View Single Post
Posts: 285 | Thanked: 1,900 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#3244
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
- You do? How? What data? Sorry, you've confused me.
If app is bound to the device, then the device needs to be identified somehow. If you buy an app, you need to pay it somehow, which in online world means you'll need to disclose certain information about yourself, which then can be easily identify you being the one using or paying for software used in that device.

You are suggesting nothing more than moving this backup out of your control and have it on some central server in Helsinki. Not that there is anything wrog with that per se, but it should not be compulsory.
Perhaps. However, knowing how hopeless it's to educate average people handling backups, I do think it would be quite a bit safer to store such data in some central server in Helsinki. Of course it would be nice if backup-set contained also list of software installed on device, in certain situations it would be quite effective.

[*]Making sure you have the same applications installed on two different devices.
This is basically about the "centralized backup" as mentioned above. Well, I am the kind of a person who
a) May want two devices with completely different application sets;
b) Does not mind to install the same appliocation twice;
c) Would be p!$$ed off if the device forced the same app sets on my two devices because I used the same account. As happened with Android: the same patch from Motorola was forced on another device in our household. Who cares that the other device was a Samsung? It used the same account
I didn't suggest that installing them to all devices were compulsory. I said that I'd like to have a list of my purchased and/or installed apps, from which I can choose which ones I want to install on my other/new device. This can be done manually, searching and installing all apps one by one, but it's more time consuming and can be made more streamlined.
.
The transfer of intellectual property.
This is the only case when "something" - not the application, but the right to install it - is associated with the person. An account does not entirely answer that if it can be shared but it is better than nothing. An account also does not help if the app developer wants you to buy a different license for each device, so the developers will just have to suck it and put up with Jolla's distribution scheme. Luckily (for Apple followers, that is) there is alraedy a precedence that people are used to.
If developer wants to use different kind of licensing, he could do it even in scenario I mentioned. It's technically possible to even integrate such functionality to store that if such licensing is used, it would prompt for buying a new license on install.

Not unconditionally since, as I explained above, it also has its caveats.
Every single thing in software world has caveats. Especially when human beings are involved.

It could work as a "convenience" for some but not for others.
Convenience is utterly critical if the platform is to make any kind of market penetration. For this reason, anything that hinders convenience and ease of use has to have very strong reasons behind them. That has been my point all along. Usability and convenience should never be sacrificed for ideological reason, especially in consumer space. But if such approach is too bold or outright evil, then I guess I'm not geek enough. Anyway, w00t explained things better than me, so for now this will be my last take on this.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to JulmaHerra For This Useful Post: