7 ms·

I Do Not Want Your Stupid App

91 points by sagivo 11y ago

jgh 11y ago
Maybe get a windows phone or something if you want to surf the web and not have to worry about installing any apps...
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  Or just use ad blockers to block app download notifications on the website
  - LeoNatan25 11y ago
    But then poor publishers might be forced to abandon their terrible ways! How undemocratic of you to suggest that! ;-)
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
- pjc50 11y ago
  That gives you the worst of both worlds, quite often: an ad banner for an app that's not available for your platform :(
greenyoda 11y ago
Ironically, TechCrunch, the publisher of this amusing rant, has an app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aol.mobile.techcrunch https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aol.mobile... https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/techcrunch/id526058642?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/techcrunch/id526058642?mt=8
- notatoad 11y ago
  Not only do they have an app, but i remember their webpage being unreachable on my iPad a couple years ago because they had a full-page interstitial ad for their app, and dismissing it sent you into a redirect loop.
- minimaxir 11y ago
  TechCrunch, in fairness, doesn't beg the user to download the app.
  - Quanttek 11y ago
    Also: Just because the publishing media has one of those apps, it doesn't mean that one of their writers can't express his dislike for those apps. If anything it proves that he has a certain independence from the business facing side and that's always good.
radicalbyte 11y ago
But how else can these sites get access to your contact list and call history?
- adevine 11y ago
  Require Facebook login - close enough.
SCdF 11y ago
See, I agree, but this is what this article looks like on my phone: https://imgur.com/VqchKIp https://imgur.com/VqchKIp Perhaps one should become a good example of an enjoyable mobile experience before one starts throwing stones.
- Bahamut 11y ago
  Installing an app for everything is not what I call an enjoyable mobile experience...
  - SCdF 11y ago
    Sorry, not sure if I was clear. What I meant was: Techcrunch shouldn't proudly point out that everyone else is making reading on a mobile device unenjoyable by asking if you want to install an app, because they themselves crap so much non-content on your screen and make their own mobile experience an unenjoyable one.
- pjbrunet 11y ago
  Try Opera with user agent desktop?
  - minimaxir 11y ago
    TechCrunch now has a responsive layout, so forcing a desktop user agent does nothing.
    - pjbrunet 11y ago
      I see your point. Above the fold I get two banner ads and a pile of poop in Opera.
sagivo 11y ago
Apps are only popular because we don't do mobile web good enough. Most of the mobile web is either a banner asking download the app, or tons of adds with no room for content.
- corndoge 11y ago
  Mobile web doesn't come anywhere close to replicating the fluidity and functionality of a native app and it never will. Running a dedicated application designed for the system will always beat an application designed for the system on top of the system (web browser). I prefer native applications every time.
  - greglindahl 11y ago
    Blekko shipped an app -- izik -- which was extremely fluid even though it was actually a webpage. You and I probably have no idea which of the apparently native apps we use every day are actually webpages.
    - corndoge 11y ago
      No, it's painfully obvious when applications are using a full-panel WebView with UI elements and transitions that aren't system-defined. It's also pretty obvious when you have no network and the app suddenly doesn't load.
      - Turing_Machine 11y ago
        It may be painfully obvious to an expert, but most people don't actually care.
  - dcwca 11y ago
    What about the case where you plan on using the app one time for a grand total of 30 seconds? Is the trouble of visiting the App Store, authenticating, installing, launching, allowing permissions and onboarding really worthwhile? Or is that a case for the web's dynamic runtime?
paulpauper 11y ago
Email subscription popups ...those are annoying
omarish 11y ago
This is why I'm super bullish on The Information (https://www.theinformation.com https://www.theinformation.com).
jagermo 11y ago
I always thought: "Well, those apps, I don't know. I don't use webapps on the pc anymore, because the browser does everyting. And some day, the mobile browser will be just as good and no one will need those apps." That was before peope discovered mobile ads, access to phonebook/email etc pp. Maybe it'll change.
staunch 11y ago
> Redecentralize the web! Redecentralize all internet services! Shameless plug ahead, I believe in this idea so much I co-founded a company to help spread the idea and see it through. Every person should have their own domain name and have the ability to run arbitrary services in the cloud. The price of computing power and bandwidth has come down so much that it's completely practical to do this now. Would love feedback/thoughts: https://portal.cloud?invite=hn https://portal.cloud?invite=hn (invite code is just there so free domain discount is applied). The most important thing is that no company (including mine) should ever have the ability to dominate the internet the way Google, Facebook, and Twitter do today. We should be able to move from cloud provider to cloud provider with very little friction. If we truly control our own domain names, apps, and data this isn't even hard to do. Google, Facebook, and Twitter could be just apps we run (webmail, web search, photo sharing, status updates). We shouldn't have to give up our privacy and be locked into a service that feeds us a hundred ads a day just to be able to check our email, search the web, share photos, or post 140 characters to the web.
- acconrad 11y ago
  I like the headline! I was initially intrigued because I just started a side project, bought the domain, and set up Google Apps for email. Then I'll probably set up a Medium blog for the project. I thought "oh neat, it's all contained in here, and a free domain that's cool!" Then I saw the price point: $8/mo. Yeah sorry, you need to be more competitive for groups that only want a few services. Google Apps is $5/mo and Medium is free...is it worth an extra $3/mo for me to decentralize project/business type emails and documents? Not really, because I don't have any sensitive documents that I don't care for Google to have access to. Maybe if I were a journalist starting a secretive blog and needing to communicate between journalists over sensitive information - yeah, I could see that. I think those are the kinds of people you're going to want to market to. Reasonably priced for sensitive documents and files, but more than conventional app solutions who don't really need the extra decentralized security.
  - jlgaddis 11y ago
    I think I must be misunderstanding. You talk about "decentralizing" but you mention Google Apps for e-mail and Medium for a blog. If you want to decentralize, you should be running these things on your own server(s) that you control. What am I missing?

91 points by sagivo 11y ago

jgh 11y ago

Maybe get a windows phone or something if you want to surf the web and not have to worry about installing any apps...

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Or just use ad blockers to block app download notifications on the website
- LeoNatan25 11y ago
  But then poor publishers might be forced to abandon their terrible ways! How undemocratic of you to suggest that! ;-)
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
pjc50 11y ago
That gives you the worst of both worlds, quite often: an ad banner for an app that's not available for your platform :(

greenyoda 11y ago

Ironically, TechCrunch, the publisher of this amusing rant, has an app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aol.mobile.techcrunch https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.aol.mobile... https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/techcrunch/id526058642?mt=8 https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/techcrunch/id526058642?mt=8

notatoad 11y ago
Not only do they have an app, but i remember their webpage being unreachable on my iPad a couple years ago because they had a full-page interstitial ad for their app, and dismissing it sent you into a redirect loop.
minimaxir 11y ago
TechCrunch, in fairness, doesn't beg the user to download the app.
- Quanttek 11y ago
  Also: Just because the publishing media has one of those apps, it doesn't mean that one of their writers can't express his dislike for those apps. If anything it proves that he has a certain independence from the business facing side and that's always good.

radicalbyte 11y ago

But how else can these sites get access to your contact list and call history?

adevine 11y ago
Require Facebook login - close enough.

SCdF 11y ago

See, I agree, but this is what this article looks like on my phone: https://imgur.com/VqchKIp https://imgur.com/VqchKIp Perhaps one should become a good example of an enjoyable mobile experience before one starts throwing stones.

Bahamut 11y ago
Installing an app for everything is not what I call an enjoyable mobile experience...
- SCdF 11y ago
  Sorry, not sure if I was clear. What I meant was: Techcrunch shouldn't proudly point out that everyone else is making reading on a mobile device unenjoyable by asking if you want to install an app, because they themselves crap so much non-content on your screen and make their own mobile experience an unenjoyable one.
pjbrunet 11y ago
Try Opera with user agent desktop?
- minimaxir 11y ago
  TechCrunch now has a responsive layout, so forcing a desktop user agent does nothing.
  - pjbrunet 11y ago
    I see your point. Above the fold I get two banner ads and a pile of poop in Opera.

sagivo 11y ago

Apps are only popular because we don't do mobile web good enough. Most of the mobile web is either a banner asking download the app, or tons of adds with no room for content.

corndoge 11y ago
Mobile web doesn't come anywhere close to replicating the fluidity and functionality of a native app and it never will. Running a dedicated application designed for the system will always beat an application designed for the system on top of the system (web browser). I prefer native applications every time.
- greglindahl 11y ago
  Blekko shipped an app -- izik -- which was extremely fluid even though it was actually a webpage. You and I probably have no idea which of the apparently native apps we use every day are actually webpages.
  - corndoge 11y ago
    No, it's painfully obvious when applications are using a full-panel WebView with UI elements and transitions that aren't system-defined. It's also pretty obvious when you have no network and the app suddenly doesn't load.
    - Turing_Machine 11y ago
      It may be painfully obvious to an expert, but most people don't actually care.
- dcwca 11y ago
  What about the case where you plan on using the app one time for a grand total of 30 seconds? Is the trouble of visiting the App Store, authenticating, installing, launching, allowing permissions and onboarding really worthwhile? Or is that a case for the web's dynamic runtime?

paulpauper 11y ago

Email subscription popups ...those are annoying

omarish 11y ago

This is why I'm super bullish on The Information (https://www.theinformation.com https://www.theinformation.com).

jagermo 11y ago

I always thought: "Well, those apps, I don't know. I don't use webapps on the pc anymore, because the browser does everyting. And some day, the mobile browser will be just as good and no one will need those apps." That was before peope discovered mobile ads, access to phonebook/email etc pp. Maybe it'll change.

staunch 11y ago

> Redecentralize the web! Redecentralize all internet services! Shameless plug ahead, I believe in this idea so much I co-founded a company to help spread the idea and see it through. Every person should have their own domain name and have the ability to run arbitrary services in the cloud. The price of computing power and bandwidth has come down so much that it's completely practical to do this now. Would love feedback/thoughts: https://portal.cloud?invite=hn https://portal.cloud?invite=hn (invite code is just there so free domain discount is applied). The most important thing is that no company (including mine) should ever have the ability to dominate the internet the way Google, Facebook, and Twitter do today. We should be able to move from cloud provider to cloud provider with very little friction. If we truly control our own domain names, apps, and data this isn't even hard to do. Google, Facebook, and Twitter could be just apps we run (webmail, web search, photo sharing, status updates). We shouldn't have to give up our privacy and be locked into a service that feeds us a hundred ads a day just to be able to check our email, search the web, share photos, or post 140 characters to the web.

acconrad 11y ago
I like the headline! I was initially intrigued because I just started a side project, bought the domain, and set up Google Apps for email. Then I'll probably set up a Medium blog for the project. I thought "oh neat, it's all contained in here, and a free domain that's cool!" Then I saw the price point: $8/mo. Yeah sorry, you need to be more competitive for groups that only want a few services. Google Apps is $5/mo and Medium is free...is it worth an extra $3/mo for me to decentralize project/business type emails and documents? Not really, because I don't have any sensitive documents that I don't care for Google to have access to. Maybe if I were a journalist starting a secretive blog and needing to communicate between journalists over sensitive information - yeah, I could see that. I think those are the kinds of people you're going to want to market to. Reasonably priced for sensitive documents and files, but more than conventional app solutions who don't really need the extra decentralized security.
- jlgaddis 11y ago
  I think I must be misunderstanding. You talk about "decentralizing" but you mention Google Apps for e-mail and Medium for a blog. If you want to decentralize, you should be running these things on your own server(s) that you control. What am I missing?