Because search still sucks.
No-one does context very well or very consistently. Even with hints. Google can't do it. Wolfram can't do it. UDDI sure doesn't/can't/won't do it.
Further, a huge part of the drive to apps is because people prefer more-responsive and dependable apps that are geared for the mobile use-case of the query they need at that instant. e.g. an interface that's not only finger-friendly, but one-thumb friendly and/or low contrast-friendly.
Even in a magical UDDI future, no generic interface group is going to churn out something that displays subway maps as well as a dedicated UX group that's only worried about subway maps.
Lastly, you only search for an app once. And most people never search randomly at all: their friend recommends an app and they search for that specific app by name. You may recognize this behavior as: the way most people use the internet. The worst the 'appocalypse' could ever get, is as horribly unusable as the current internet. And we certainly have enough history on that to see whether people will ignore it because it can be difficult to find things [1].
That the author totally skips the UX concerns and shamefully overhypes the search process strikes me as somewhere between 'just not getting it' and 'intentionally disingenuous'.
[1] So we're clear: It really is still too difficult to search for most things online. My point is that state of affairs just doesn't matter. Maybe you could get more use from more people with better search. It remains to be seen whether people would rather search for themselves or whether they truly prefer to get their information through third party curators and aggregators. But clearly apps won't run into a roadblock because of search any time soon.
I don't get your point. People do UX design on the web. Instead of opening your NYCSubway app, you just type "NYCSubway" into Google, touch the first link, and now you're on nycsubway.com, whose UX has been meticulously crafted just like the NYCSubway app.
The point is that downloading apps is an unnecessary step.
It seems the article is talking about having some search interface call some data providers, then display the data returned by the providers. I imagine what your parent was trying to say was that the search interface cannot generify the display and interaction with the data provider's data.
The author's identified 'problem' is: I can't find a subway map when I need it because it's too difficult to find and install 'an app for that'.
My reply was working from the assumption that the author was proposing a solution that was designed to address that.
If the context-sensitive search site is merely identifying that I'm looking for a subway map, and then forwarding me on to one of 10,000 disparate subway map web services as erikpukinskis seems to be suggesting, users will inevitably bookmark the web service interface they like best and query it directly in the future. Leading to the same use scenario as with apps. The only differences being trivial technical ones (from the standpoint of the user).
Further, a huge part of the drive to apps is because people prefer more-responsive and dependable apps that are geared for the mobile use-case of the query they need at that instant. e.g. an interface that's not only finger-friendly, but one-thumb friendly and/or low contrast-friendly.
Even in a magical UDDI future, no generic interface group is going to churn out something that displays subway maps as well as a dedicated UX group that's only worried about subway maps.
Lastly, you only search for an app once. And most people never search randomly at all: their friend recommends an app and they search for that specific app by name. You may recognize this behavior as: the way most people use the internet. The worst the 'appocalypse' could ever get, is as horribly unusable as the current internet. And we certainly have enough history on that to see whether people will ignore it because it can be difficult to find things [1].
That the author totally skips the UX concerns and shamefully overhypes the search process strikes me as somewhere between 'just not getting it' and 'intentionally disingenuous'.
[1] So we're clear: It really is still too difficult to search for most things online. My point is that state of affairs just doesn't matter. Maybe you could get more use from more people with better search. It remains to be seen whether people would rather search for themselves or whether they truly prefer to get their information through third party curators and aggregators. But clearly apps won't run into a roadblock because of search any time soon.