3 ms·

I apologise for being rude, but IMO you didn't build an app, you built a web page. Web pages are things people look at one time or maybe many times, but they ar

by cmsj 7y ago

I apologise for being rude, but IMO you didn't build an app, you built a web page. Web pages are things people look at one time or maybe many times, but they are just web pages that exist in a web browser for the lifetime of the tab they're in, and then they're gone. They shouldn't expect to have any persistent storage from the browser, and if the browser does make small affordances for storage, it's not reasonable to have that persist indefinitely. Apps are bundles of code/assets that people choose to install on a computer because they want to use them over time to do something. They have a clear lifecycle of installation and deletion that the user has complete control over. I know the web app, PWA, offline app, etc. stuff is very popular, but it will never be as good as native apps, and it creates an expectation that every browser will expand its functionality until it is effectively a full operating system. I think the only reasonable case for the web-as-app model, is things that get installed to the home screen, in the sense that the user is then again given control of the lifecycle, but I would still honestly prefer that people just write a native application.

6510 7y ago
I really liked the web when it was just documents. > you didn't build an app, you built a web page "Progressive web apps use modern web APIs" The word application is there twice. I don't have to like it. > they are just web pages that exist in a web browser for the lifetime of the tab they're in Evidently not. My opinion doesn't matter. > They shouldn't expect to have any persistent storage 2016 "With Chrome 52, we're introducing the ability to make storage persistent" > ...a clear lifecycle of installation and deletion that the user has complete control over. I've never asked for 7 days > it will never be as good as native apps I don't develop anything for walled gardens. I cant wait for my linux phone. > it creates an expectation that every browser will expand its functionality until it is effectively a full operating system. This already happened. Again, I don't have to like it. > I think the only reasonable case for the web-as-app model, is things that get installed to the home screen, in the sense that the user is then again given control of the lifecycle But the user isn't given control over the life cycle. It's 7 days. No one asked for 7 days. It's just about short enough to be completely worthless? I propose an interface where the pwa provides a picture of a cartoon animal, have fire at the bottom of the screen and each creature tumbling down at its chosen speed. Some 1 day, some 30, some 6 months. The user can opt to drag it up to save it. Notify the user with a soft screaming sound. This is how it should work!
Grimm1 7y ago
I expect the browsers to expand to an OS level. I hope so in fact. I don't find you rude I just find your thinking to be in the minority, maybe not on this site, but certainly in the broader market. The web is one of the best distribution platforms for applications we've seen as far as widespread adoption is concerned and in terms of resource expenditure to develop and maintain it's much better than native applications. And no offense but I'm not going to spend the resources to cater to a tiny percentage of the market who care about using native apps vs going to a site / adding to the homescreen if I can iterate, build, release and maintain features much quicker without the general costs of native applications and the arduous publication process current walled gardens have. I also simply don't support what Apple and Google stand for with respect to their app marketplaces. Beyond that the distinctions you make usually come from no true scotsman developers. I've built everything from OS emulator extensions to 3d graphics engines to web apps and as far as building things people actually use and benefit from outside of my own interests the web takes the cake. The low-level or native vs web issue seems overly self masturbatory to me. I build things to get used by people quickly and effectively, not show off my mastery of software development. I take pride in my craft but the only value in shipped software is the utility it provides to other people as evidenced by the number of horribly designed pieces of software that are pretty much ubiquitous in our daily lives now. I pride myself on pragmatism, good fundementals, and getting things done expidiently and native applications seem no where close to being the pragmatic choice from any of those standpoints. Some of my favorite projects however are from people who have tried to merge the performance and memory characteristics + respect for end user systems of native applications with the speed of development and ability to quickly iterate of web applications. If they reach the threshold I believe won't unnecessarily delay the work I want to do from native development minutae, then I'll make your native apps. But I think you should get used to web apps being here to stay.

by cmsj 7y ago

6510 7y ago

I really liked the web when it was just documents. > you didn't build an app, you built a web page "Progressive web apps use modern web APIs" The word application is there twice. I don't have to like it. > they are just web pages that exist in a web browser for the lifetime of the tab they're in Evidently not. My opinion doesn't matter. > They shouldn't expect to have any persistent storage 2016 "With Chrome 52, we're introducing the ability to make storage persistent" > ...a clear lifecycle of installation and deletion that the user has complete control over. I've never asked for 7 days > it will never be as good as native apps I don't develop anything for walled gardens. I cant wait for my linux phone. > it creates an expectation that every browser will expand its functionality until it is effectively a full operating system. This already happened. Again, I don't have to like it. > I think the only reasonable case for the web-as-app model, is things that get installed to the home screen, in the sense that the user is then again given control of the lifecycle But the user isn't given control over the life cycle. It's 7 days. No one asked for 7 days. It's just about short enough to be completely worthless? I propose an interface where the pwa provides a picture of a cartoon animal, have fire at the bottom of the screen and each creature tumbling down at its chosen speed. Some 1 day, some 30, some 6 months. The user can opt to drag it up to save it. Notify the user with a soft screaming sound. This is how it should work!

Grimm1 7y ago

I expect the browsers to expand to an OS level. I hope so in fact. I don't find you rude I just find your thinking to be in the minority, maybe not on this site, but certainly in the broader market. The web is one of the best distribution platforms for applications we've seen as far as widespread adoption is concerned and in terms of resource expenditure to develop and maintain it's much better than native applications. And no offense but I'm not going to spend the resources to cater to a tiny percentage of the market who care about using native apps vs going to a site / adding to the homescreen if I can iterate, build, release and maintain features much quicker without the general costs of native applications and the arduous publication process current walled gardens have. I also simply don't support what Apple and Google stand for with respect to their app marketplaces. Beyond that the distinctions you make usually come from no true scotsman developers. I've built everything from OS emulator extensions to 3d graphics engines to web apps and as far as building things people actually use and benefit from outside of my own interests the web takes the cake. The low-level or native vs web issue seems overly self masturbatory to me. I build things to get used by people quickly and effectively, not show off my mastery of software development. I take pride in my craft but the only value in shipped software is the utility it provides to other people as evidenced by the number of horribly designed pieces of software that are pretty much ubiquitous in our daily lives now. I pride myself on pragmatism, good fundementals, and getting things done expidiently and native applications seem no where close to being the pragmatic choice from any of those standpoints. Some of my favorite projects however are from people who have tried to merge the performance and memory characteristics + respect for end user systems of native applications with the speed of development and ability to quickly iterate of web applications. If they reach the threshold I believe won't unnecessarily delay the work I want to do from native development minutae, then I'll make your native apps. But I think you should get used to web apps being here to stay.