4 ms·
If you develop an application that runs in the web browser, I won't use it. That's not some dogmatic principle of mine, it's just an empirical fact. I use only
by WaltPurvis 6y ago
If you develop an application that runs in the web browser, I won't use it. That's not some dogmatic principle of mine, it's just an empirical fact.
I use only one browser-based application: Gmail.
I've never used another browser-based application and I can't imagine that I ever will unless there's truly no alternative and it's forced on me by an employer.
I've happily paid for dozens of desktop applications, and I'm even semi-happily paying for around ten of them that have switched to a subscription model, but I never have and likely never will use browser-based applications even if they're free.
- kleiba 6y agoI don't get the downvotes: the original question asked about opinions on web-based vs. native apps, and this guys is giving exactly that. And what else could you do, you can either cite some usage statistics or give personal assessments.
- kleiba 6y agoWhat, and now even my own comment gets downvoted?! If there was at least a reason given... coward.
- twicetwice 6y agoI'd be surprised if that is the case—or perhaps we have different definitions of what constitutes a "browser-based application." For example, I do all my online banking in my browser; it's the most fully-featured way to do so. It might not obviously be a PWA or an SPA, but I certainly think it deserves to be called a "browser-based application." What else could it be? It's certainly not a "web page." In fact I'd argue that any site that has content that's scoped to a user and can be manipulated by the user is a "web application."
- coronadisaster 6y agoDoes that mean that you dont browse the web? Except for gmail? I use gmail but i get it through Thunderbird...