called Citrix Receiver: http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=1689163 Have just started evaluating it. It seems to work well. Brett "David Jordan" wrote in message news:<6F91EB9F76538448AB0D1D84E19424D1199316A04D@DACONOSBSERVER2.daconosbs.local>... > Hi George > > I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for > downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. With an > app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more intuitive to > a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. However if you have > users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then you need to create a > separate app for each phone. With the new phones you need to load the app > from the marketplace which is difficult for an enterprise application. > Hence the decision to use an app vs web is related to performance and > intuitive interface vs portable and easier to load. > > Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a potential > risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app is a bit more > secure. > > Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a > spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to access > KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. > > David Jordan > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of GPM Development Ltd. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient ,you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. This e-mail was sent to you by GPM Development Ltd. We are incorporated under the laws of England and Wales (company no. 2292156 and VAT registration no. 523 5622 63). Our registered office is 6th Floor, AMP House, Croydon, Surrey CR0 2LX. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
> However, with mobile apps, you would need to have a different program, or at > least end-drivers for > each type of phone - and then you need to know which phone it's going to. ... >That's what I'm looking for.what are those really good apps that have been >developed out there > that would make it worth the effort. ... > Capturing signatures or GPS data , that I see as useful, and a potential > reason for development. > I could see devloping an app that would just accept data, then using the > phones User interface make displays that would > be difficult using a > browser.but that again, it would need to be something worth the > development. We do something like that using Windows Mobile and Windows XP on UMPCs. We have a product for "in the field" workers (I don't think I can go into actual detail here) which runs in .Net / .NetCF. Given signal availability issues, though, we don't use UO directly from the device - that's handled by a service on the server listening for MSMQ responses and a RedBack web service. This is used as a proof of delivery / proof of location mechanism, and includes signature capture (although that will need to disappear with Phone 7). GPS has been discussed / tested, too as a replacement for signatures. We don't currently support Android or iOS though, which makes maintenance a little easier. This electronic message contains information from CACI International Inc or subsidiary companies, which may be confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, be aware that any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at postmas...@caci.co.uk Viruses: Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. CACI Limited. Registered in England & Wales. Registration No. 1649776. CACI House, Avonmore Road, London, W14 8TS. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
I wrote a series of mobile applications back in '06 for use by our sales reps in the field. I opted to make them browser based so it was essentially the same WebSphere to U2 development I was already doing for our public facing web site. The only difference was that I stripped out javascript and images to make performance reasonable and sized everything to fit a small screen. We were using Palm Treos and the time and the horrible Blazer browser barely supported javascript, if at all. We're currently on Blackberries, and the app migration to the new platform consisted of minor tweaks to a single stylesheet. The web apps use Active Directory for authentication and everything runs over SSL, so it's plenty secure. Of course, the primary drawback of this approach is that if your data service gets dropped while you're right in the middle of a multi-step process (like placing an order), you're liable to have to start over. -John ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
George Gallen-2 wrote: > > Maybe we should have a mini thead on "Cool things I've got my UV system to > do with a > mobile device!" - or at the least, "cool things, I've got my system to do > with a mobile > device - just not in UV" > > I don't see this as a UV deficit, but rather a knowledge deficit in the > sense that if we don't > know what we can't do, it's hard to want to do it, or realize that we > should be doing it! > What about just - "Cool things I've got my MV system to do!" - Learn and Do Excel and Share http://mvdbs.com http://mvdbs.com -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Pondering-recent-thread-on-compact-framework-tp31651311p31658267.html Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
ok. But this isn't something that can't be done already using existing web programming, just tailored to the screen layout of a mobile device. I'm talking about interfacing with a mobile device using apps, which is different depending on which phone mfg you are trying to interface with. (granted, Tony was asking specific to Windows) But as stated already, if you use the web method, it's HTML, as long as the browser supports HTML, you have one development route. However, with mobile apps, you would need to have a different program, or at least end-drivers for each type of phone - and then you need to know which phone it's going to. Until, the phone mfgs start using ONE standard, it's there needs to be some really really good app out there that you can't do already either by email, or by browser that would make someone want to spend the development time/money to support 5 or 6 different standards. That's what I'm looking for.what are those really good apps that have been developed out there that would make it worth the effort. Capturing signatures or GPS data , that I see as useful, and a potential reason for development. I could see devloping an app that would just accept data, then using the phones User interface make displays that would be difficult using a browser.but that again, it would need to be something worth the development. Those are the ideas/reasons that need to be put out there, where we could pitch it's usefullness. Armed with these kind of uses, this could ignite some fires. > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- > boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John Thompson > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 1:24 PM > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > Two practical examples come to mind... > > Reports: > If you are talking about something at least as large as an Ipad, then > reports that top management would want to look at comes to mind. > > There are any number of tools out there, that are compatible with IOS > 4+ or > Android or WIndows Mobile "Browsers", or what have you, that you could > use > to grab a real time snapshot of sales for the day. > > The president of the company walks in, gets his coffee, turns on his > ipad, > opens up a browser, and touches the link to see the sales for today, or > for > yesterday. > > Proof of Delivery: > If you are into something that might actually make some money for the > company, then think proof of delivery. For those in the delivery > business... > What if you could write a web interface or an app for a mobile device > that > would capture a signature for an invoice? > Perhaps you might throw in some GPS capability and send data back to U2 > about where the driver went for the day, etc. > > ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Two practical examples come to mind... Reports: If you are talking about something at least as large as an Ipad, then reports that top management would want to look at comes to mind. There are any number of tools out there, that are compatible with IOS 4+ or Android or WIndows Mobile "Browsers", or what have you, that you could use to grab a real time snapshot of sales for the day. The president of the company walks in, gets his coffee, turns on his ipad, opens up a browser, and touches the link to see the sales for today, or for yesterday. How is this different, than him turning on his PC, firing up Accuterm, logging in, and viewing a green screen report of the same info? Not much, really, other than its prettier. Proof of Delivery: If you are into something that might actually make some money for the company, then think proof of delivery. For those in the delivery business... What if you could write a web interface or an app for a mobile device that would capture a signature for an invoice? Perhaps you might throw in some GPS capability and send data back to U2 about where the driver went for the day, etc. If you have 200 drivers and you could do all of this on a $200 Iphone,Android, or Windows Mobile phone, then that is a lot better than paying Motorola 5 times that amount per device for some proprietary device that was just made to do deliveries. And yes, its all a fairly large learning curve. If it were easy, then businesses would not need us... On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:05 PM, George Gallen wrote: > This is what I'm asking, and not seeing > > Tony wants to know if there is interest to decide if it warants development > time/cost > > however, unless someone can give examples of a real usage where we > say...WOW, we NEEED that > it wouldn't be worth the expense to develop. > > It might not be that there is no interest, it just might be that no one has > given the > masses a really good reason to want to use that method. > > Which was what I was saying, if people who are using it currently with > their UV (or non UV) > give some examples of how it has helped their bottom line, or at least > quieted the Pointy > hair boss! > > George > > > -Original Message- > > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- > > boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett > > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 12:22 PM > > To: U2 Users List > > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > > > And now for a dose of reality... Consider the problem with Sony > > servers > > in the gaming environment. How in the world is a smaller MV company > > supposed to keep up with all of this technology blowing in the wind? > > This technology de'jour mentality puts us all out of business, because > > there's no way we can develop all of these interfaces because someone > > has to pay for all of this - and that someone is us! Neither is there > > any way we can afford to use 3rd party GUI people, as a simple > > incomplete web-site costs $3-5K, and then it takes many hours to > > integrate their work into the technology we use. > > > > Once again, there are some specific and excellent uses for something > > like an android phone. I, personally, have a very difficult time > > reading the screen and navigating around, because navigation speed is > > directly correlated to use and I use the device very little - I do have > > life! :-) > > > > Just a thought. :-) > > > > Bill > > > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- John Thompson ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
This is what I'm asking, and not seeing Tony wants to know if there is interest to decide if it warants development time/cost however, unless someone can give examples of a real usage where we say...WOW, we NEEED that it wouldn't be worth the expense to develop. It might not be that there is no interest, it just might be that no one has given the masses a really good reason to want to use that method. Which was what I was saying, if people who are using it currently with their UV (or non UV) give some examples of how it has helped their bottom line, or at least quieted the Pointy hair boss! George > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users- > boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 12:22 PM > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > And now for a dose of reality... Consider the problem with Sony > servers > in the gaming environment. How in the world is a smaller MV company > supposed to keep up with all of this technology blowing in the wind? > This technology de'jour mentality puts us all out of business, because > there's no way we can develop all of these interfaces because someone > has to pay for all of this - and that someone is us! Neither is there > any way we can afford to use 3rd party GUI people, as a simple > incomplete web-site costs $3-5K, and then it takes many hours to > integrate their work into the technology we use. > > Once again, there are some specific and excellent uses for something > like an android phone. I, personally, have a very difficult time > reading the screen and navigating around, because navigation speed is > directly correlated to use and I use the device very little - I do have > life! :-) > > Just a thought. :-) > > Bill > ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
And now for a dose of reality... Consider the problem with Sony servers in the gaming environment. How in the world is a smaller MV company supposed to keep up with all of this technology blowing in the wind? This technology de'jour mentality puts us all out of business, because there's no way we can develop all of these interfaces because someone has to pay for all of this - and that someone is us! Neither is there any way we can afford to use 3rd party GUI people, as a simple incomplete web-site costs $3-5K, and then it takes many hours to integrate their work into the technology we use. Once again, there are some specific and excellent uses for something like an android phone. I, personally, have a very difficult time reading the screen and navigating around, because navigation speed is directly correlated to use and I use the device very little - I do have life! :-) Just a thought. :-) Bill - Original Message - *From:* dmc...@imb.com.au *To:* U2 Users List *Date:* 5/18/2011 9:43 PM *Subject:* Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Tony, I completely agree with you. I think you are misinterpreting my "sor far ... much penetration" to mean "isn't appropriate" Take for banking sector, which is typically quite reserved/slow in uptake of current technology vs the gaming sector on the other side of the spectrum. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:05 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework [snipped] ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Everything I have done so far for our mobile devices has been a web app. A little bit of extra programming time up front is more than made up for in ease of management/deployment and platform independence. That and I would probably die without ClickOnce support... -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 5:08 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Since it's a little slow here I'll open a discussion which is borderline between Tech and Community. The thread "Uniobjects.Net Compact Framework and Visual Basic" had an interesting resolution. I'd like to see more discussions on that topic. If only there were enough people interested in mobile connectivity, I'd get a WinMobile to replace my old Win PDA devices, and offer app development services for these devices. I've blogged about mobile development and have written proof-of-concept apps. But there is never a critical mass of demand for any device (Win, Android, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) to justify the investment required to do a lot of this. What I'm wondering of the U2 audience is: 1) Is there little to no interest in mobile computing for U2 systems despite hundreds of thousands of apps satisfying a hunger in the mobile-user marketplace? If that's the case, it's no wonder the Pick community continues to lose market share. 2) Is everyone with interest happily doing development internally? If that's the case, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here. What are you folks doing to create mobile apps for your U2 business systems? 3) Are people resigned to "I don't know how to do this therefore my company won't do it"? Unfortunately that sort of thinking is quite common in the general Pick community, and it's no less than suicidal for the market and individual careers. In short - if you don't do it, you will be replaced by those who do - as many of you have seen over the years. So where do U2 developers stand with mobile? Personally I'm doing a lot with SMS rather than trying to write apps for every phone (all based on MV). That's just my solution. I'm also doing a lot with voice/telephony, virtual PBX integration for companies that want to shift from hardware solutions to more versatile phone systems backed by MV. This is only "mobile" because some companies have decided to forego the pleasures of the GUI for common voice menus. It's just another solution where mobile computing was once considered. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
To answer number 1: I was planning on investigating the following scenario: 1) Setting up a web server to talk to the Universe machine 2) Using JQuery mobile and PHP to connect my mobile devices to Universe http://jquerymobile.com/ This is NOT a local app on the device scenario, and would require the user to have a Wi-Fi or 3G connection to use. However, where I'm located (in an urban area), every kid on the street has an iphone or android device or something of that nature. To answer number 2: Local development usually depends on how long Management wants to wait for us to get it done (there are only a couple of us) To answer number 3: Not really... I like to learn new things, but, its usually how skillful I can be at ignoring the interruptions and project overload. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Steve Romanow wrote: > An Order Log Inquiry would be neat as well. > > None of these 2 ideas require specific u2 bindings. Just need an rpc > service to return json. > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Steve Romanow > wrote: > > I would love to have a correct and quick inventory inquiry for mobile > > targets. Maybe even integrated with the zebra crossing barcoding libs > > on droid. > > > > Droid is relatively open compared to the other handsets and os's. > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Dan McGrath wrote: > >> Sorry, that should have been "I'm sure a lot of people" as opposed to > >> "I'm a lot of people" > >> > >> I can assure everyone, I am just a single person. > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > >> [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath > >> Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:36 PM > >> To: U2 Users List > >> Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > >> > >> Good points there David, which I notice a lot of people don't consider > >> when dismissing the benefits of an app vs web. > >> > >> Another point is the better offline capabilities of a native app. I'm a > >> lot of people on Vodafone over here in Australia (myself include) can > >> understand the importance of this. > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > >> [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan > >> Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:11 PM > >> To: U2 Users List > >> Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > >> > >> Hi George > >> > >> I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for > >> downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. > >> With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more > >> intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. > >> However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then > >> you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones > >> you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an > >> enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is > >> related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to > >> load. > >> > >> Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a > >> potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app > >> is a bit more secure. > >> > >> Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a > >> spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to > >> access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. > >> > >> David Jordan > >> ___ > >> U2-Users mailing list > >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >> > >> __ > >> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > >> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > >> __ > >> > >> ### > >> The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) i
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
An Order Log Inquiry would be neat as well. None of these 2 ideas require specific u2 bindings. Just need an rpc service to return json. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Steve Romanow wrote: > I would love to have a correct and quick inventory inquiry for mobile > targets. Maybe even integrated with the zebra crossing barcoding libs > on droid. > > Droid is relatively open compared to the other handsets and os's. > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Dan McGrath wrote: >> Sorry, that should have been "I'm sure a lot of people" as opposed to >> "I'm a lot of people" >> >> I can assure everyone, I am just a single person. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org >> [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath >> Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:36 PM >> To: U2 Users List >> Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework >> >> Good points there David, which I notice a lot of people don't consider >> when dismissing the benefits of an app vs web. >> >> Another point is the better offline capabilities of a native app. I'm a >> lot of people on Vodafone over here in Australia (myself include) can >> understand the importance of this. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org >> [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan >> Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:11 PM >> To: U2 Users List >> Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework >> >> Hi George >> >> I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for >> downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. >> With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more >> intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. >> However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then >> you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones >> you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an >> enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is >> related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to >> load. >> >> Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a >> potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app >> is a bit more secure. >> >> Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a >> spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to >> access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. >> >> David Jordan >> ___ >> U2-Users mailing list >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >> __ >> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. >> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email >> __ >> >> ### >> The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is >> intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The >> message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any >> review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any >> action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other >> than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in >> error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any >> computer. >> >> The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose >> or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached >> files with the permission of IMB. >> >> ### >> ___ >> U2-Users mailing list >> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org >> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >> __ >> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. >> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email >> __ >> >>
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
I would love to have a correct and quick inventory inquiry for mobile targets. Maybe even integrated with the zebra crossing barcoding libs on droid. Droid is relatively open compared to the other handsets and os's. On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Dan McGrath wrote: > Sorry, that should have been "I'm sure a lot of people" as opposed to > "I'm a lot of people" > > I can assure everyone, I am just a single person. > > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath > Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:36 PM > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > Good points there David, which I notice a lot of people don't consider > when dismissing the benefits of an app vs web. > > Another point is the better offline capabilities of a native app. I'm a > lot of people on Vodafone over here in Australia (myself include) can > understand the importance of this. > > -Original Message- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan > Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:11 PM > To: U2 Users List > Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework > > Hi George > > I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for > downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. > With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more > intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. > However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then > you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones > you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an > enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is > related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to > load. > > Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a > potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app > is a bit more secure. > > Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a > spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to > access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. > > David Jordan > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > __ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > __ > > ### > The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is > intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The > message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any > review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any > action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other > than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in > error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any > computer. > > The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose > or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached > files with the permission of IMB. > > ### > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > __ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > __ > > __ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > __ > ### > The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is > intended only > for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may c
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Sorry, that should have been "I'm sure a lot of people" as opposed to "I'm a lot of people" I can assure everyone, I am just a single person. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:36 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Good points there David, which I notice a lot of people don't consider when dismissing the benefits of an app vs web. Another point is the better offline capabilities of a native app. I'm a lot of people on Vodafone over here in Australia (myself include) can understand the importance of this. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:11 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Hi George I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to load. Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app is a bit more secure. Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. David Jordan ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached files with the permission of IMB. ### ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached files with the permission of IMB. ### ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http:/
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Tony, I completely agree with you. I think you are misinterpreting my "sor far ... much penetration" to mean "isn't appropriate" Take for banking sector, which is typically quite reserved/slow in uptake of current technology vs the gaming sector on the other side of the spectrum. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 11:05 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework For George, I think a question about "what would be some potential uses" characterizes our community, and is part of what prompted me to open the discussion. With hundreds of thousands of apps out there for every mobile device, there are any number of potential uses for mobile access, regardless of the platform on the back-end. With apologies for my directness and not the content: Pick people need to stop thinking like Pick people and start looking at what the rest of the world is doing in terms of data access and updates. To answer your question more directly however, many companies these days look for things like reporting, BI, dashboards, GUI, and web services to satisfy their needs to communicate current data to trading partners, management, and other employees. The mobile device is just another UI where you can gather and provide information on a timely basis. For Dan, your point on connecting indirectly is my preferred method, and was the suggestion I made when an issue was presented with UO/CF. As to U2 applications covering a segment that isn't covered by mobile devices - I think U2/MV has widespread applications in every market, and almost everyone has a cell phone these days. I don't think there's anything to separate the kind of people who use U2 apps from the kind of people who use cell phones. And one of my points is precisely that, that these things are unrelated. People who use mobile devices download apps of all kinds. There's no reason why apps based on U2 should be categorically any different. As many people would be ready to state, we're selling applications, not databases. Thanks for your responses. T > From: George Gallen > To further the question, what would be some potential uses of mobile > phone with U2 that would not be covered with website usage with U2, > with different screen layouts? > > Or are you talking about smartphone apps? > From: Dan McGrath > 4) Not directly connecting to U2 from the mobile phone, but some > intermediate web server in between. > Using a REST or Webservices API from the mobile device would probably > be far more common than directly connecting to U2. For anyone (if > there is) doing it this way, you wouldn't see any questions on that > here. > The other question would be, are the majority applications built on U2 > covering a segment that so far doesn't have much penetration on mobile > devices (whether it is a U2 system or other)? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached files with the permission of IMB. ### ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Good points there David, which I notice a lot of people don't consider when dismissing the benefits of an app vs web. Another point is the better offline capabilities of a native app. I'm a lot of people on Vodafone over here in Australia (myself include) can understand the importance of this. -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David Jordan Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 2:11 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Hi George I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to load. Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app is a bit more secure. Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. David Jordan ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached files with the permission of IMB. ### ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Hi George I use a Windows phone 7. With a web page there is a cost of time for downloading a web page and a performance issue with screen loading. With an app, I conform to the user interface of the phone which are more intuitive to a phone user. The app loads quicker and runs quicker. However if you have users using android, blackberry, iphone, etc then you need to create a separate app for each phone. With the new phones you need to load the app from the marketplace which is difficult for an enterprise application. Hence the decision to use an app vs web is related to performance and intuitive interface vs portable and easier to load. Remember also that most phones have no virus protection and are a potential risk area for Trojans and viruses for web interfaces. An app is a bit more secure. Again there are other features I can use on the phone such as sending a spreadsheet of KPIs to the phone rather than having an application to access KPIs. There are just too many ways to skin a cat. David Jordan ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Possibly, since I don't use a smart phone on a daily basis, I'm still not seeing the question. What would be different in programming UV to interface with a mobile device, vs programming UV to interface with a web browser? Aside from screen layout. Which was why I asked about potential uses. What kind of uses of a mobile device would require special programming? over a normal web interface / web service except catered to a smaller screen? I haven't been asked to produce any mobile output, but now that you brought up the subject, what kind of things are people using mobile devices for? that uses a new interfacing method. If it's something I can suggest, I'm all for that. Maybe we should have a mini thead on "Cool things I've got my UV system to do with a mobile device!" - or at the least, "cool things, I've got my system to do with a mobile device - just not in UV" I don't see this as a UV deficit, but rather a knowledge deficit in the sense that if we don't know what we can't do, it's hard to want to do it, or realize that we should be doing it! George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno [3xk547...@sneakemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:05 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework For George, I think a question about "what would be some potential uses" characterizes our community, and is part of what prompted me to open the discussion. With hundreds of thousands of apps out there for every mobile device, there are any number of potential uses for mobile access, regardless of the platform on the back-end. With apologies for my directness and not the content: Pick people need to stop thinking like Pick people and start looking at what the rest of the world is doing in terms of data access and updates. To answer your question more directly however, many companies these days look for things like reporting, BI, dashboards, GUI, and web services to satisfy their needs to communicate current data to trading partners, management, and other employees. The mobile device is just another UI where you can gather and provide information on a timely basis. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Excellent points, David. > The presentation people take results given to them by > the business application and present it on the phone > and web. The business rules developers have little to > do with presentation. Many developments in the U2 > world are starting to move that way, where the > business rules developers are U2 and the presentation > developers are another group such as .Net. Hence U2 > people are not aware of the phone development. I wish U2/MV developers were that far along but the reality I see is that while such a scenario is prevalent outside of this market, it's not the way things are in most MV sites. Most MV apps are still spaghetti code, entwined with the Character UI (CUI), and only "some percentage" of sites are even on their way to extracting rules from the UI, or even understanding this concept and the implications, so that they can leave presentation to some other team. Most of my MV consulting these days is on this specific topic and that's my experience with both large and small shops. Your experience may differ. > Another issue that would concern organisations is how > to handle security and identification of remote users. [snip] Quite true but this applies to all external development - it's a part of the process of moving forward into the modern world, not limited to mobile, nor a specific reason for companies to be avoiding mobile. > Finally the issue is the cost benefit analysis. Do I > write an app that allows executives to access KPIs > from my application. Would sending them an email > with the KPIs be far cheaper and simpler. At what > point is it productivity and at what point is it > playing with technology. As a "right tools for the job" guy, I'm in full agreement. A significant difference between mobile and email is that the user can request specific information when she/he wants it. I provided one of my clients with the ability to get customer balances, inventory status, and other data via SMS, as well as broadcasting data to customers and employees who want focused information in a medium other than email. They don't need the "glitz" of a mobile app, but they have recognized the value of mobile computing. The solutions must be in-line with the perceived benefits. My theme here is that there might be benefits for this medium which have not yet been explored by the "usually" larger companies that tend to run U2. I'll note here that according to several independent analyses, both email and IM (AIM, ICQ, MSN...) usage has plummeted compared to the use of mobile apps and SMS/texting. Agree or disagree with the statistics, but just look around you. As IT people we need to recognize trends or we will continue to lose to competing software and new management thinking. I'm not saying we must use mobile media (voice, apps, texting), just that we should all consider mobile amongst all of the other UI options to address end-user needs/desires. ... And I'm just wondering how U2 sites are thinking about such things or implementing solutions. Regards, T Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
For George, I think a question about "what would be some potential uses" characterizes our community, and is part of what prompted me to open the discussion. With hundreds of thousands of apps out there for every mobile device, there are any number of potential uses for mobile access, regardless of the platform on the back-end. With apologies for my directness and not the content: Pick people need to stop thinking like Pick people and start looking at what the rest of the world is doing in terms of data access and updates. To answer your question more directly however, many companies these days look for things like reporting, BI, dashboards, GUI, and web services to satisfy their needs to communicate current data to trading partners, management, and other employees. The mobile device is just another UI where you can gather and provide information on a timely basis. For Dan, your point on connecting indirectly is my preferred method, and was the suggestion I made when an issue was presented with UO/CF. As to U2 applications covering a segment that isn't covered by mobile devices - I think U2/MV has widespread applications in every market, and almost everyone has a cell phone these days. I don't think there's anything to separate the kind of people who use U2 apps from the kind of people who use cell phones. And one of my points is precisely that, that these things are unrelated. People who use mobile devices download apps of all kinds. There's no reason why apps based on U2 should be categorically any different. As many people would be ready to state, we're selling applications, not databases. Thanks for your responses. T > From: George Gallen > To further the question, what would be some potential > uses of mobile phone with U2 that would not be covered > with website usage with U2, with different screen > layouts? > > Or are you talking about smartphone apps? > From: Dan McGrath > 4) Not directly connecting to U2 from the mobile > phone, but some intermediate web server in between. > Using a REST or Webservices API from the mobile device > would probably be far more common than directly > connecting to U2. For anyone (if there is) doing it > this way, you wouldn't see any questions on that here. > The other question would be, are the majority > applications built on U2 covering a segment that so > far doesn't have much penetration on mobile devices > (whether it is a U2 system or other)? ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
> From: Jeff Schasny > 1) I work for a business and write business > applications.I have no interest in writing Rag Doll > Blaster or Angry Birds for U2. Your perspective in your response to #1 is different from #2 so I'm a little confused. In short, if you look around there are a lot of business apps available for mobile devices. I'm just suggesting that U2 developers make sure their clients/management know that we can do the same things as everyone else. We don't want to see another U2 "baby" getting tossed with the entire IT department "bath water", for some new app where developers know how to use a mobile device for something other than games. > 2) ... [snipped good response of scanner integration] > 3) Not me. I always strive to be ahead of what my > users want/need. And I like playing with new stuff as > much as the next geek. Good for you - and again this somehow doesn't gel with your response to #1 but thanks for your responses. :) I try to be on top of such things as well but in the MV market there seems to be too small a demand for mobile, and that demand is further fractionalized across platforms (iPhone, Android, Symbion, etc) to a point where it's not worth it yet to offer solutions to help with such development. That's why I wanted to see what others here are doing. T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
I certainly agree with the concept of pro-actively pushing information to people via email. Information can be readily accessed from virtually any device (even the desktop!), and if these notifications are triggered by critical business events, as well as standard daily reports, then it just helps the overall feature set of the system The same technology can then also be used to push SMS to mobiles, as there are a myriad of email --> SMS solutions available. We have clients who have been doing this for over a decade, especially in industries where your customers are pretty well guaranteed to have a phone on their hips (anyone seen a locksmith WITHOUT a mobile :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage > Better by Design! Finally the issue is the cost benefit analysis. Do I write an app that allows executives to access KPIs from my application. Would sending them an email with the KPIs be far cheaper and simpler. At what point is it productivity and at what point is it playing with technology. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Microsoft has split their development products into 2 areas presentation and business rules. The presentation people take results given to them by the business application and present it on the phone and web. The business rules developers have little to do with presentation. Many developments in the U2 world are starting to move that way, where the business rules developers are U2 and the presentation developers are another group such as .Net. Hence U2 people are not aware of the phone development. Another issue that would concern organisations is how to handle security and identification of remote users. Creating an application on the phone is simple. How you connect from the phone to the database with encryption, passwords, etc is an area that people fear. Simple web services are easy, but when you then want to know that it is really joe blog that is calling the web service, it becomes another level of complexity. Finally the issue is the cost benefit analysis. Do I write an app that allows executives to access KPIs from my application. Would sending them an email with the KPIs be far cheaper and simpler. At what point is it productivity and at what point is it playing with technology. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
1) I work for a business and write business applications.I have no interest in writing Rag Doll Blaster or Angry Birds for U2. Well, other than the resulting large stacks of cash which would enable me to buy a Ducati 1198s without getting killed by my wife. 2) Apparently. In my case I'm doing what pretty much every U2 software developer has been doing for the last 10 years. Putting a happy GUI front end on what were some green screen applications. These just happen to run on Symbol Mobile Computer/Scanners under Windows Mobile and Windows CE. I also have done some as ASP.NET web applications which I love because then you can run them on anything with a web browser. I selected Win Mobile native as the platform for the one I'm currently doing just because of screen real estate considerations on the Symbol Guns. Their former incarnations meant firing up Portable Putty and establishing an SSH connection logging in a a specific user which would then trigger the specific application required, like order picking, restocking, or cycle counting to name a few. As a bonus, the new versions allow us to do things we could not do before, like press the "Image" button to display a picture of what an item in a pick list looks like. This is quite useful in a retail environment where we have a wall of 6 shelves of things with a description like: "Black Nike Ball Cap". 3) Not me. I always strive to be ahead of what my users want/need. And I like playing with new stuff as much as the next geek. Tony Gravagno wrote: Since it's a little slow here I'll open a discussion which is borderline between Tech and Community. The thread "Uniobjects.Net Compact Framework and Visual Basic" had an interesting resolution. I'd like to see more discussions on that topic. If only there were enough people interested in mobile connectivity, I'd get a WinMobile to replace my old Win PDA devices, and offer app development services for these devices. I've blogged about mobile development and have written proof-of-concept apps. But there is never a critical mass of demand for any device (Win, Android, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) to justify the investment required to do a lot of this. What I'm wondering of the U2 audience is: 1) Is there little to no interest in mobile computing for U2 systems despite hundreds of thousands of apps satisfying a hunger in the mobile-user marketplace? If that's the case, it's no wonder the Pick community continues to lose market share. 2) Is everyone with interest happily doing development internally? If that's the case, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here. What are you folks doing to create mobile apps for your U2 business systems? 3) Are people resigned to "I don't know how to do this therefore my company won't do it"? Unfortunately that sort of thinking is quite common in the general Pick community, and it's no less than suicidal for the market and individual careers. In short - if you don't do it, you will be replaced by those who do - as many of you have seen over the years. So where do U2 developers stand with mobile? Personally I'm doing a lot with SMS rather than trying to write apps for every phone (all based on MV). That's just my solution. I'm also doing a lot with voice/telephony, virtual PBX integration for companies that want to shift from hardware solutions to more versatile phone systems backed by MV. This is only "mobile" because some companies have decided to forego the pleasures of the GUI for common voice menus. It's just another solution where mobile computing was once considered. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- Jeff Schasny - Denver, Co, USA jschasny at gmail dot com ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
To further the question, what would be some potential uses of mobile phone with U2 that would not be covered with website usage with U2, with different screen layouts? Or are you talking about smartphone apps? George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Dan McGrath [dmc...@imb.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 6:23 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Tony, there is (at least) a fourth option that I see 4) Not directly connecting to U2 from the mobile phone, but some intermediate web server in between. Using a REST or Webservices API from the mobile device would probably be far more common than directly connecting to U2. For anyone (if there is) doing it this way, you wouldn't see any questions on that here. The other question would be, are the majority applications built on U2 covering a segment that so far doesn't have much penetration on mobile devices (whether it is a U2 system or other)? -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:08 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Since it's a little slow here I'll open a discussion which is borderline between Tech and Community. The thread "Uniobjects.Net Compact Framework and Visual Basic" had an interesting resolution. I'd like to see more discussions on that topic. If only there were enough people interested in mobile connectivity, I'd get a WinMobile to replace my old Win PDA devices, and offer app development services for these devices. I've blogged about mobile development and have written proof-of-concept apps. But there is never a critical mass of demand for any device (Win, Android, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) to justify the investment required to do a lot of this. What I'm wondering of the U2 audience is: 1) Is there little to no interest in mobile computing for U2 systems despite hundreds of thousands of apps satisfying a hunger in the mobile-user marketplace? If that's the case, it's no wonder the Pick community continues to lose market share. 2) Is everyone with interest happily doing development internally? If that's the case, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here. What are you folks doing to create mobile apps for your U2 business systems? 3) Are people resigned to "I don't know how to do this therefore my company won't do it"? Unfortunately that sort of thinking is quite common in the general Pick community, and it's no less than suicidal for the market and individual careers. In short - if you don't do it, you will be replaced by those who do - as many of you have seen over the years. So where do U2 developers stand with mobile? Personally I'm doing a lot with SMS rather than trying to write apps for every phone (all based on MV). That's just my solution. I'm also doing a lot with voice/telephony, virtual PBX integration for companies that want to shift from hardware solutions to more versatile phone systems backed by MV. This is only "mobile" because some companies have decided to forego the pleasures of the GUI for common voice menus. It's just another solution where mobile computing was once considered. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may o
Re: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Tony, there is (at least) a fourth option that I see 4) Not directly connecting to U2 from the mobile phone, but some intermediate web server in between. Using a REST or Webservices API from the mobile device would probably be far more common than directly connecting to U2. For anyone (if there is) doing it this way, you wouldn't see any questions on that here. The other question would be, are the majority applications built on U2 covering a segment that so far doesn't have much penetration on mobile devices (whether it is a U2 system or other)? -Original Message- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno Sent: Thursday, 19 May 2011 8:08 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework Since it's a little slow here I'll open a discussion which is borderline between Tech and Community. The thread "Uniobjects.Net Compact Framework and Visual Basic" had an interesting resolution. I'd like to see more discussions on that topic. If only there were enough people interested in mobile connectivity, I'd get a WinMobile to replace my old Win PDA devices, and offer app development services for these devices. I've blogged about mobile development and have written proof-of-concept apps. But there is never a critical mass of demand for any device (Win, Android, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) to justify the investment required to do a lot of this. What I'm wondering of the U2 audience is: 1) Is there little to no interest in mobile computing for U2 systems despite hundreds of thousands of apps satisfying a hunger in the mobile-user marketplace? If that's the case, it's no wonder the Pick community continues to lose market share. 2) Is everyone with interest happily doing development internally? If that's the case, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here. What are you folks doing to create mobile apps for your U2 business systems? 3) Are people resigned to "I don't know how to do this therefore my company won't do it"? Unfortunately that sort of thinking is quite common in the general Pick community, and it's no less than suicidal for the market and individual careers. In short - if you don't do it, you will be replaced by those who do - as many of you have seen over the years. So where do U2 developers stand with mobile? Personally I'm doing a lot with SMS rather than trying to write apps for every phone (all based on MV). That's just my solution. I'm also doing a lot with voice/telephony, virtual PBX integration for companies that want to shift from hardware solutions to more versatile phone systems backed by MV. This is only "mobile" because some companies have decided to forego the pleasures of the GUI for common voice menus. It's just another solution where mobile computing was once considered. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ### The information transmitted in this message and attachments (if any) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The intended recipient of this e-mail may only use, reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained in this e-mail and any attached files with the permission of IMB. ### ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] Pondering recent thread on compact framework
Since it's a little slow here I'll open a discussion which is borderline between Tech and Community. The thread "Uniobjects.Net Compact Framework and Visual Basic" had an interesting resolution. I'd like to see more discussions on that topic. If only there were enough people interested in mobile connectivity, I'd get a WinMobile to replace my old Win PDA devices, and offer app development services for these devices. I've blogged about mobile development and have written proof-of-concept apps. But there is never a critical mass of demand for any device (Win, Android, iPhone, Blackberry, etc) to justify the investment required to do a lot of this. What I'm wondering of the U2 audience is: 1) Is there little to no interest in mobile computing for U2 systems despite hundreds of thousands of apps satisfying a hunger in the mobile-user marketplace? If that's the case, it's no wonder the Pick community continues to lose market share. 2) Is everyone with interest happily doing development internally? If that's the case, I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here. What are you folks doing to create mobile apps for your U2 business systems? 3) Are people resigned to "I don't know how to do this therefore my company won't do it"? Unfortunately that sort of thinking is quite common in the general Pick community, and it's no less than suicidal for the market and individual careers. In short - if you don't do it, you will be replaced by those who do - as many of you have seen over the years. So where do U2 developers stand with mobile? Personally I'm doing a lot with SMS rather than trying to write apps for every phone (all based on MV). That's just my solution. I'm also doing a lot with voice/telephony, virtual PBX integration for companies that want to shift from hardware solutions to more versatile phone systems backed by MV. This is only "mobile" because some companies have decided to forego the pleasures of the GUI for common voice menus. It's just another solution where mobile computing was once considered. Tony Gravagno Nebula Research and Development TG@ remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com remove.pleaseNebula-RnD.com/blog Visit PickWiki.com! Contribute! http://Twitter.com/TonyGravagno ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
