8 ms·

PWA's have room to grow but have a lot of benefits over native apps

by mattpearl 6y ago

Nicksil 6y ago
>PWA's have room to grow but have a lot of benefits over native apps Just gonna leave us hangin'?
- p1necone 6y ago
  Biggest thing for me would be instant installs and no/much less space taken on local storage.
  - buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
    In addition: not having to install at all to be able to try it out.
  - fidelramos 6y ago
    Most important thing for me is sandboxing, no abuse of the device's data and sensors. I hate how most native apps invade your privacy.
    - Nicksil 6y ago
      >Most important thing for me is sandboxing, no abuse of the device's data and sensors. I hate how most native apps invade your privacy. User abuse is rampant on the Web. For example, those APIs you mention are used to fingerprint machines. If you're genuinely concerned with abuse of privacy, you'd do yourself a huge favor by researching the history and current mechanisms for such abuse by websites and, by extension, PWAs.
      - fidelramos 6y ago
        I'm well aware of browser fingerprinting, I take my privacy seriously and do my best to protect it. Both on desktop and mobile I use an array of browser extensions to limit online tracking and fingerprinting. On Android I use Webapps Sandboxed Browser [1] to log in to webapps without leaking the logged in status to other websites. I feel that with the web I get a fighting chance, while native apps are designed for tracking you. [1] https://f-droid.org/app/com.tobykurien.webapps https://f-droid.org/app/com.tobykurien.webapps
  - Nicksil 6y ago
    >Biggest thing for me would be instant installs[...] That's relative to the size of the thing you're installing, no? Wouldn't it then be comparable to software of the same size being installed on the host system? >no/much less space taken on local storage. Isn't this, too, relative to the size of the application or the data it is persisting?
- torgoguys 6y ago
  Single codebase for multiple platforms, no app store approvals/revenue share required, openable via a link, works to the webs' strengths, etc. That sort of stuff. It has its own set of disadvantages too of course.
  - FridgeSeal 6y ago
    Hasn’t pretty much every Silicon Valley tech company that tried to use single-condensed Cross platform apps essentially come to the conclusion that they’re not worth it, or better than OS-specific codebases and proper separation of UI and logic?
    - Drew_ 6y ago
      Native is obviously better and always will be. Making cross platform apps is not worth it only if you can easily afford to go native. This is obviously not true for everyone.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    No revenue share, sure. What’s the likelihood that people are going to put their credit card information into some unknown website compared to using Apple/Google for payments? Every “advantage” you mentioned is better for the developer not the user. That’s why PWA’s will never take off.
    - kevincox 6y ago
      You can take payments powered by Apple or Google on websites. The UX is quite similar for the user.
    - filleduchaos 6y ago
      > What’s the likelihood that people are going to put their credit card information into some unknown website compared to using Apple/Google for payments? Outside of HN's bubble, people do that all the time. Or at worst they will use PayPal or an equivalent to make payments.
- kevincox 6y ago
  Cross platform support is nice for users as well. I have a number of apps that I can't use on my desktop which is quite annoying. When I use a PWA I know that I can access it from whatever device I am on.
- pier25 6y ago
  - No store needed - Crossplatform (in use and development) - No store/developer fees to pay - CSS and HTML are capable of things native can only dream of like real reusable responsive UIs across many types of devices. https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross-platform-email-client-with-nothing-but-html-aa12fc33bb02 https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross... - Until SwiftUI web front end was way more advanced in terms of reactive programming of UIs
  - Nicksil 6y ago
    >- No store needed Software was distributed long before those walled gardens popped up. Native applications need no store. >- Crossplatform (in use and development) Cross-platform frameworks exist for native applications. >- No store/developer fees to pay Same goes for native applications >- CSS and HTML are capable of things native can only dream of like real reusable responsive UIs across many types of devices. >https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross.. https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross.... This is just an incredibly odd statement. First of all, if such layouts are rendering on your machine then of course native applications are also capable of such a feat. Web browsers capabilities are limited to the resources being made available on the host machine. The same goes for any software running on the machine. And second: Qt. >- Until SwiftUI web front end was way more advanced in terms of reactive programming of UIs I don't understand what you mean here.
    - pier25 6y ago
      > Native applications need no store On iOS they do. On Android 99% of users won't use a different store. > Cross-platform frameworks exist for native applications. Nothing really good though. Best ones are RN and Flutter which do not get you there 100%. A PWA will consume less memory and will be smaller than a RN or Flutter app. > Same goes for native applications Not on iOS. > if such layouts are rendering on your machine then of course native applications are also capable of such a feat Theoretically, yes. > And second: Qt. Remind me again how much a QT license costs? > I don't understand what you mean here. For the last 10 or so years UI development for the web has gone from archaic jQuery imperative DOM manipulation to a new paradigm with data binding and reactive data. UI data binding in the native world exists but is extremely complicated and tedious. AFAIK the only thing that is similar to what we have now in web dev is SwiftUI.
FridgeSeal 6y ago
Like inferior performance, support and integration with the rest of the OS.

PWA's have room to grow but have a lot of benefits over native apps

Nicksil 6y ago

>PWA's have room to grow but have a lot of benefits over native apps Just gonna leave us hangin'?

p1necone 6y ago
Biggest thing for me would be instant installs and no/much less space taken on local storage.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y ago
  In addition: not having to install at all to be able to try it out.
- fidelramos 6y ago
  Most important thing for me is sandboxing, no abuse of the device's data and sensors. I hate how most native apps invade your privacy.
  - Nicksil 6y ago
    >Most important thing for me is sandboxing, no abuse of the device's data and sensors. I hate how most native apps invade your privacy. User abuse is rampant on the Web. For example, those APIs you mention are used to fingerprint machines. If you're genuinely concerned with abuse of privacy, you'd do yourself a huge favor by researching the history and current mechanisms for such abuse by websites and, by extension, PWAs.
    - fidelramos 6y ago
      I'm well aware of browser fingerprinting, I take my privacy seriously and do my best to protect it. Both on desktop and mobile I use an array of browser extensions to limit online tracking and fingerprinting. On Android I use Webapps Sandboxed Browser [1] to log in to webapps without leaking the logged in status to other websites. I feel that with the web I get a fighting chance, while native apps are designed for tracking you. [1] https://f-droid.org/app/com.tobykurien.webapps https://f-droid.org/app/com.tobykurien.webapps
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >Biggest thing for me would be instant installs[...] That's relative to the size of the thing you're installing, no? Wouldn't it then be comparable to software of the same size being installed on the host system? >no/much less space taken on local storage. Isn't this, too, relative to the size of the application or the data it is persisting?
torgoguys 6y ago
Single codebase for multiple platforms, no app store approvals/revenue share required, openable via a link, works to the webs' strengths, etc. That sort of stuff. It has its own set of disadvantages too of course.
- FridgeSeal 6y ago
  Hasn’t pretty much every Silicon Valley tech company that tried to use single-condensed Cross platform apps essentially come to the conclusion that they’re not worth it, or better than OS-specific codebases and proper separation of UI and logic?
  - Drew_ 6y ago
    Native is obviously better and always will be. Making cross platform apps is not worth it only if you can easily afford to go native. This is obviously not true for everyone.
- scarface74 6y ago
  No revenue share, sure. What’s the likelihood that people are going to put their credit card information into some unknown website compared to using Apple/Google for payments? Every “advantage” you mentioned is better for the developer not the user. That’s why PWA’s will never take off.
  - kevincox 6y ago
    You can take payments powered by Apple or Google on websites. The UX is quite similar for the user.
  - filleduchaos 6y ago
    > What’s the likelihood that people are going to put their credit card information into some unknown website compared to using Apple/Google for payments? Outside of HN's bubble, people do that all the time. Or at worst they will use PayPal or an equivalent to make payments.
kevincox 6y ago
Cross platform support is nice for users as well. I have a number of apps that I can't use on my desktop which is quite annoying. When I use a PWA I know that I can access it from whatever device I am on.
pier25 6y ago
- No store needed - Crossplatform (in use and development) - No store/developer fees to pay - CSS and HTML are capable of things native can only dream of like real reusable responsive UIs across many types of devices. https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross-platform-email-client-with-nothing-but-html-aa12fc33bb02 https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross... - Until SwiftUI web front end was way more advanced in terms of reactive programming of UIs
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >- No store needed Software was distributed long before those walled gardens popped up. Native applications need no store. >- Crossplatform (in use and development) Cross-platform frameworks exist for native applications. >- No store/developer fees to pay Same goes for native applications >- CSS and HTML are capable of things native can only dream of like real reusable responsive UIs across many types of devices. >https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross.. https://medium.com/missive-app/our-dirty-little-secret-cross.... This is just an incredibly odd statement. First of all, if such layouts are rendering on your machine then of course native applications are also capable of such a feat. Web browsers capabilities are limited to the resources being made available on the host machine. The same goes for any software running on the machine. And second: Qt. >- Until SwiftUI web front end was way more advanced in terms of reactive programming of UIs I don't understand what you mean here.
  - pier25 6y ago
    > Native applications need no store On iOS they do. On Android 99% of users won't use a different store. > Cross-platform frameworks exist for native applications. Nothing really good though. Best ones are RN and Flutter which do not get you there 100%. A PWA will consume less memory and will be smaller than a RN or Flutter app. > Same goes for native applications Not on iOS. > if such layouts are rendering on your machine then of course native applications are also capable of such a feat Theoretically, yes. > And second: Qt. Remind me again how much a QT license costs? > I don't understand what you mean here. For the last 10 or so years UI development for the web has gone from archaic jQuery imperative DOM manipulation to a new paradigm with data binding and reactive data. UI data binding in the native world exists but is extremely complicated and tedious. AFAIK the only thing that is similar to what we have now in web dev is SwiftUI.

FridgeSeal 6y ago

Like inferior performance, support and integration with the rest of the OS.