Tech media pundits talk incessantly about migration to the cloud, but it is always interesting to get reports from the trenches. Two recents ones interested me. The first is from Patrick McKenzie, who sells a niche Java application. He's just posted a detailed and entertaining blog entitled Why I'm Done making Desktop Applications. His application exists in both desktop and online versions, and he says he was a staunch defender of the advantages of desktop apps - "You can keep your Google Docs, Excel is superior in almost every way." Then he made an online version of his app with if anything fewer features, and tracked the statistics. He discovered the following:
His conclusion:
The next major release will almost certainly be its last. The webapp, and my future webapps, seem to be much better investments.
Does any of this apply to corporate development? It's true that life is easier in some ways if you do not have to make a sale; and there are still some things that desktop applications do better, like integrating with Microsoft Office through COM automation, or continuing to work offline on the train or plane - though see Rails creator David Heinemeier Hansson's You're not on a plane for a contrary view.
Still, many of the other factors do apply. Lower support requests, zero installation, accurate usage monitoring - all these things have immediate financial benefit.
It is no longer web application developers who have to justify their case, but rather those who still advocate desktop development.
If you need any further persuading, take a look at this survey of 1400 Microsoft's small business customers by Accredited Supplier. Apparently 62% prefer business applications that work through a browser, and only 18% prefer desktop applications. The more chilling news for Microsoft is that 13% actively intend to switch to Google Apps - with all that implies for sales of Windows server, Exchange, and Office - while only 36% are sure that they are not switching.
All that cloud talk is translating rapidly into business decisions. I'm not sure whether the future of the business application client lies more with AJAX and HTML 5, Microsoft Silverlight, Adobe Flex, or something else; but for sure it is not a desktop technology.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Desktop applications are dead.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.itjoblog.co.uk/blogadmin/mt-tb.cgi/116
Thank you for submitting this cool story - Trackback from DotNetShoutout Read More
Silverlight and Flex are basically "desktop" technologies as they require something to be installed besides just the browser. Of course the browser usually needs to be installed because it is a ..... desktop app.
For years, i have been able to do "desktop apps" with nothing more than a plugin.
Web apps have plenty of cons too. You seem to only be looking to the Pros.
As for the example above - it only proves that HIS app was better as a web app. And that might only because (and i have read his post before) he didn't know the the best way to distribute his "desktop app".
Mark
The arrival of desktop-like technologies in the browser is a big enabler of web applications. You can argue if you like that they are really some kind of hybrid - and yes, clients almost always execute on the desktop in a technical sense, unless you are using a terminal server approach.But I think we should have the user's perspective on this. A web application is something they go to in the browser and it just works.
Having to install a plug-in is definitely added friction and can be a deal-breaker; but it is only necessary if the plug-in is not already installed.
It would be interesting to spell out the "plenty of cons" for web apps. They are becoming harder and harder to find.
Tim