Posted by emy1013 on 4/2/2013 12:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by reddyred on 4/1/2013 11:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/1/2013 10:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rednation58 on 4/1/2013 7:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/1/2013 4:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by reddyred on 4/1/2013 3:33:00 PM (view original):
I guess I just don't understand here? Is internet accessibility on your cell having it do everything for you? It's designed for internet access. I would also think anyone who has a cell without internet access probably has a cell made prior to 2000 or if they don't have a cell at all, probably they don't have a job or home either? The fact is most smartphones require data plans now so internet comes with the package.

What's wrong with wanting an app (if it works right)? Is that the lazy part? I guess if you prefer to write letters than sending a text message then maybe you would think having internet on the phone is lazy and you're so entitled to that opinion, but honestly today our phones are capable of doing so much I don't see why a person is lazy for wanting an app for HD.  

"If they don't have a cell at all, probably they don't have a job or home either?"  Really?  Having a cell phone is now a pre-requisite to owning a home or being employed?  I wonder if you even realize how arrogant and condescending that sounds?

emy honestly do you know anyone that doesn't have a cell? It's not a pre-requisite for owning a home duh... but there are even programs now where you can get a free cell phone with the basic works. so no it's not condescending or an arrogant statement, it's simply the truth and the point is most everyone has a cell. no need to sound the alarms. 

Reddy, I live in southeastern Kentucky in what probably wouldn't be considered a metropolitan area, so to answer, yes, I know plenty of people who don't have cell phones.  For one, even with the best plans and providers, the coverage in our area isn't necessarily the best.  Sporadic would be an appropriate description I think.  I have one, but I only get a signal for about half the drive from my job to my house.  Other than that, I may as well be in Siberia, probably get a better signal there.  Point being, that there are alot of people around here who don't waste their money on having a cell phone when they can't use it about half the time anyway.

Point noted emy, but I think my point in that post went beyond one sentence that was singled out of a 2 paragraph post. I live in NYC and most everyone has a cell. Even the people who live in upstate NY where signals are also dismal. There may be alot of people out there who are in the situation you describe and voluntarily choose not to have cells, but the vast majority of people in the USA do have cell phones regardless of coverage, like yourself. That one sentence was not meant to be arrogant or condescending but stated to support my point that the desire to have an app for WIS is a more than reasonable request and isn't in the slightest bit a lazy desire. 

Fair enough Reddy, I think we're actually quibbling over nothing anyway.  I'm not against an app for WIS by any means, never was.  The way you worded that sentence earlier just kind of rubbed me the wrong way I guess.  No worries, I don't feel that wanting an app is lazy by any means.  As someone pointed out earlier (now THAT'S lazy, not even going back to look who said it initially), an app is for some and isn't for others.  For those who don't want to use one, don't.  For those who would like one and would have one available to use, great!  To each their own, right?  :^)

True enough.

I would also think anyone who has a cell without internet access probably has a cell made prior to 2000 or if they don't have a cell at all, probably they don't have a job or home either?

I have a job and a home and I have a cell phone purchased in 2009 that is a simple flip phone. I'm sure it could have internet access, but I don't see the point in paying for something I'd use so rarely, so I don't have it as a part of my plan.

I guess if you prefer to write letters than sending a text message then maybe you would think having internet on the phone is lazy

I don't text either as I it as pointless. No, not because I prefer sending letters, but because I prefer having actual phone conversations, which are much more efficient in most circumstances.

With a phone call, you can hit 10 buttons or less for almost every call, and just one button if you have someone on speed dial. Then at least some of the time, you get to have a real conversation where you get instant responses.

Contrast that with a text, where you waste time hitting many buttons on an awkward small keyboard, touchpad, or perhaps even a number pad only to wonder when someone will get it and perhaps respond so you can do it all over again. What a time suck.

Anyway, back to the original discussion...


I wouldn't use an app. I understand some people would.

However, I think the people in charge at WIS have plenty of other things that should be addressed first, including the actual game itself.

Odds are very slim that WIS would have the capacity in house to develop an app (considering the experience and skills they list on their open developer position postings).  This is more a matter of them just taking the time to contract the development out to a consulting firm who could churn something out.  All they would need to devote to this would likely be an analyst or two to put together a requirements doc and maybe some wireframes - not very intense stuff.

They're looking for iOS developers supposedly, but they've had postings up since early February.

Posted by bistiza on 4/2/2013 1:07:00 PM (view original):

I would also think anyone who has a cell without internet access probably has a cell made prior to 2000 or if they don't have a cell at all, probably they don't have a job or home either?

I have a job and a home and I have a cell phone purchased in 2009 that is a simple flip phone. I'm sure it could have internet access, but I don't see the point in paying for something I'd use so rarely, so I don't have it as a part of my plan.

I guess if you prefer to write letters than sending a text message then maybe you would think having internet on the phone is lazy

I don't text either as I it as pointless. No, not because I prefer sending letters, but because I prefer having actual phone conversations, which are much more efficient in most circumstances.

With a phone call, you can hit 10 buttons or less for almost every call, and just one button if you have someone on speed dial. Then at least some of the time, you get to have a real conversation where you get instant responses.

Contrast that with a text, where you waste time hitting many buttons on an awkward small keyboard, touchpad, or perhaps even a number pad only to wonder when someone will get it and perhaps respond so you can do it all over again. What a time suck.

Anyway, back to the original discussion...


I wouldn't use an app. I understand some people would.

However, I think the people in charge at WIS have plenty of other things that should be addressed first, including the actual game itself.

I think the issue is your 2009 flip phone then. Maybe you just haven't experienced having a smartphone at this point, Like emy said to each his own.

I'm perfectly happy with my 2009 flip phone.

I don't want to pay for a smart phone, and more importantly, I don't want to pay a fee every month to have internet on my phone. I've played around with other people's iphones and droids and I get annoyed looking at the tiny screen when I can just go to my computer and have a wonderful 22 inch monitor to show me what I want to see.

Basically, having things like internet and texting on phones isn't efficient.

Did I mention I save a ton on cell phone bills because I don't have internet and texting on them? Yeah, I think I did.

Hey some people don't pay for cable either (you save more by the way so you may want to try it)... some people also don't run their AC's in the middle of summer and prefer fans... again to each his own... more than one way to save a buck...

Google Mobile Planet

This is a cool resource that some fairly intelligent people at a little company called Google put together.  Shows some interesting charting on how mobile browsing has been increasing over the past few years.  It's extremely customizable, so you can see comparisons on desktop browsing and other areas as well.  Just something to play with if you're extremely bored... I use it for my job, so that's my excuse.  You'll have to come up with your own.  Plus who can hate pie charts?

Saying having mobile browsing and text messages is inefficient puts you in the overwhelming minority of people in first world countries who feel that way.  Mobile Internet usage is extremely efficient for short browsing sessions, in the same way that text messages are much more efficient for sending quick messages to someone without having to go through calling them just for one sentence.  If I'm leaving the office, I can send my wife a "home in 10" text.  If she isn't at her phone, I don't need to leave her a voicemail - the message will be queued up and waiting for her when she gets back to her phone.  She doesn't have to rush to her phone to get to it within four rings or whatever because the text won't go away.  Plus it lets us have a bit of a system - if it's a text, it generally isn't very important.  If it's a phone call, it's important.  Or for another example, if I'm watching a Louisville game where a kid suffers an awful leg injury, I can immediately send a text to ten of my friends saying "holy sh*t, did you see that?" without having to individually call each one and have the same conversation ten times.  

It's all in how you use the technology - you can't just issue a blanket statement declaring something that is as useful as mobile browsing or texting as inefficient.  Maybe the way you use it is inefficient and that's the issue, but millions of people send billions of texts and internet requests every single day in very efficient ways.  For WIS to ignore that given that they are a web-based company is absolutely ridiculous.

cool resource ryrun and very well put. 

Hey some people don't pay for cable either (you save more by the way so you may want to try it)... some people also don't run their AC's in the middle of summer and prefer fans... again to each his own... more than one way to save a buck...

It's not saving a buck - it's more like not throwing away a buck.

Given how little I would use internet and texting, it would just be a complete waste to pay anything at all to have those services. This is because I think internet and texting on cell phones are only useful in very limited circumstances to begin with, such as needing info with no other internet access or needing to text because you simply can't talk in that situation but absolutely need to communicate.

So if I'm ever out somewhere and need sudden and immediate info, the internet might be useful. Or if I am ever taken hostage and the person somehow doesn't take my phone and would hear me if I talk but I can get out a silent text, then texting might be useful.

By contrast, the things you mention here actually have use, so you'd have to "sacrifice" something in order to save that buck. I'm not sacrificing anything to save the money I save when I don't have internet or texting.

Mobile Internet usage is extremely efficient for short browsing sessions, in the same way that text messages are much more efficient for sending quick messages to someone without having to go through calling them just for one sentence.

Other than emergencies or maybe a rare desperate need for info from the internet when no computer is available, I can't think of any reason I might need a "short browsing session". When I get on the internet, it's rarely for a short period of time.

I also don't see a point in punching a whole bunch of keys to tell someone one sentence when I can hit a few and tell them the sentence on the phone, which doesn't take any more time and is actually less effort (not to mention I don't have to pay extra for texting).

 If I'm leaving the office, I can send my wife a "home in 10" text.  If she isn't at her phone, I don't need to leave her a voicemail - the message will be queued up and waiting for her when she gets back to her phone.

I just call and tell my wife when I'm coming home. I hit a single button (you just hit at least ten with that short message) because she's on speed dial, and we have a real conversation if she answers. If not, leaving a voicemail isn't that difficult.

She doesn't have to rush to her phone to get to it within four rings or whatever because the text won't go away.

Voice mails don't go away either.

Plus it lets us have a bit of a system - if it's a text, it generally isn't very important.  If it's a phone call, it's important.

If I need to contact someone and do so over the phone, about 95 percent of the time, it's important. Even if it's not, I don't see how I need texting to differentiate.

Or for another example, if I'm watching a Louisville game where a kid suffers an awful leg injury, I can immediately send a text to ten of my friends saying "holy sh*t, did you see that?" without having to individually call each one and have the same conversation ten times.

Sure, but this is something that is so unimportant to me that it would be entirely useless. I have ZERO desire to ask my friends if they saw something on TV unless we're right there watching it together, in which case the phone is unnecessary to begin with. To me that's about the most pointless thing you could do with your phone. Heck, using it as a paperweight would prove more useful to me than contacting my friends about some meaningless sports event the moment it happens.

On top of that, I don't want people sending me ridiculous texts like this about sports events and what not. I don't need to know you were watching the game and something weird happened - I'm either watching it myself or I'll find out later. I don't want to be bothered with that kind of thing.

It's all in how you use the technology - you can't just issue a blanket statement declaring something that is as useful as mobile browsing or texting as inefficient.

I just explained how every reason you gave for mobile browsing and texting is inefficient from my perspective. So unless there are other uses you can tell me about that actual are efficient, I stand by my statement that both are inefficient.

Maybe the way you use it is inefficient and that's the issue, but millions of people send billions of texts and internet requests every single day in very efficient ways.

I disagree. I think  most of them simply live less than efficient lives but don't realize how inefficient they are being. 

This is the bottom line on how I see it:

Browsing is infinitely better on a computer - usually faster, more capabilities, and a much bigger screen which is easier to see. By comparison, mobile browsing is inefficient. Other than emergencies where info from the internet is needed and a computer isn't available, there isn't much reason to do it.

Texting takes more time and effort than a simple phone call (more keys pressed, etc.). Compared to a phone call where more information can be exchanged faster and easier, it is tremendously inefficient. In fact, other than emergencies or other situations where you can't talk but absolutely need communicate with someone, there isn't much reason to do it.

I do think that's a cool resource of information you posted a link to, though.

Debating this issue with you is inefficient.  Agree to disagree - this has nothing to do with the topic of the post.  If you want to talk about the pros and cons of mobile browsing and texting, there are countless forums available for that.  I don't need to convince you of the benefits of technology or read about how awesome you are because you make phone calls instead of sending messages, sorry.

You want to talk about the app itself and how to make it useful, cool - other than that, this is pointless.

Actually it is directly connected to the main point of the topic, because if mobile browsing is inefficient, an app based upon mobile browsing is also inefficient. I'd rather WIS work on the games themselves, fixing issues, making gameplay better, etc. than waste time on creating something inefficient. That's why I think it's relevant.

So sure, I'll talk about the app and how to make it useful - don't waste resources (time, money, etc.) creating it at all, and those resources would be more useful in other areas.

Or is everyone so "pro app" that no one can accept my opinion that it's a waste of resources to do it?

If that's the case, geez, I'm sorry for daring to disagree with the masses and state a contrary opinion.

You don't seem to grasp that WIS is a web-based company, so creating as many web-enabled avenues to their web product is efficient for their company.  Just because you can't seem to wrap your head around the concept doesn't make it any less true, sorry.  I'm sure if WIS ran a report on what user agents access their sites in a given month, a decent % would be from mobile browsers, which is all the data necessary to determine if they would benefit from an app.  

Given that they are looking for iOS developers, I'm guessing they've already determined that it's a beneficial avenue for the company.  If you want them to listen to your opinion on how inefficient it'd be, submit a ticket and try to move it up the chain, don't know what else to tell you.  The majority of the users here seem to be very pro technology - you seem to be stuck a few years behind, which is fine, but you're a dying breed and WIS isn't going to be marketing to you - that's what this is about, their target market.  You aren't it.

Sure, WIS is web-based. That doesn't mean they need to persue every possible web-based avenue or add every feature a group of people think might be nice.  Even if a large group of people agree a feature would be nice, that doesn't mean it's the best use of resources or even an efficient one.

Add to that there seem to be a large number of complaints on these forums about the actual game play, and you've got something that is - in my opinion at least - a more important issue to deal with. If the gameplay isn't there, having an app will mean nothing.

Technology is a great thing and I absolutely embrace it when it makes my life more efficient. Mobile browsing doesn't do that because compared to computer browsing it is slower, has limited capabilities, and shows me a much smaller screen. Texting doesn't do that because it requires me to exert more effort for the same communication.

I'm actually not sure how you don't get these points - how can you say browsing on slower, less capable device with a smaller screen is better? How can you say punching a bunch of keys is less time consuming than hitting one?

To sum up: I'm not "stuck a few years behind" -  I simply live a more efficient life because I use better ways of browsing and communicating.

Sure, WIS is web-based. That doesn't mean they need to persue every possible web-based avenue

Actually, they absolutely should.  That quote couldn't be more incorrect from a business stance.  I'm actually amazed you can't comprehend that simple concept, and it sheds a lot of light on your previous posts.

Mobile browsing is trending upwards and desktop browsing is moving downwards.  That's an undebatable fact based on conducted studies.  You can trumpet all you want about how much more efficient your life is all because you go running to your computer to look up anything and everything on the Internet.  I hold to the statement that the way you use the Internet is simply inefficient because you are too reliant on the computer.  The world is mobilizing, has been for a while now.  It's efficient when you use it intelligently.  

But, whatever - you aren't going to change my mind, I'm obviously not going to change yours, so I'll let it go and suggest you do to the same.  WIS is obviously moving forward with an app on their road map given their job openings and their ticket response mentioned earlier in the thread.  If you don't like it, don't download the app... though you likely couldn't on a flip phone anyhow.

Posted by bistiza on 4/3/2013 8:42:00 AM (view original):

Hey some people don't pay for cable either (you save more by the way so you may want to try it)... some people also don't run their AC's in the middle of summer and prefer fans... again to each his own... more than one way to save a buck...

It's not saving a buck - it's more like not throwing away a buck.

Given how little I would use internet and texting, it would just be a complete waste to pay anything at all to have those services. This is because I think internet and texting on cell phones are only useful in very limited circumstances to begin with, such as needing info with no other internet access or needing to text because you simply can't talk in that situation but absolutely need to communicate.

So if I'm ever out somewhere and need sudden and immediate info, the internet might be useful. Or if I am ever taken hostage and the person somehow doesn't take my phone and would hear me if I talk but I can get out a silent text, then texting might be useful.

By contrast, the things you mention here actually have use, so you'd have to "sacrifice" something in order to save that buck. I'm not sacrificing anything to save the money I save when I don't have internet or texting.

Mobile Internet usage is extremely efficient for short browsing sessions, in the same way that text messages are much more efficient for sending quick messages to someone without having to go through calling them just for one sentence.

Other than emergencies or maybe a rare desperate need for info from the internet when no computer is available, I can't think of any reason I might need a "short browsing session". When I get on the internet, it's rarely for a short period of time.

I also don't see a point in punching a whole bunch of keys to tell someone one sentence when I can hit a few and tell them the sentence on the phone, which doesn't take any more time and is actually less effort (not to mention I don't have to pay extra for texting).

 If I'm leaving the office, I can send my wife a "home in 10" text.  If she isn't at her phone, I don't need to leave her a voicemail - the message will be queued up and waiting for her when she gets back to her phone.

I just call and tell my wife when I'm coming home. I hit a single button (you just hit at least ten with that short message) because she's on speed dial, and we have a real conversation if she answers. If not, leaving a voicemail isn't that difficult.

She doesn't have to rush to her phone to get to it within four rings or whatever because the text won't go away.

Voice mails don't go away either.

Plus it lets us have a bit of a system - if it's a text, it generally isn't very important.  If it's a phone call, it's important.

If I need to contact someone and do so over the phone, about 95 percent of the time, it's important. Even if it's not, I don't see how I need texting to differentiate.

Or for another example, if I'm watching a Louisville game where a kid suffers an awful leg injury, I can immediately send a text to ten of my friends saying "holy sh*t, did you see that?" without having to individually call each one and have the same conversation ten times.

Sure, but this is something that is so unimportant to me that it would be entirely useless. I have ZERO desire to ask my friends if they saw something on TV unless we're right there watching it together, in which case the phone is unnecessary to begin with. To me that's about the most pointless thing you could do with your phone. Heck, using it as a paperweight would prove more useful to me than contacting my friends about some meaningless sports event the moment it happens.

On top of that, I don't want people sending me ridiculous texts like this about sports events and what not. I don't need to know you were watching the game and something weird happened - I'm either watching it myself or I'll find out later. I don't want to be bothered with that kind of thing.

It's all in how you use the technology - you can't just issue a blanket statement declaring something that is as useful as mobile browsing or texting as inefficient.

I just explained how every reason you gave for mobile browsing and texting is inefficient from my perspective. So unless there are other uses you can tell me about that actual are efficient, I stand by my statement that both are inefficient.

Maybe the way you use it is inefficient and that's the issue, but millions of people send billions of texts and internet requests every single day in very efficient ways.

I disagree. I think  most of them simply live less than efficient lives but don't realize how inefficient they are being. 

This is the bottom line on how I see it:

Browsing is infinitely better on a computer - usually faster, more capabilities, and a much bigger screen which is easier to see. By comparison, mobile browsing is inefficient. Other than emergencies where info from the internet is needed and a computer isn't available, there isn't much reason to do it.

Texting takes more time and effort than a simple phone call (more keys pressed, etc.). Compared to a phone call where more information can be exchanged faster and easier, it is tremendously inefficient. In fact, other than emergencies or other situations where you can't talk but absolutely need communicate with someone, there isn't much reason to do it.

I do think that's a cool resource of information you posted a link to, though.

It's saving a buck dude. That's exactly what it is and I'm glad ryrun said this, you wouldn't be able to use the app anyhow so after reading your tech history, you probably shouldn't even care to post on this topic as you wouldn't have an option to download a WIS app if one were available anyway.  

Most everyone who actually has a smartphone of their own (not playing with a friend's device) knows that it takes time to get acclimated to. My first smartphone took me a couple weeks to get used to and then I was off to the races... That's something you wouldn't know if you didn't have one of your own, so your description of how inefficient smartphones are is based on limited knowledge of how to operate them in the first place. You sound like many friends I've had who just couldn't deal with a touch keyboard and oh so wanted their buttons back... After a few weeks with a touch screen, I stopped hearing those comments.

I'm not trying to change your mind at all here, but you make blanket statements about technology you have limited knowledge of and boast about saving money because you don't have an internet data plan. If I was interested in penny pinching I could honestly download everything I want to see on TV and cut cable and I could do this from my galaxy and I wouldn't be sacrificing anything... I'd be saving about $130 a month. I pay what I pay because the service is convenient. If it's not convenient for you then it's not, but it's far from inefficient.