5 ms·
> It's totally possible to build a PWA that behaves like a native app but Apple actively tries to destroy them. Ugh, no. No it's not. At least not yet. Access
by Razengan 6y ago
> It's totally possible to build a PWA that behaves like a native app but Apple actively tries to destroy them.
Ugh, no. No it's not. At least not yet.
Accessibility features alone are almost always woefully crap in web-apps, compared to what native apps have access to, at least on macOS (and SwiftUI is amazing in how it lowers the barriers in implementing accessibility in your app from the get-go.)
Shit like Electron and PWAs seem to be championed by user-hostile developers that just want things to be easy for themselves, without considering what's best for the users and their hardware resources.
- candiddevmike 6y agoYou really think accessibility for native apps will always be better than a web app that follows a11y?
- someUserTonight 6y agoI think so. If we're talking about "out of the box" or what you'd find on average. As an Android dev for a few years now I think we get a lot out of the box and I get that web devs also use libraries or frameworks that have similar benefits. At that point it's comparing framework A's a11y vs framework B's a11y vs Android a11y. Not an Android fanboy but I'm going to assume that the bigger (widely used/constantly iterating) "platform" (for a lack of a better term) has better a11y. And if there is a web framework that provides this (react?) do the majority of websites use it ? like they do native api's for native apps (and this isn't even talking about the api's accessible to native vs web app)
- Silhouette 6y agoShit like Electron and PWAs seem to be championed by user-hostile developers that just want things to be easy for themselves, without considering what's best for the users and their hardware resources. There is a standard counter to that argument at this point. Developers on native platforms might be able to achieve a better experience on that platform than a web app given the same time and resources. However, if the time and resources have to be split N ways to build a native app on each of N platforms, compared to investing everything into polishing a single web application, the outcome might be very different. While each native developer is still worrying about whether they're aligning and labelling a button in the platform-standard way, the web team is already refining their UI using the results of their third round of usability testing and has determined that the button shouldn't have been there in the first place and designed and implemented a more intuitive UI. And since they launched their version 1 two months earlier than any of the native apps did, they even have the extra revenue in the bank to pay for those usability tests, too.
- wtallis 6y ago> While each native developer is still worrying about whether they're aligning and labelling a button in the platform-standard way, the web team is already refining their UI using the results of their third round of usability testing and has determined that the button shouldn't have been there in the first place and designed and implemented a more intuitive UI Your hypothetical scenario seems to be treating the app's UI as if it exists in a vacuum, rather than existing alongside other apps. If there's a platform-standard UI convention that applies to a button, then UI testing in the context of that platform is probably not going to tell you to remove that button entirely—you shouldn't be surprising users by removing functionality they expect to find present. And if there is a UI convention that tells you how to position that button, you probably shouldn't A/B test the positioning of that button and should focus your usability testing on the UI elements that are not dictated by the platform's standards and conventions.
- Silhouette 6y agoIn God we trust; all others must bring data. (Origin unknown) Your arguments use the word "probably" a lot. As someone who does a lot of UI design professionally, I prefer to rely on the kind of user testing you apparently dismiss, precisely because prior expectations about what works well so often turn out to be inaccurate. Indeed, there have been plenty of native platform standards that have awful usability in recent years, which have rightly been criticised for it by professionals wielding empirical evidence.
- wtallis 6y ago> Indeed, there have been plenty of native platform standards that have awful usability in recent years, which have rightly been criticised for it by professionals wielding empirical evidence. Platform native UI conventions are very often sub-optimal, if only because they're old. But sub-optimal standards are very often preferable to unpredictable, and are definitely preferable to having to juggle multiple conflicting UI conventions at the same time when multitasking. That's why we still have QWERTY, and why all the surviving scrollbars are on the right, and why pie menus never caught on. You say you test UI designs professionally, and claim the higher ground of having empirical evidence. But it still sounds like you're using worthless methodology by focusing only on your one app at a time and ignoring how it fits into its environment and the user's broader workflow. Is that correct, or have you actually quantified the overall productivity loss an app introduces by violating the user's expectations and habits?
- merrywhether 6y agoPWAs are extremely user friendly in one dimension: they frequently take 1-2 orders of magnitude less space. This is very relevant for low end devices, and has been one of their biggest selling pints since inception.