Hands-on with Articles for iPhone: Wikipedia in your palm

If you love some Wikipedia and find yourself checking it from your iPhone, you may want to check out Articles from Sophiestication Software. It's the same old Wikipedia, but with a few twists that make browsing a pleasure.

<a href='http://meincmagazine.com/apple/reviews/2010/03/review-articles-for-iphone-wikipedia-in-your-palm.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[Jonathon]

So how does this compare to the free Wikipanion for iPhone (another Wikipedia browser)?

 

[bartfat]

IMHO i'm not impressed. Wikipanion does the job just as well, if not better.

 

[Game_Ender]

Have you used the Mobile Wikipedia? the site is great on my iPod touch. These programs would have to add a lot more value before I would considering buying one.

 

[SpringWarmCold]

if this app had Instapaper support it would be awesome. i've used other wiki apps before and they always were lackluster. wikiamo was the best i could find until this one came along.

 

[darkowl]

The "official" Wikipedia app is complete and utter pants, although the mobile version as per Safari is pretty good.

Wikipanion is great, and comes in both free and for-pay with a few extra features. I use it regularly, and it's got pride of place on my first screen of stufff.

I just don't see how this app can really offer so much more than the above. That Wikipanion wasn't compared here is a shame, I think it would have made for some interesting discussion.

 

[yesno]

I've largely soured on apps that merely offer slightly better versions of a website. They add more complication than they're worth. In fact, I don't much like apps that require me to be online to use them.

Two great reference apps are the American Heritage dictionary and the OED.

 

[cobra libre]

I'm actually quite impressed with Articles, and I've come to prefer it over Wikipanion and Kiwi, two fine Wikipedia apps. The Articles UI is simple and beautiful; borrowing liberally from Mobile Safari, so obvious in retrospect, is genius. If the app provided some means of navigating between sections in longer articles and a better icon, it would be perfect.

 

[procyon]

How does this compare to Wikiamo, which seemed to be the best reader back when I was looking?

 

[n0b0dy_h3r3]

How does this compare to Wikiamo, which seemed to be the best reader back when I was looking?

I use Wikiamo, and though it's not perfect, Aricles it doesn't look like anything I'd pay $2.99 for over Wikiamo.

 

[qchronod]

I find that I have to consciously stay away from sites like Wikipedia and TVTropes or else I end up spending waaaaay to long jumping around to different articles and forget what I was doing before hand.

 

[mmnw]

I tried several other wikipedia applications. I ended up using the mobile version of wikipedia, but am not satisfied with it. The feature I miss most, and missed in several apps, was the easy switching between different languages. The "standard" wikipedia offers an easy link to other language articles. I use wikipedia so much, 2,99 aint much to try.

 

[oomu]

Articles is very nice and efficient. I'm not afraid to pay for a good application.

To navigate in long article, you can do a double-tap and keep the finger on the screen, now when you scroll you go section to section.

 

[rolphus]

Seems potentially useful, although the only thing I feel is missing from the m,wikipedia.org site is search as you type. If they had that functionality, I wouldn't feel the need to even consider a wikipedia app.

My major problem with most of the apps (Kiwi and the various free options, at least) is that they seem to start up substantially slower than Safari, which means I tend to lose interest in them pretty quickly.

 

[Mr_V]

Articles' strength lies in its super-slick look and feel. Feature-wise, it still lacks some things users of other iPhone Wikipedia apps may take for granted. But yes, if slick UI design floats your boat, Articles is certainly for you.

One really nifty feature that wasn't mentioned in this review is the double-click-and-hold method of navigating a Wikipedia page. If you double-click and hold a page, a grey scrollbar appears on the right-hand side but, unlike a normal scrollbar, this one has little white notches to indicate the various sections the page is divided into. Drag up and down, and you scroll by section rather than smoothly. It's a bit hard to describe in words, but in practise it's a phenomenally useful navigation features.

Things I miss when using Articles:

* A way to display the table of contents of the current page. (The author has stated on Twitter that it's coming.)

* A way to do a full-text search of the current page.

* A way to see the captions of images.

 

[Deleted member 14629]

How does this compare to Wikiamo, which seemed to be the best reader back when I was looking?

I use Wikiamo, and though it's not perfect, Aricles it doesn't look like anything I'd pay $2.99 for over Wikiamo.

Yah, I love me some Wikiamo.

 

[laudunum]

I have NinjaWords, Wikipanion, and EpiCurious side by side at the top of my second screen as my reference apps for daily use.

 

[masklinn]

I tried several other wikipedia applications. I ended up using the mobile version of wikipedia, but am not satisfied with it. The feature I miss most, and missed in several apps, was the easy switching between different languages.

Ditto, how's the multiple language linkage in Articles? It blows balls in Wikipanion, which I'm currently using, and I don't remember Kiwi having language switching worth pants.

And how's it in Wikiamo as well? That's a deal maker for me, a good UI + good language switching (even between preselected languages, I can live with that) = I've found my new WP client.

 

[ammon85]

Wikipedia is the best tool on any trivias we are searcihing and its advantage that it will be now in our palms... great news...


Movie Pass
Bookkeeping
Embroidery Thread