KGS on iPad?

[antinoun]

I know that the KGS app is written in Java, and that there would be some work in porting it to run on the iPad, but it'd be SOOOOO cool to run on an iPad!

My question is not whether or not the KGS admins plan on doing it, I'm pretty sure they are not.

My question is: can someone else do it? Which is to say, is the server protocol at all documented (I assume it is not), and would the KGS peeps be tolerant of someone else potentially reversing the Java app network protocol in order to implement a client for other platforms?

I'd hope they'd tolerate it, ideally I'd hope they'd help by providing what code/documentation is available.

[oren]

Time to get an Android tablet.

You can root your device and run android apps. I know someone did that and play a game on KGS before. Have fun figuring that out.

[hyperpape]

WMS does not support third party clients, as it would greatly complicate his task of maintaining KGS.

Same reason it took the iPhone a year to get an SDK.

[wms]

Yes, I don't let other people write clients. If somebody writes an iPad client then I must support it indefinitely and make sure that updates to server and iPad client are done in sync so it doesn't break when I do an update. I'm not ready to sign on to that right now. If KGS were a full time job then I would be doing that (or else programming it myself), but the headaches of supporting another platform, with or without somebody else doing the bulk of the programming work, isn't something I'm willing to put up with right now.

The client runs quite well on the Samusung Android tablets. I'll make sure that I keep it updated and working on future Android tablets. But iOS devices (iPad, iPod, iPhone) aren't likely; it will be a long time if they do show up.

[antinoun]

Sorry to hear that, but I understand where you're coming from. I'm not in a position to offer porting support anyway, but I'd just love to see it. Too bad good go apps are split between those platforms (smartgo on ios, kgs client on android), I really want a tablet to do all things go! Maybe in the future, you know, one a major movie features go centrally and everyone starts playing it!

Of course, if Apple gets their iHead out of their iAss and supported java, that'd be helpful too!

[kirkmc]

Yes, I don't let other people write clients. If somebody writes an iPad client then I must support it indefinitely and make sure that updates to server and iPad client are done in sync so it doesn't break when I do an update.

I still don't understand this. If it's just a data protocol, why is it such a big deal? IGS does it; heck, web pages do it. What's so special about your protocol?

[wms]

Yes, I don't let other people write clients. If somebody writes an iPad client then I must support it indefinitely and make sure that updates to server and iPad client are done in sync so it doesn't break when I do an update.

I still don't understand this. If it's just a data protocol, why is it such a big deal? IGS does it; heck, web pages do it. What's so special about your protocol?

I change it. The next release will have a change to support a new feature that will make it incompatible.

I could figure out ways to keep things backward compatible. But that's more work, so I don't.

[kirkmc]

Yes, I don't let other people write clients. If somebody writes an iPad client then I must support it indefinitely and make sure that updates to server and iPad client are done in sync so it doesn't break when I do an update.

I still don't understand this. If it's just a data protocol, why is it such a big deal? IGS does it; heck, web pages do it. What's so special about your protocol?

I change it. The next release will have a change to support a new feature that will make it incompatible.

I could figure out ways to keep things backward compatible. But that's more work, so I don't.

Couldn't you just give the info to people who make clients, so they have it in advance? And if the clients aren't updated, the server could refuse connections. There wouldn't be that many clients anyway, and you could choose who makes them. It would really be in the interest of many of us to have non-Java clients, at least for Macs, iOS devices, and others.

[wms]

Couldn't you just give the info to people who make clients, so they have it in advance? And if the clients aren't updated, the server could refuse connections. There wouldn't be that many clients anyway, and you could choose who makes them. It would really be in the interest of many of us to have non-Java clients, at least for Macs, iOS devices, and others.

I've gone over this before. I think even in conversations with you. The answer is no. Everybody who connects to KGS gets a client that I think is a decent one. I will not let people connect with a client that I don't support and consider to be good enough. And the only practical way to make sure that the clients are good enough for me and stay up to date (and can be supported by me and the admins) is to do the clients myself, so that is what I do. That's my policy and I'm sticking to it.

[vash3g]

OK, next person on the forum that wins the lotto can pay WMS to program KGS full time then maybe he'll do it.

[kirkmc]

Couldn't you just give the info to people who make clients, so they have it in advance? And if the clients aren't updated, the server could refuse connections. There wouldn't be that many clients anyway, and you could choose who makes them. It would really be in the interest of many of us to have non-Java clients, at least for Macs, iOS devices, and others.

I've gone over this before. I think even in conversations with you. The answer is no. Everybody who connects to KGS gets a client that I think is a decent one. I will not let people connect with a client that I don't support and consider to be good enough. And the only practical way to make sure that the clients are good enough for me and stay up to date (and can be supported by me and the admins) is to do the clients myself, so that is what I do. That's my policy and I'm sticking to it.

If you want to have your own walled garden, that's your right. But your saying - at other times - that other clients would crash the server makes me wonder why you think that. After all, there are no other clients. You've never said why this would happen, and from my knowledge of network protocols, I don't see what would be so special about the KGS protocol that would lead to problems.

Just saying, as a KGS Plus member, it's something I'd like to see.

[rubin427]

You've never said why this would happen, and from my knowledge of network protocols, I don't see what would be so special about the KGS protocol that would lead to problems.

I remember third party/non-java KGS clients being discussed in the past. At the time, a very specific technical reason was given. I would link to the thread in question, but I don't know of any reliable archive of GoDiscussions.com

[Bantari]

Couldn't you just give the info to people who make clients, so they have it in advance? And if the clients aren't updated, the server could refuse connections. There wouldn't be that many clients anyway, and you could choose who makes them. It would really be in the interest of many of us to have non-Java clients, at least for Macs, iOS devices, and others.

I've gone over this before. I think even in conversations with you. The answer is no. Everybody who connects to KGS gets a client that I think is a decent one. I will not let people connect with a client that I don't support and consider to be good enough. And the only practical way to make sure that the clients are good enough for me and stay up to date (and can be supported by me and the admins) is to do the clients myself, so that is what I do. That's my policy and I'm sticking to it.

If you want to have your own walled garden, that's your right. But your saying - at other times - that other clients would crash the server makes me wonder why you think that. After all, there are no other clients. You've never said why this would happen, and from my knowledge of network protocols, I don't see what would be so special about the KGS protocol that would lead to problems.

Just saying, as a KGS Plus member, it's something I'd like to see.

Personally, I understand wms.

And as for your gripe - I understand it too. But the 'proper' way to vent is to put pressure on Apple to make a decent tablet rather than putting pressure on software developers to adjust to Apple's quirks and silly policies. The way I see it is that the more people complain that iPad does not support this or that application - the sooner Apple will make a decent tablet that supports what the rest of the world uses.

I speak here as a dedicated MacBook Pro user - the best laptop ever! So no Apple-hater at all.
But I don't understand Apple's insistence on supporting a silly device like the iPad with no camera, no multitasking, no Flash, no Java, and so on... Join the 21st century, dudes!!! I'd buy the iPad in a second if they made it even half-decent! I hear they're thinking about it, so maybe next year. But the longer wms sticks to his guns - the better for all of us!

[kirkmc]

Well, you've got a couple of things wrong. The iPad does multitasking, and I don't see the use for a camera on a device that size. Flash and Java are both resource hogs, and tests of Android tablets that run Flash show that their battery life is terrible; when Flash works, that is, because apparently it doesn't work very well on all of them.

As for Java, Apple has decided that there are too few Java apps for them to really support it. In the future, it'll be up to Sun to provide it, but they won't put it on iOS devices for reasons similar to those they chose for Flash: battery life, reliability, and security. (Apparently, given that there is fragmentation in Java itself, CGoban doesn't work correctly with all flavors of Java. This seems to be another reason to look toward other solutions in the future.)

In any case, blaming hardware for not supporting old software seems to me to be the wrong way around.

Anyway, my point was about more than just the iPad; I'd very much like to have a native client for Mac OS X that doesn't use Java with its many quirks. And I know there are a couple of people who would like to make them.

[judicata]

Apple: "We restrict what people can do with our product because we want it to run perfectly, and for everyone to have the same great user experience."

KGS: "We restrict what clients people can use because we want KGS to run perfectly, and for everyone to have the same great user experience."

Who is wrong? It depends on whether you're an Apple or KGS superfan. Personally, I think WMS is "more right" because this is primarily a resource issue. I tend to agree that a poorly-implemented or under-maintained client would tend to cause more harm than good.

Also, kirk, check yourself here. Many people have given reasons for a camera on the iPad (e.g. facetime). If you start adopting the logic that "this Apple product doesn't have X feature because it would be bad for you/the product" (or because "you don't need it"), you start to sound kind of silly. Can you find any reason to criticize Apple or one of its recent appliances?