3 ms·
I must be missing something; all of this feels very uncoordinated. The primary entry point into Android Instant Apps are normal URLs which get shared over Emai
by callahad 10y ago
I must be missing something; all of this feels very uncoordinated.
The primary entry point into Android Instant Apps are normal URLs which get shared over Email, SMS, or Instant Messaging, but for those URLs to ever get shared, they must already exist and work on the current web. So you still have to put in the effort of building a full Web experience.
...and Android can automatically enhance progressive web apps to provide experiences that are capable of being indistinguishable from native. Plus, it will work just fine everywhere else. Because it's the Web.
And you pretty much have to get close to that point anyway, since Instant Apps are useless without preexisting, functioning links for the app to hijack... why would you then duplicate the effort to have a version written in Java? Access to payment APIs is compelling for the B&H demo, but for Buzzfeed?
...and wouldn't you already be doing your damnedest to provide a similar experience for iOS or desktop users, on the Web itself?
- dragonwriter 10y agoDevelopers differ on preference for whether they want to do "desktop web + mobile app" or "web for all platforms". Google, rather than taking a firm stand on which is "right", is providing tools so that developers can take either approach. Google, in this area, is more opinionated on the kind of UX that should be achieved than the route. Now, you make some good arguments for why Progressive Web Apps might be the better route.