5 ms·
I think hybrid wins for all but the most widespread or highest budget apps. Most apps have only few users. Most apps don't have a million dollar budget. Most u
by WA 9y ago
I think hybrid wins for all but the most widespread or highest budget apps.
Most apps have only few users. Most apps don't have a million dollar budget. Most users don't care or notice whether an app is native or not. They use it to get a job done and don't care if that button is slightly less responsive than another.
- ryanwaggoner 9y agoMaybe most apps being a steaming pile of shit is part of why they only have a few users. Million dollar budget is a strawman. I've built dozens of complex apps for five figure budgets. Very few ran into six figures, and they'd have been a train wreck on hybrid. Most things don't need to be an app at all. Those that do need an app should at least consider making a reasonable investment. Besides, it's not like hybrid is some magical unicorn technology that enables creating a great app at a tiny fraction of the budget of a native one. You save like 30-50% in the best case, and get what you pay for.
- smokeyj 9y ago> Besides, it's not like hybrid is some magical unicorn technology that enables creating a great app at a tiny fraction of the budget of a native one It actually is.. You cite saving "50%" likes it's no big deal. Clearly you're in charge of coding and not in charge of the business. > Most things don't need to be an app at all Well then you'll be writing this logic in JS for a web-app anyways. I'm curious, what part of your native app couldn't be done in a hybrid model?
- WA 9y agoYou're right with everything you say – from a developer perspective. I agree, most apps are indeed shit and that's why they have few users. I agree, you certainly can build beautiful apps with a smaller budget. I agree, most things don't need an app. But, and this is a big BUT and the reason why hybrid is a good solution: Users demand apps. Your average user rather downloads an app for the local bus service or a museum than going to a mobile website, because experience taught them that mobile websites are shitty and some apps work offline, at least. Yes, both of us rather use a good mobile website, but average Joe doesn't. The app experience might not be better, it might even be worse, but users are looking in the Stores for apps like that. The reality of the App Store is that there are a handful of "good" apps everybody uses, and then there are the 95% that are garbage anyways, but are still preferred over mobile websites. I'm not saying that you can build the perfect app with hybrid, but solutions that are good enough for most people, because they want to catch the next bus and give zero fucks about a native experience. And then, saving 30-50% or maintaining an app for Android AND iOS as a solo developer suddenly becomes quite a strong point in favor of hybrid.
- ryanwaggoner 9y agofrom a developer perspective I think you have it backwards. I think you're still hung up on the developer experience, not the user experience. My observation is that users clearly prefer native apps to hybrid apps. And yes, you can throw together a hybrid app a bit faster, but you're just going to lose out to someone who did a better job (probably with native). So you might have saved a few bucks, but it's all going to be wasted. Just my observation, YMMV, etc, etc.
- weaksauce 9y agoWhat's wrong with a hybrid approach? use react native for most of the dev work on the app and then focus on using native solutions for the few parts of the app that require you to drop into native code?
- s73ver_ 9y agoMost users can tell. They may not know exactly why, but they know something is off with hybrid apps.