Life In 19x19

Xa17u wrote:

oren wrote:You just can't beat native...

This is absolutely true for mobiles. I don't think anyone doubts that.

A client for desktop environments would make no sense whatsoever though. I can't think of a single advantage it'd bring; lots of inconveniences though.

I find it gets messy when you use your browser for Kaya and everything else on the internet. Plus, starting a new game in Kaya opens in a new window, and I don't like having multiple windows open on my browser, while i'm doing other things on the net as well. It gets far to messy and irritating. It's much easier to organise with a separate application on the desktop rather than integrate it into another one. If that makes sense.

Also on a Mac, flicking between applications is easy - for example I can flick between Safari and CGoban instantly. I can't do that with Kaya, because it's in Safari.

All I'm saying is that it should be there as an option. If Kaya wishes to replace existing servers it needs to allow maximum choice for its users, in order to draw in a large player base from other servers.

Annihilist wrote:[..]

Also on a Mac, flicking between applications is easy - for example I can flick between Safari and CGoban instantly. I can't do that with Kaya, because it's in Safari.

[..]

I don’t know how you work your Mac, but on my Mac, using Chrome, Kaya just opens a new tab, and switching to that tab with ctrl+tab is just as easy as the App Switcher cmd+tab, I can also use cmd+[1..9] for selecting tabs 1-8 or the last tab. With Safari it’s also ctrl+tab, as with Firefox. Whether Web pages open a new window or just a new tab is an option one can change in the respective preferences.

Or you could just open Kaya in its own window and switch using cmd+> or cmd+< (if you’ve checked these in System Preferences > Keyboard > Keyboard Shortcuts > Keyboard & Text Input: Move focus to the next window).

<shrug> just a few ideas from a fellow Mac user & veteran.

Bonobo wrote:

Annihilist wrote:[..]

Also on a Mac, flicking between applications is easy - for example I can flick between Safari and CGoban instantly. I can't do that with Kaya, because it's in Safari.

[..]

I don’t know how you work your Mac, but on my Mac, using Chrome, Kaya just opens a new tab, and switching to that tab with ctrl+tab is just as easy as the App Switcher cmd+tab, I can also use cmd+[1..9] for selecting tabs 1-8 or the last tab. With Safari it’s also ctrl+tab, as with Firefox. Whether Web pages open a new window or just a new tab is an option one can change in the respective preferences.

Or you could just open Kaya in its own window and switch using cmd+> or cmd+< (if you’ve checked these in System Preferences > Keyboard > Keyboard Shortcuts > Keyboard & Text Input: Move focus to the next window).

<shrug> just a few ideas from a fellow Mac user & veteran.

I guess that's Chrome, which I don't use. Not sure how to change it to tabs, I could look into it. But that aside, I think mingling it with your browser can be irritating at times if you're multitasking - it is for me, and maybe it's just my (lack of) proficiency at multitasking in general.* Nevertheless, I see zero harm in releasing a desktop client as an alternative for those who would prefer it. Adding an extra choice, without altering the existing ones, can do only good to the server.

(*And also, it is wise marketing to cater for as many people as possible, including the morons like myself who can't deal with too many browser windows/tabs. Hence, adding extra choices is always a positive thing for both the user and the marketer.)

Separating the browser into kaya tabs, and other tabs would resolve the problem you're describing.

Xa17u wrote:Separating the browser into kaya tabs, and other tabs would resolve the problem you're describing.

That's not my point. I'd just prefer not to mix my Kaya pages with my browser pages. I'd prefer them to be separate. And I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be an option to download a client if I prefer.

Annihilist wrote:proficiency at multitasking in general.* Nevertheless, I see zero harm in releasing a desktop client as an alternative for those who would prefer it.

The "harm" is opportunity. The cost of creating another client in a different technology would increase their development burden by about 50%, and that's assuming they know the technology of the new client. In practice, they'd probably have to more or less freeze their server development, because to manage two clients with a shifting server would be a tough ask for any software company, requiring some serious planning and coordination, which is probably not appropriate for the small team involved at the moment.

quantumf wrote:

Annihilist wrote:proficiency at multitasking in general.* Nevertheless, I see zero harm in releasing a desktop client as an alternative for those who would prefer it.

The "harm" is opportunity. The cost of creating another client in a different technology would increase their development burden by at about 50%, and that's assuming they know the technology of the new client. In practice, they'd probably have to more or less freeze their server development, because to manage two clients with a shifting server would be a tough ask for any software company, requiring some serious planning and coordination, which is probably not appropriate for the small team involved at the moment.

I guess I overlooked the technical side of it. It should still be laid out as a possibility if it becomes more achievable at some point.

Annihilist wrote:I guess I overlooked the technical side of it. It should still be laid out as a possibility if it becomes more achievable at some point.

Definitely - once the server becomes stable, they may consider it. As you no doubt know, Tygem and KGS have released mobile clients. They have at least two advantages, tho - the server is stable and more or less feature complete, AND they have a well established client base and this high degree of certainty that many of them will start using the mobile client. Kaya are taking a risk already, and shouldn't add to it at this point.

Interestingly, they've chosen HTML5 as their cross platform solution. That of course was the plan with KGS and Java, which didn't pan out as well as they would have hoped. I wonder how HTML5 will work out in, say, five years from now?

Well, once they have something that works they could do something like this:

http://www.quora.com/HTML5/How-can-I-pa ... executable


I for one would also prefer a standalone application. I have too many open tabs in my browser as it is.

For everyone after a desktop application to separate kaya from other browser tasks, why not just download another browser (e.g. Chrome, if you use Safari), set your homepage to kaya, and go from there? It's probably even easy to hide all the unnecessary UI stuff, especially in Chrome which I vaguely remember made this a feature on launch. You could also open a second browser window in your main browser and confine kaya to it - that's what I do.

Obviously this is slightly more heavyweight than a dedicated application (or a simple webkit frame) would be, but it seems nice and flexible - you even have the choice of tabs vs windows etc.

Asking for a desktop client in 2012 (nearly 2013) is ridiculous. Desktop clients are a thing of the past and Kaya is a forward-looking server. HTML 5 is the way of the future.

That said, Kaya could offer a much better in-browser experience. At the moment, it opens *everything* in a new tab or window - the equivalent of a Windows 95 app that makes everything a modal popup window.

Waiting for a game to start is a perfect example. That should be a mode-less floating dialog or fixed overlay or something on the main Kaya screen - NOT a tab. The tab should open when the game actually begins.

Similarly, viewing preferences, user profiles, etc... none of those should open tabs unless you specifically ask for a new tab by holding Ctrl or Shift or something.

99.9999% of my apps are still desktop apps. I dont understand why running it in my browser is such a good idea? What does it really bring to the table?
Using webkit or whatever you can still get all the benefits of running the latest code, automatic updates, etc etc but at least it will be a separate application, can have a nicer way of handling multiple rooms and games (I hate that Kaya opens up new browser window or tab whenever I press anything for example).
If this is the future, I dont want to be part of it, sorry.

There are applications that convert single pages into standalone applications (Fluid for Mac comes to mind, I haven't played with anything similar for Windows/Linux). Technically, nothing is really different, but you get the advantage of a) a dedicated icon for your start menu or application launcher or whatever, and b) a separate window that you can alt/command-tab to. Both features can make life a lot more pleasant.

I don't know how that works with a webapp that wants to spawn multiple tabs. I too find that obnoxious about Kaya, and hope that it at least becomes an option to run everything through a single tab.

Just created a Dashboard web clip in Safari of the Kaya beta page … works GERAT, incl. chat, BUT sadly won’t (cause prolly can’t) open game tabs etc.

But I guess it should be possible to create a web clip of a game you’re playing for use in Dashboard … anybody wanna try?

And then I remember there was an app, kind of browser, but just for one purpose. IIRC it was possible to use instances of this browser app for sepcific web sites/web applications. This could be what you're looking for, if you don't want to use “just another browser” for Kaya. But I can’t remember the name … MacUpdate.com should help.

<edit>

Could be that the app Hyperpape mentions is what I meant.

</edit>

Mef wrote:

badukJr wrote:
Earn ratings points for AGA/EGA - 60 Votes
30 Community comments and no feedback from Kaya

To be fair, the major barrier here will be dealing with the organizations themselves. As far as I know there is some resistance to using online games for "real life" rating purposes (and perhaps rightly so!).

Rightly so. You open the door to cheating by allowing server games for official rating. Probably not an issue for the top20, but for everyone else. (Read strong go bots, help from stronger players, ...) Also, it is pointless to request this on the feedback section of a server - there is absolutely no possibility that such a change would be implemented as a free advertisement for only a single server.