[cjcampbell]

I see what your after...there is a thread with all the specs...I will go find and post back here for you
One Moment please. Haha

Posted via CB10

Didn't know there was a hold feature on the forums...

[Shanerredflag]

We are sorry for the delay...can we offer you some pretzels?

http://crackberry.com/blackberry-a10...-appear-online


Posted via CB10

[lcjr]

Didn't know there was a hold feature on the forums...

It's an app. Lol. How's Viki working out so far? By the time the A10 comes out all the bugs should be worked out and she should be making everyone happy. Lol

[Shanerredflag]

Didn't know there was a hold feature on the forums...

Haha...

Posted via CB10

[shadowy banger from a shadowy duplex]

You don't figure that "html5" is not
A browser language in BB10 environment. It's a coding language in conjonction with JS and CSS and natively supported. There are numerous apps you'll never know that they are html5. You may even use several already...

Posted via CB10

Recovering programmer here. Lots of Java and now some "administrative" scripting. Am perfectly aware of the various applications of HTML.
Wrapped in an app or through the browser, the functionality cannot compare for anything more than simple tasks compared to apps written in Objective C / Java (on the Dalvik VM) / or apparently Cascades if what I have gathered is correct. Zero experience with Cascades but the cries from users who get ports instead of native are loud and clear.

Sad but true, different apps for different platforms are still necessary unless your users are willing to put up with significant compromises.

Or haven't you noticed?

[cjcampbell]

It's an app. Lol. How's Viki working out so far? By the time the A10 comes out all the bugs should be worked out and she should be making everyone happy. Lol

It's ok. There's tons of potential that's for sure but bugs too. I did the beta as well and this is far and above what that was so I have my hopes still.

[lcjr]

One more before I sign off. Just saw a Chevrolet car commercial advertising newly installed software in all their cars that links the car with your smartphone for far more than just bluetooth. They were hitting on the "find your car" anywhere and that's awesome. Especially bad news for car thiefs. Didn't say if it was QNX or what the software name is though.

[danprown]

When I installed it, I recall it did a prompt that it was going to have access to those files, but I just unchecked that, and it seemed to install and work. For some reason, I can't get the gestures to work...

It needs access to files so that you can download off the web, save pictures, upload files... etc. It's all good man

[cjcampbell]

One more before I sign off. Just saw a Chevrolet car commercial advertising newly installed software in all their cars that links the car with your smartphone for far more than just bluetooth. They were hitting on the "find your car" anywhere and that's awesome. Especially bad news for car thiefs. Didn't say if it was QNX or what the software name is though.

I saw a Lexus one earlier with the same sort of message. They really are making it more of a standard thing now as opposed to a luxury add on.

[cjcampbell]

When I installed it, I recall it did a prompt that it was going to have access to those files, but I just unchecked that, and it seemed to install and work. For some reason, I can't get the gestures to work...

I tried the gestures and didn't get them to work but really didn't spend any time with it. I just downloaded it, tried a few pages to see if it was indeed faster, and that's about it.

[Bugmapper]

I tried the gestures and didn't get them to work but really didn't spend any time with it. I just downloaded it, tried a few pages to see if it was indeed faster, and that's about it.

Gestures start on the bezel.

Posted via CB10 on a Z10 root device!

[Shanerredflag]

Why would someone advertise HTML 5 on their business homepage but flame it here.....bizzareo

Posted via CB10

[cjcampbell]

Gestures start on the bezel.

Posted via CB10 on a Z10 root device!

Thanks... of course now that you said that, I recall reading it. Should make things easier for when I actually try to use them lol

[m0de25]

Why would someone advertise HTML 5 on their business homepage but flame it here.....bizzareo

Posted via CB10

I'm no expert, but I think his point was that HTML5 may be fine for websites, but can't really do the trick for many/most apps.

[m0de25]

Anyone know if BB10 would be just as succeptible as others with this type of hacking/snooping? Maybe BBM is safe, but how about the other security breaches shown here? Kind of scary...

CNN Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

EDIT: Seriously, if BBM texting,file sharing, and video communicating is immune to this... cross platform BBM should explode onto the scene!

[Shanerredflag]

Here is one for you guy's...been awhile since I heard this:L

[Shanerredflag]

I'm no expert, but I think his point was that HTML5 may be fine for websites, but can't really do the trick for many/most apps.

Perhaps...I'm just curious.

[Kid Vibe]

Have a goodnight errybody. NSFW (kinda)

[Shanerredflag]

Have a goodnight errybody. NSFW (kinda)

And the predecessor to this:




Songs like this are the reason your generation is here haha

[CDM76]

Gestures start on the bezel.

Posted via CB10 on a Z10 root device!

The top bezel. Took a while to figure out but works fairly smoothly.

Posted via CB10

[YangFui]

Sorry, HTML 5 (which, by the way, is still a draft spec) is by comparison to native apps far inferior at this time.

Anything more complex than a web forum is far more pleasant, functional and efficient with an app.

Groans aside, I think the issue of whether a native app performs significantly and meaningfully "better" than or as well as an HTML app is a very complex one that doesn't easily lend itself to broad and hasty conclusions.

Here's a great example: The game "Cut The Rope". This is, by all measures, an incredibly complex animated puzzle game that renders a rope and some cute animated creatures with astounding fidelity to real-world physics. I have the version of the game for the iPad (a native app)--and it runs smoothly and beautifully.

At some point some months ago, Microsoft sent me an email that provided links to a new browser-version of the game designed to run in an IE desktop browser. If you haven't seen it, it's here and it's free (I discovered that it runs just as well in Chrome):
Cut the Rope
(Visit Cut the Rope | Behind the Scenes if you want to learn more about how the dev team pulled it off!)

The development team essentially ported the game from the iOS Objective C version to HTML 5, JavaScript, and CSS 3. While the game is running, the IE browser is executing a minified version of roughly 15,000 lines of JavaScript ported from the original Objective C code. The game performs so well that I simply cannot discern any performance difference between the native iOS app version and the HTML 5 version. Now I realize that this is one example--but it's a darned good example because it is far from a trivial one.

In general, to have productive conversations about native app performance versus HTML 5 app performance requires that we agree on what exactly is being measured--and that we have an objective way to take that measurement. I imagine that there are indeed native apps that cannot run as HTML apps and vice versa; but I also feel that most apps can run adequately as either and that end users wouldn't know the difference in most cases.

Finally, I think it's important to point out that the performance yield you get from a program, whether compiled or interpreted, is often a matter of how well-written and well-designed it is. You can have a bad programmer write something in Objective C that can't beat a well-written JavaScript application running on the same hardware--much the way a supercharged Jaguar XJR isn't going to be faster than a Honda Civic if Civic is operating to spec and the Jaguar has fouled spark plugs, a clogged air filter, and a dirty fuel line.

[chrysaurora]

@Yang Fui - agree with what you said. But the game you mentioned is not representative of majority of the cases. Generally speaking, in majority of the cases, native app will provide vastly superior experience than an HTML5 version of the app.

Numbers speak for themselves. I mean, this is why - most companies prefer to create a native app for each platform (separately), instead of creating one HTML5 app wrapped inside a native (web-view) container. It'd obviously much easier, cheaper to create an HTML5 app (often utilizing cross-platform JS libraries like Titatnium, PhoneGap), but the app-experience (more often than not) tends to be sub-par and that's the reason why companies and programmers tend to choose the native route, instead of developing 1 cross platform/HTML5 app (that can be wrapped inside equivalent of web view UI container for each platform).

Besides, not all native APIs are available in HTML5/webkit version yet.

That said, capabilities of browsers are still growing and it is quite possible that (an average) programmer would be able to create native-equivalent responsive/beautiful app that runs inside a browser (or a UI web view container) in couple of years. But we are not there yet. Though we are likely to get there.




Posted via CB 10 app on my Q10!

[YangFui]

Though we are likely to get there.

Hi Chrysaurora,

Yes, I think the take away is that we (as an industry) are moving in the right direction--we're just not quite there yet. Also, as you already mentioned, the native APIs need to be available to software developers in order for HTML 5 to really shine as a viable cross-platform solution.

Just for kicks, I took a look at the "best" 50 apps on Android here:
All the Essentials for Your Android Phone | 50 Best Android Apps for 2013 | TIME.com

Some apps had to do with watching video or listening to music or streaming services, so those might best work as native apps; but the others struck me as unremarkable and I couldn't imagine that they would be any better served as a native app versus an HTML 5 app. For example, Yelp (reviews), Any.do (task manager), Nooly (weather app), Key Ring (stores affinity card barcodes), Gas Guru (helps find nearby cheap gas), ES File Explorer (Zip compression and file utility), Zedge (ring tones and wallpaper), Holo Bulb (flashlight utility), Google Translate, Evernote Food(recipe browser), and Cerberus (remotely wipe your phone), just to name a few, are apps that seem not require any sort of performance advantage of running natively. I understand that some of them, such as Holo Bulb, need to access the phone's hardware via an API layer, but that's not a performance issue--it's an API-availability issue that will be addressed in time if it hasn't been already.

There are a lot of apps--even really popular ones--that really don't require anything that HTML 5/JavaScript can't deliver today. Undoubtedly, some shops continue to write native apps just because it's what they know and because it's generally costly and inefficient to shift to a new software-development toolset and methodology.


Anyway, I think you and I are in agreement and looking towards a future in which write-once, run everywhere might become a reality.

[Superfly_FR]

Still not understanding why an app needs access to my picture files like it says it does. Or are you saying the apps need access to the picture folder for downloads and such?

Edit: never mind, I get it now.

In short yes. Your settings for instance .
P.S: as for the PB browser, we are slightly long OT bros

Posted via CB10

[YangFui]

Hi LCJR,

As some users are becoming more sophisticated/paranoid about apps running on their phones, app developers are starting to post details as to why their app needs certain permissions. Here's an example from the makers of the any.do to-do manager (an Android app):
Frequently Asked Questions
(The last question listed has to do with permissions.)

This type of "technical transparency" is designed to put more sophisticated users at ease. A published permissions list is generally very specific about why the app in question requires certain permissions. If the publisher gives a fake reason and ends up doing something nefarious then users will blast forums about it and the app developer's good reputation will be forever tarnished. It probably helps keep conscientious app developers honest.

I imagine that some new or less popular apps just ask for more permissions than they need--not because they are necessarily going to do anything wrong (although they can!) or misuse/abuse access to your device and/or your device's data, but because they are lazy and just don't want to go through all the QA effort required to ensure the app still functions perfectly even when certain permissions haven't been granted. Anyone who has configured computers on a network understands the convenience of granting access to all files on all drives on all computers. It's a lot more work to lock all files down and then grant specific permissions to users on an as-needed basis. Apps don't have nearly that level of access granularity, but the principle is the same.

I advocate requesting only those specific permissions an app actually needs in order to function. If you're interested in more information, this is a really good read:

Why Does This Android App Need So Many Permissions?