Why most Newsstand apps suck

[[)roi(]]

http://thepixelpeeps.com/post/19598477265/the-new-yorker-on-the-new-ipad-updated

In brief - it's all thanks to Adobe and their crappy iOS magazine conversion tools....

btw just to summarize why I don't like most Newsstand apps:

• Highly unstable
• Excessively massive in comparison to the content
• Slow page rendering speed
• Issues downloading issues.
• Screwed up navigation paradigms
• ...

Dolby this should interest you.

 

[Dolby]

Yea ... That's what I've always said

After blowing money on 12 month subscriptions, I don't even bother anymore.

Of all of those, it was the downloading that was the issue : I'd watch it download 100MB .... Then it'd be at 15MB when you check next :/ It would restart when the screen shut off or you pressed home etc.

There is potential and the idea is great - but it needs work

EDIT : ... And the downloading has nothing to do with Adobe or conversions. Thats iOS ...

 

[skimread]

Have to agree. I have the exact same gripes. I download the epub or pdf version rather off the web and use iBooks.

 

[[)roi(]]

Yea ... That's what I've always said

After blowing money on 12 month subscriptions, I don't even bother anymore.

Of all of those, it was the downloading that was the issue : I'd watch it download 100MB .... Then it'd be at 15MB when you check next :/ It would restart when the screen shut off or you pressed home etc.

There is potential and the idea is great - but it needs work

EDIT : ... And the downloading has nothing to do with Adobe or conversions. Thats iOS ...

Sorry but you are completely wrong re nothing to do with Adobe... as a iOS developer I can confirm the download had nothing to do with Apple; the implementation is all down to the developer which in most cases was Adobe's crappy magazine app tools.

Oh and FYI, crappy download issues are not just limited to Newsstand apps; i've also experienced some major download problems with for example: Navigon updates and maps changes --- thankfully they listen to their customers and are constantly fixing improving their app.

The primary differentiator in this case is that most magazine publishers bought into Adobe's lies on write once deploy everywhere. The result was slow, unjustifiably excessively large and crappy on all platforms (yes not only crap on iOS, also on Android ...) -- hopefully they learn something from this; won't hold my breath though.

Think about how much you can compress the equivalent text vs a final resolution rendered high definition image of the of the same text (double that for portrait/landscape). Text will be in the minor Kb, HD image render will be in the high Mb (with the iPad 3, this becomes even larger). if they used an old concept that has been around for ages (web page rendering) you wouldn't have this crap, but no to meet Adobe's promise completely you have to pre render each page (HTML engines will render things differently, so instead of possibly imbedding a common webkit type engine Adobe took the lazy route and chose pre-rendering) -- and we end up with monster magazine downloads.

 

[Dolby]

Out of interest - this irrational fear of opening the iPad or iStore that Apple as was to to prevent this, right? Don't they look at each and everything that goes onto the ipad and make sure it conforms and meets their standards?

A the back of mind, I always told myself that the limited experience is for a reason - but now we have strict limits on what we can do ... As well as apps that mess up the Apple system?

 

[[)roi(]]

Out of interest - this irrational fear of opening the iPad or iStore that Apple as was to to prevent this, right? Don't they look at each and everything that goes onto the ipad and make sure it conforms and meets their standards?

A the back of mind, I always told myself that the limited experience is for a reason - but now we have strict limits on what we can do ... As well as apps that mess up the Apple system?

Too true, but as we know all too well Apple tried to initially prevent this, but through Gov legal threats chose to allow the Adobe Air app mess.
... and even if Apple were more controlling we'd get better Apps but at the mercy of so much more negative sentiment --- you can't win this one, you at fault if you do and at fault if you don't.

 

[Dolby]

I'm not asking this to fight - I genuinely don't know :/

What does the government have to do with what software is going to make it onto a tablet?
Isn't that like blaming the government because Samsung didn't put USB3 on their new TVs or DLNA or some models?

 

[[)roi(]]

I'm not asking this to fight - I genuinely don't know :/

What does the government have to do with what software is going to make it onto a tablet?
Isn't that like blaming the government because Samsung didn't put USB3 on their new TVs or DLNA or some models?

No worries, I'm sure I understand the question.

Basically Apple has always enforced full control over its platforms -- and with iOS it was no different.

Without arguing the pros and cons; the primary reason Apple takes this approach is to ultimately guarantee the end user experience.

In the iOS develop circles, the only official way to develop apps was to use either Xcode /Objective-c or HTML5 with iOS multitouch extensions.

Then as with any popular platform, other multi-platform development environments started being adapted to create apps for that platform; in the iOS case, the following were the primary ones to emerge:
1. Unity (c# based OpenGL game development studio)
2. MonoTouch (c# based .NET port for iOS's unix environment)
3. Adobe Air (ActionScript)

Ok let me try to simplify the key difference between these:
Unity and MonoTouch compiled to native Arm processor code and by in large are indistinguishable from an App compile with Apple's dev tools -- similarly they run equally fast.
Monotouch in particular maps 1 to 1 to the full iOS SDK.
Unity is OpenGL focused so the need to map to the iOS SDK is not necessary as the compliance standard is OpenGL.

Adobe Air is different; basically they wrote the equivalent of the Air client (flash type client) as an App and then the ActionScript is packaged at "compile" time into something that resembles an iOS app. There is no direct relationship between ActionScript and the iOS SDK and also none with OpenGL. The reason they do this is to only support common functionality between the multiple platforms they support. For example if the iOS sdk does not support a feature in the Android SDK, the it is not supported. Implementation of functionality is imbedded into the app engine (similar to the flash client on desktop pcs)

Mono approach is always to support all features on the targeted platform I.e. 1 to 1 SDK compatibility, so too for Unity in respect of OpenGL.

Adobe try to shield their customers from the underlying complexity of each platforms' SDK and OpenGL -- but this of course comes at a price:
1. Apps are slower.
2. Apps navigation is typically strange and inconsistent.
3. UI look and feel is alien on each targeted platform (iOS, Android, ...)
4. The stability of the apps are solely dependent on the Air App engine -- sadly Adobe has not been known to produce very robust, fast or stable engines.
5. Many of the hardware differences are not supported, for example: initially the gyroscope was not supported, and similarly the barometer, compass, ... Well not until most platforms had support for this.

Ok back to the Gov bit:
Apple wanted to prevent this type of inferior apps on its devices, so it changed its developer terms to strictly prohibit anything but native compiled arm code , for example: Xcode / objective-c (the primary target being Adobe)
Key many Adobe public adverts re being shackled by the new Apple terms, and finally you have the Gov's attention.

Instead of challenging this legally Apple chose to adjust the development terms to permit all development environments.

So in the end we have good Apps that are produced by in large by Xcode / objective -c, Apps produced by Monotouch and Unity that because of their design (mapping to iOS SDK and OpenGL) and native Arm compilation perform in most cases just as good as the Apple dev ones and look and feel just like the real thing.

Then unfortunately we have apps created by Adobe's Air mess... very evident in the Magazine space. You won't find any best seller Apps made with Adobe's tools on either iOS or Android.

Complex question, hopefully the long description makes it easier to understand why much of this magazine mess is beyond Apple's control.

Think for example the fact that Adobe tools do not map to Apple's iOS SDK -- so simple things like background downloading are completely dependent on Adobe implementation in Air / Flex -- and improvements are solely dependent on when Adobe decide to fix them or include functionality for it.

 

[Dolby]

I had to read that a few times ... Remember I'm in sales

I dont understand shy Apple would be reluctant to take on anyone - legally or otherwise - at all? That's the Apple way of doing things and Apple usually bend for anyone?

 

[[)roi(]]

I had to read that a few times ... Remember I'm in sales

I dont understand shy Apple would be reluctant to take on anyone - legally or otherwise - at all? That's the Apple way of doing things and Apple usually bend for anyone?

True, but just like Microsoft and the recent Google gov interference (anti trust). Apple has become such a large target, so if anyone screams they are not playing fair -- senators, ITC, and other Gov parties jump on the anti-trust / legal bandwagons. You
Can argue most anti-trust cases fix no problems, rather they just make it very painful for the targeted coy and the financial consequences are dire. For example Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

Apple now have to choose their best legal battle to fight: which of course they don't always get right btw. But for a company of its size it has had less problems with the Gov than most -- even Google with their "don't be evil" motto has come up a cropper more times. This must say that they are doing something right in the eyes of the Gov; basically balancing act, and
As I said Anti-trust battles don't help the consumer, here's another case in point where the consumer suffers because to avoid a possible anti trust law suit, Apple could not enforce its high level of quality on Adobe.

Yet when all is not perfect in the Apple world, fingers are pointed at Apple.