4 ms·

A native app is already lost at the start because it requires the user to install it. Also at least on Android I don't buy the efficiency argument at all, Java

by rockdoe 11y ago

A native app is already lost at the start because it requires the user to install it. Also at least on Android I don't buy the efficiency argument at all, Java and JavaScript are both JITed. You think Java JITs better than asm.js? The integration argument is decent, but it's only really relevant for apps that get a lot of use, not the long tail of stuff that you use once or twice.

criddell 11y ago
> A native app is already lost at the start because it requires the user to install it The billions of installed apps indicates that the friction isn't significant. > I don't buy the efficiency argument at all, Java and JavaScript are both JITed That's how everything worked back in the Gingerbread days. Android's ART system compiles applications to native code when they are installed. You can also install actual native code with Android's NDK. If you like the idea of asm.js, then you should check out Go on Android. It does the same thing - offers a restricted set of the language that runs very fast. There's definitely a subset of apps that work very well in a browser. But you can do more, faster, with lower power consumption with native apps.