Clarification needed regarding BOARD on mobile devices

Hi everybody,

I am confused with the several options I have heard and read about which allow to consume BOARD applications on a mobile device. I mean no only tablet, but also smartphone.

Can the community confirm or unconfirm which options are currently (BOARD 10.1.4) available, deprecated, to avoid, to recommend ? If these options will be all deprecated in near future, could you give a few details of the roadmap replacing them ?

Use "mobile" capsules. Advantage is, the resolution can be set to stick to tablets' resolution. On another hand I see these drawbacks:
- a few toolbox objects (heatmap, treemap, Geomap, pager, trellis, dynawrite, viewer) and containers are not available at all.
- the chart object is not up-to-date compared to the chart object of the standard capsule.
- when I consume a screen from a smartphone and from a PC browser, I cannot see any difference or added value in the visualisation results using a "mobile" capsule compared to a standard capsule which has the screens with Lock size option active .
Board mobile apps. I haven't found any app in the App store. What is the official name to look for ? Or is this deprecated today ?
Use standard capsules and set all its screens with Lock size option active. This would be me preferred approach today.
What does the software contained in B10.1.4_Mobile_Server.zip do ? Why is it intended for ?
to be continued

Many thanks,

Find more posts tagged with

Configure

Accepted answers

unknown

Hi interested typ,

You need to install the Mobile Server in case you are using our native BOARD Mobile app for IOS, that you can find at this address: BOARD Mobile on the App Store. Note that you will need a Mobile license type in order to access capsules from the mobile app.

The mobile capsule feature that you mention is specifically built to create capsules that can be consumed from our BOARD Mobile App. Opening them directly from the BOARD HTML5 WebClient on your mobile / tablet won't show any difference.

Using the BOARD mobile app on a IOS tablet gives a quite sleek experience, and in case of a corporate installation you can manage installation on company devices through MobileIron - but there are limitations to what you can do in terms of objects and configurations.

The mobile app is not deprecated but given the fact that you can use the HTML5 client on any mobile or tablet device, it's not as used as before BOARD 10 came out. Your approach at point 3 is what most developers prefer nowadays.

In the future versions of BOARD, an option for the automatic resizing of capsules (responsive rendering) will be made available, this will semplify even more using BOARD on mobile devices.

Hope this helps,

Michele

All comments

unknown

Hi interested typ,

In the future versions of BOARD, an option for the automatic resizing of capsules (responsive rendering) will be made available, this will semplify even more using BOARD on mobile devices.

Hope this helps,

Michele

unknown

As you've noted, there are a few different options for a mobile experience. Speaking only for myself, here is my approach. All existing capsules should be tested over the web. Users should be encouraged to use the web client as much as possible. Once BOARD 11 is available, all use cases should be available over the web. This will simplify the mobile experience, from both a development and functional perspective. For folks that need something right now, I encourage users to use their smartphone or tablet browser to interact with the web site, rather than working with the mobile app. That's just my two cents.

Sebastian Gurt

Hi interested typ,

I want to add one point that could still be an argument pro "mobile capsule": When using the apps you can use an offline mode. This downloads basically the "first layer" of data (not the complete database of course) and allows you to use the capsules without a network connection. Not all functionality is available, but for dashboard applications this could be useful. Check out the documentation: Mobile . I am pretty sure that something like this would be hard to implement in thehtml5 client.

Sebastian