<div class="gmail_quote">Am 11. März 2010 12:00 schrieb Mike Shaver <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mike.shaver@gmail.com">mike.shaver@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
2010/3/11 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <<a href="mailto:ifette@google.com">ifette@google.com</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">> I think apps will have to deal with hitting quota as you describe, however<br>
> with a normal desktop app you usually have a giant disk relative to what the<br>
> user actually needs. When we're talking about shipping something with a 5mb<br>
> or 50mb default quota, that's a very different story than my grandfather<br>
> having a 1tb disk that he is never going to use. Even with 50mb (which is<br>
> about as much freebie quota as I think I am comfortable giving at the<br>
> moment), you will blow through that quite quickly if you want to sync your<br>
> email.<br>
<br>
</div>How did you come up with 50MB? As a user, I would want "the<br>
application that is gmail" to have the same capabilities as "the<br>
application that is thunderbird", I think. Isn't that our goal?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>AFAIK most browsers are setting a default quota for storage options that is on the order of megabytes.</div><div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im"><br>
> The thing that makes this worse is that you will blow through it at<br>
> some random point (as there is no natural "installation" point from the APIs<br>
> we have.<br>
<br>
</div>That's the case for desktop applications too, really -- mostly I run<br>
out of disk not when I install uTorrent or Thunderbird, but when I'm<br>
trying the Nth linux distro to find one that likes my video card or<br>
someone mails me an HD-resolution powerpoint and I'm about to head to<br>
the airport.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> I would personally be in<br>
> favor of this approach, if only we had a good way to define what it meant to<br>
> "offline the app".<br>
<br>
</div>Sorry, I was working from that premise, which (I thought!) you stated<br>
in your first message:<br>
<div class="im"><br>
"I personally would not expect to browse to a site and then just<br>
happen to be able to use it offline, nor do I expect users to have<br>
that expectation or experience. Rather, I expect going through some<br>
sort of flow like clicking something that says "Yes, I want to use<br>
Application X offline"."<br>
<br>
</div>Could also be an infobar on first some-kind-of-storage use, which<br>
users can click to say "yeah, make sure this works offline" vs "it can<br>
use some storage, I guess, but don't let it get in the way of my<br>
torrents!" I am not a UI designer worth the term, but I *do* believe<br>
that the problem is solvable.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, but I think there may be uses of things like storage for non-offline uses (pre-fetching email attachments, saving an email that is in a draft state etc.) If it's relatively harmless, like 1mb usage, I don't want to pop up an infobar, I just want to allow it. So, I don't really want to have an infobar each time a site uses one of these features for the first time, I'd like to allow innocuous use if possible. But at the same time, I want apps to be able to say up front, at a time when the user is thinking about it (because they just clicked something on the site, presumably) "here's what I am going to need".</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<font color="#888888"><br>
Mike<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>