[DocNo]

Cheaper? Only if you don't value your privacy.
Cluttered? Again back to the cheaper comment - those ads sure aren't clutter free - and flat out annoying. And if you block ads, those web apps won't be cheaper for very long!
Easier? Hardly! Even the best web apps don't have a fraction of the controls or functionality such as drag and drop, selection of multiple items or flat out speed that native apps have. Maybe as HTML 5 matures the gap may close, but it will NEVER be the equivalent of native apps.

Web browsers have come a long way, but at the end of the day they are just a VT100 terminal on steroids - but a terminal is still a terminal and I prefer my data and applications under local control. That doesn't mean I have no use for the cloud - my data is backed up there, my email primarily resides there - but it's not the only place my stuff is. It's another tool, not the sole one. I'm glad it works for you, but there is no way in heck I would ever want to rely solely on Google, Apple or any other provider for my stuff - and that's the biggest problem I have with web apps. You have NO CONTROL over the version of the application you are using. If a company in their infinite wisdom decides to revoke functionality you are SOL. At least with local apps I can keep using the older version if I want to.

Oh well - good luck. Better you than me...

[CyberBob]

I'm not going to comment on the author's preference on using web apps - there are pros and cons to this approach, and ultimately it's his decision on how he likes to work.

What I don't understand is why use the (much more expensive) Macbook Air when a Chromebook would suffice? Especially if you're going to use services like Google Docs and Talk.

For less than half the price of an entry-level 11" MacBook Air, you can get an 11" Chromebook that also has built-in 3G wireless. It even looks like an Air!

Using an Air for only web apps is like buying a Ferrari to just go grocery shopping.

[DocNo]

Quote

I thought one of the reasons surely would be that it keeps the system running faster. Everybody's needs differ and the author's needs seem minimal; but the less extraneous and duplicate stuff you install on your system, the better it keeps purring along.

Huh? App's only affect your system if the are *running*. If I have 100 installed on my machine and only two are running in the background but you have 10 and they are all running in the background then you'r going to potentially be worse than me... but then again not all background apps are created equal either so that's not an indicator of anything. And if any of your web apps require Java or Flash... well, I pity you )

This isn't windows where registry bloat can cause problems in and of itself now!

Other than this slight nitpick, I heartily agree with the other points you raised.

[flowney]

I think that your approach has merit as a discovery technique. In the early days of email, I would compose, send and retrieve email via a command line to better understand how it worked. Then, I discovered Eudora and moved along. I once created an AppleWorks spreadsheet to do a full suite of descriptive statistics to improve my understanding fo both statistics and spreadsheets. Then, I moved on to apps like R.
So, go for it but stay tuned for the moment when this tactic no longer serves you.

[katakwi]

Macworld, on 04 January 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

Post your comments for Why I use as few Mac apps as possible here

What is the privacy cost for these so called "free" Apps. There is a reason they are "free" if you dig a little more deeper into their privacy policies. Many
share private information with developers or third parties, most of them without parents' consent.

http://www.informati...-cost/240003591

The other issue is integration of apps with the MacOS. What is the impact on speed and functionality of the system.

This post has been edited by katakwi: 05 January 2013 - 10:40 AM

[Fixx]

Excellent arguments but I have opposite conclusions. Having native apps is easier, speedier, more powerful. Online apps create their own kind of convoluted clutter. I alsi do not like Dock, bouncing or not, so I use it as little as possible and interact with my MBP with other tools.
I even have Google Talk as an application in my Win machine, and wish it were available for OSX too.

[icerabbit]

DocNo, on 04 January 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

Quote

I thought one of the reasons surely would be that it keeps the system running faster. Everybody's needs differ and the author's needs seem minimal; but the less extraneous and duplicate stuff you install on your system, the better it keeps purring along.

Huh? App's only affect your system if the are *running*. If I have 100 installed on my machine and only two are running in the background but you have 10 and they are all running in the background then you'r going to potentially be worse than me... but then again not all background apps are created equal either so that's not an indicator of anything. And if any of your web apps require Java or Flash... well, I pity you )

This isn't windows where registry bloat can cause problems in and of itself now!

Other than this slight nitpick, I heartily agree with the other points you raised.

While things are far from as bad on the Mac side as on the Windows side; installing a lot of software does add additional data, slows down startup times, adding software as you go, will cause your personal files to be spread around the drive farther, increasing access times and over time file fragmentation increases. Evidence: cleaning out systems that are several years old, re-install only what's needed, put the data back and it'll respond significantly faster. People with newer & faster macs than I have that respond slower than they should. Keeping it simple and light keeps things zippier.

[syrgrad91]

I can understand the author's reasons for using web apps, however, you can't use those apps if you don't have internet access. Sure Wi-Fi connectivity is available in a lot of places, but if being a cheapskate is important then you'll find that free Wi-Fi isn't as available as you might think (BTW, FreedomPop is cool, but you burn through the 500MB of free data pretty quick). Sure, it's one thing if your CPU doesn't go anywhere, like my iMac, but this is a MacBook Air, where portability is king!

Having apps actually on your MacBook Air has advantages in terms of portability and especially in the ability to work offline. I am a cheapskate too, and when my license of Photoshop wouldn't run on Snow Leopard I was too cheap (being unemployed had something to do with that) to get the latest version, so I went with a great substitute, Pixelmator. Yes, it wasn't free, but it is a very good substitute for PS and a great price. Plus, because I bought it through the Mac OS X App store, I'm notified about updates.

Owning apps doesn't mean you have to install them, or rather keep them installed. Over the years, I have installed various apps, usually for a single use (recovering a corrupt file on a flash drive, etc.). It doesn't mean I keep them installed on my CPU. Often times I'll uninstall them after they've served their purpose, and I keep their original CD/DVD in a safe place or the downloaded installer or .DMG file on a backup drive for later use.

Also, the comparison to the iOS is wrong. A surprising number of iOS apps require internet access. So even though the app is present on the device, it doesn't mean it's usable. On my iPhone with unlimited data for example, it's not an issue, but on my Wi-Fi only iPad, it is a problem.

[Charles_Martel]

Support Big Brother. Save your data in the "cloud" where he can analyze it more efficiently.