3 ms·
Ah, but you don't waste time, that's the whole point of the idea. You just repackage your existing web app and distribute it as a "native" app, no effort requir
by joefourier 7y ago
Ah, but you don't waste time, that's the whole point of the idea. You just repackage your existing web app and distribute it as a "native" app, no effort required. You also have a cross-platform application with no extra work (the auld "Write once, run anywhere" slogan), and can use web developers instead of people who know QT/Java/what have you.
Then the user can run your chat/music/text editor in the background, have it appear in the taskbar, and start boot, at the cost of requiring a few gigabytes of RAM and 25% CPU utilization while idling.
Personally I'd rather have Progressive Web Apps but for some reason, those are still in an awkward stage.
- jlarocco 7y agoBut packaging and distributing take a non-zero amount of time. And none of those "benefits" have any advantage over running the web app in its own window. It's a hack to use cheap web developers to check off the "standalone app" checkbox.
- steve1977 7y ago> and can use web developers instead of people who know QT/Java/what have you. Is that supposed to be an advantage? ;)