Revolt!! as expected the Facebook App sucks. Make some noise here!

[windzilla]

Originally Posted by VickMackey

disagree. If you used facebook you'd realize what a letdown the pre app is and most users will not be satisfied with it. By your logic, most users will read a cnet review, facebook app sucks? Android good? Iphone good? Hey I'll go with them. So again, a crappy app of the biggest social networking site will likely affect not only sales, but perception of the platform.

I was interested in what you said, but it turns out reality dosn't jive with that scenario
I think a potential buyer and facebook user would read this and not be immediately turned off to say the least.
from the cnet pixi review
http://reviews.cnet.com/smartphones/palm-pixi-sprint/4505-6452_7-33770759-2.html?tag=txt;page
For more apps, you can check out the Palm App Catalog. It's still in beta but has the catalog has now increased to around 350 apps and includes paid apps. One notable addition that might interest many is the new dedicated Facebook app. It was truly odd that the Pre could integrate all your Facebook contacts, photos, and events, yet there wasn't any way to actually check your Facebook account. Thankfully, there's now a way to update your status as well as view your news feed, comment or like a friend's status, read inbox message, respond to friend requests, and so forth. Palm hopes to bring the App Catalog out of beta before the end of the year at which point we hope to see the floodgates open. In the meantime, there are also hundreds of Homebrew apps available for download.

[Xyg]

Originally Posted by mikah912

Which brings us back to square one...why have an app that just duplicates the mobile site in a different skin if that's all "most people" use anyway?

People aren't asking for an app because it is such a frickin' hassle to type touch.facebook.com into your Pre browser once and bookmark it. They want an app because they want to do MORE, not less.

By your logic, then, nobody should bother making a native Facebook application because it would duplicate the functionality of the website.

[donm527]

interesting... cnet gave it a 'very good' rating but it really sounds like a crummy review.

Originally Posted by windzilla

Palm Pixi (Sprint) Smartphone reviews - CNET Reviews

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by VickMackey

happy for you, then my need for a more robust app shoudnt bother you then eh?

Actually, I've never said anything to the contrary. As a matter of fact, this was the gist of my firt post on this thread:

"Feel free to dislike the app, but the notion that this app is somehow indicitive of a poor development process from Palm is just more of your "I hate Palm" nonsense. "

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by dandbj13

...
If it is not very good, there are only two conclusions one can draw. WebOS is deficient and a better app can't be made, or a better app can be made but Palm is unable to attract better developers.

Sorry, but there is a third conclusion one can draw (and likely others that neither you or have have considered):

WebOS is fully capable, as evidenced by other Facebook apps, and just like other apps, this new functionality that's been built into WebOS will likely be further utilized after this initial showing.

The new hooks this utilizes haven't even been released yet (except for those few users that got an early Pixi).

[Stihl]

There are somewhere around four different arguments going on in this thread and it's become pretty difficult to for me to parse, so I will bow out for now.

I do think the general idea of 'this facebook app will be adequate for most users and will get better in the future ' is not only speciously tautological, but also misses the point of several varying and valid arguments presented in this thread by many people

[VickMackey]

Originally Posted by hparsons

Actually, I've never said anything to the contrary. As a matter of fact, this was the gist of my firt post on this thread:

"Feel free to dislike the app, but the notion that this app is somehow indicitive of a poor development process from Palm is just more of your "I hate Palm" nonsense. "

actually it is very indicative of poor development process from Palm. If this is what they have to show for 6+ months of development/outsourcing then it is disconcerting to say the least. you need to stop carrying the water for palm, they pay people to do that.

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by sivan

Alright. To borrow from hparsons, only "some" users want a good Facebook app, and only "some" users want a good Calendar, and only "some" users care about the Music app and podcasts, and so on.

Is there anything at all that's actually important in webOS, or is it just a mishmash of stuff no one really cares about?

Go back and look at your own summary. First you talk about me saying "some users", then you conclude with "no one really cares about".

Do you see the fault in your logic.

Even though your summary of my view is incorrect, or at least misleaing, your logic is flawed.

The proper conclusion would have been "just a mishmash of stuff that some users care about".

And yes, that's how I view WebOS. A mixture of all the things that, individually "only some" users want, but collectively will appeal to many.

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by dandbj13

No, I'm confusing the target market with those who Palm designed their ad campaign for...

Which ad campaign would that be? The Facebook ad was from Sprint, not Palm.

[s219]

Originally Posted by hparsons

"Feel free to dislike the app, but the notion that this app is somehow indicitive of a poor development process from Palm is just more of your "I hate Palm" nonsense. "

It sure is not indicative of a good development process.

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by VickMackey

actually it is very indicative of poor development process from Palm. If this is what they have to show for 6+ months of development/outsourcing then it is disconcerting to say the least. you need to stop carrying the water for palm, they pay people to do that.

You might have a point if Palm were working exlusively to please you. There's no indication that this is a showing of "6+ months of development/outsourcing".

And you need to stop instructing me on what I should and shouldn't do, I have a wife for that.

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by s219

It sure is not indicative of a good development process.

Well, you fancy yourself the expert, I hear Palm is hiring...

[windzilla]

yea I'm out too

[s219]

Originally Posted by hparsons

Well, you fancy yourself the expert, I hear Palm is hiring...

You're the only one sarcastically labeling people as experts around here, when they don't agree with your point. I think you need to knock it off. It's getting really old.

If Palm had their act together and put out a good FB app, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by s219

You're the only one sarcastically labeling people as experts around here, when they don't agree with your point. I think you need to knock it off. It's getting really old.

If Palm had their act together and put out a good FB app, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.

I just think it's humorous when folks insist they know more about how to run Palm than Palm does. Show the credentials that convinces us you know more about what Palm should do than Palm, and I'll "knock it off".

As far as the second comment; if it wasn't the Facebook app, it would be something else that you (and others) insist that full evidence of Palm not having their act together. Yet they keep selling phones, keep succeeding after the "experts" predicted they'd fail.

It's really not a matter of "agreeing with my point". I don't disagree about whether or not this is a good app (I haven't seen it yet, but then, I suspect neither have you...) The truth is that if Palm was really the failure in all of the areas that you, and so many others, keep insisting they are, then they wouldn't be around.

[sivan]

Originally Posted by hparsons

Go back and look at your own summary. First you talk about me saying "some users", then you conclude with "no one really cares about".

Do you see the fault in your logic.

Even though your summary of my view is incorrect, or at least misleaing, your logic is flawed.

The proper conclusion would have been "just a mishmash of stuff that some users care about".

And yes, that's how I view WebOS. A mixture of all the things that, individually "only some" users want, but collectively will appeal to many.

I left the "no one" in there just for you. Have a nice weekend

[hparsons]

Originally Posted by sivan

I left the "no one" in there just for you. Have a nice weekend

Ahhh, nothing to do with failed logic. Thanks, good to know you completely blow any form of logic just for me. That explains a lot.

[s219]

Originally Posted by hparsons

I just think it's humorous when folks insist they know more about how to run Palm than Palm does. Show the credentials that convinces us you know more about what Palm should do than Palm, and I'll "knock it off".

As far as the second comment; if it wasn't the Facebook app, it would be something else that you (and others) insist that full evidence of Palm not having their act together. Yet they keep selling phones, keep succeeding after the "experts" predicted they'd fail.

It's really not a matter of "agreeing with my point". I don't disagree about whether or not this is a good app (I haven't seen it yet, but then, I suspect neither have you...) The truth is that if Palm was really the failure in all of the areas that you, and so many others, keep insisting they are, then they wouldn't be around.

I never claimed I could run Palm, or would even want to. I don't think anyone else did either. You're inventing that. Like you always do.

However, as a software developer, Pre owner, and someone with an average amount of good taste, I think it's pitiful that Palm is putting their weight behind this app in any way, shape, or form. It is embarrassing. It looks like something a summer intern put together. It tells me that they lack critical oversight at some key levels. If somebody pitched this app to Steve Jobs at Apple, he would have crucified them. Yet Palm touts it as a feature in a press release. You can see the same thing on many levels at Palm. It reflects of poor taste, low expectations, and a lack of good judgement. I don't need to be a CEO to see that, nor do the other folks that are posting here. Anyone who has used a good FB app on another platform can look at this and see it's junk.

Don't pull out the "Palm is succeeding" argument either. If we were to rewind to some of the summer discussions where I was griping about OpenGL, source code protection, and other missing software technologies, we'd see that my points have become extremely accurate in recent months. And we'd see all your predictions about successful apps, developers figuring out how to do stuff, big developers showing up, the app catalog taking off, etc... failed to materialize. I think you even had some grand prediction for September that never materialized. So I don't want to hear the "if Palm that, then Palm this" arguments, because your track record isn't so good right now.

[theChrisLake]

I don't have a problem with the Facebook App.

Just Sayin

[mikah912]

Originally Posted by Xyg

By your logic, then, nobody should bother making a native Facebook application because it would duplicate the functionality of the website.

Oh, so there's a Facebook website that integrates with the notifications of WebOS and the notifications and widgets of Android?