5 Responses to “iPad Media Apps: Can Do Better”

  1. An app for every major entry point sounds like overkill for both the reader and publisher. We already have too many apps for the home screens. Doesn’t this further the problem of app management for users and publishers? Publishers could do what the Facebook app does and offer an in-app launch screen as a shortcut

  2. Hype-Pad. javari withdrew 19 Apps from iTunes because of the inadequacies of web 1.0 iPad and the Appreviewers “native tech functionality” ignorance as well as Apple’s hubris. They are hogging up AT&T bandwidth with redundant ads and pushing media onto YouTube.
    See THE APP on javari
    FREE UNIVERSAL also gorgeous on iPad iPhone iPod touch
    11 Books+26 Films (12 Large Widescreen)+360 Photos
    New York NY

  3. Safari being a “killer app” is an oxymoron as porting HTML into mobile devices been nothing to write home about over the years. The success model of iPod Touch/iPhone/iPad is the ability to create mobile apps to development monetization for both app development and distribution.

    So the oxymoron is a device that suppose to monetize apps only killer app is a browser that does not have the best monetization model?

  4. I keep seeing this commentary that Safari is the killer app on the iPad, but, if anything, the iPad apps that are out there (USA Today as one example) clearly demonstrate how poor Web design has become – we’ve become accustomed to accepting bad design. Note Safari 5’s “reader” app and the success of Instapaper.

    It won’t take long for the apps to become feature rich, then it will only be a matter of seeing whether or not readers will accept the silo of the apps vs the maneuverability of the Web. And, hopefully, apps will push web publishers to make more readable web sites.