5 ms·

Maintaining 2 different apps (a native one and a web one) is costly in terms of time/resources. The point its not that developers "don't want" to make both, is

Maintaining 2 different apps (a native one and a web one) is costly in terms of time/resources. The point its not that developers "don't want" to make both, is that many don't have the resources to make both.

albertgoeswoof 6y ago
Right but how does that help users? If you don’t have the resources to build the right interfaces for them, then the business model isn’t working. Telling your customers to install a pwa is a terrible user experience and borderline rude
- The_Colonel 6y ago
  Not everyone is building a next Instagram for hundreds of millions users. There's a long tail of smaller business niches which might sustain a solo developer / small company and there having one codebase is obviously critical.
- _ink_ 6y ago
  Rude is telling developers their business model is not good, because they cannot affort to build native apps for Windows, Mac, Gnome, Kde, Android, iOS and web. If you cannot work with PWAs maybe you just aren't in the targeted user group.
- doteka 6y ago
  Hard disagree for the long tail of apps. My company’s payroll admin system uses a PWA as a mobile interface. I don’t need slick ui there, I need to view my payslips (click a link to open a pdf) and request time off (fill in a 4-field form). It’s perfectly fine for this usecase and there is no conceivable business value in pouring more resources into it. News flash: a majority of applications is simple CRUD like this. They don’t need a native UI or performance. They just need an icon on your homescreen.
- twobitshifter 6y ago
  Actually I find that the user experience on PWAs and Electron apps is better than that on native desktop apps. Developers have always been challenged in building desktop apps because the available toolkits are generally crusty, limited, and complex. GTK, TK, QT, Windows Forms, don’t compare well against what can be done in the DOM.
- postalrat 6y ago
  Nobody is telling users to install a PWA. Just because a site has all the features to be considered a PWA doesn't mean your user must use them. But they are telling users to install apps. Sites that depend on advertising want to force the app down your throat to eliminate ad blockers and to better track you.
jefftougas 6y ago
The core problem with PWAs is that ultimately the success of the overall idea is held hostage by the level of consensus across the browser development teams. Whilst they "collaborate" on "common" web standards (they being many, btw), iOS and Android (note: only 2) have very well defined apis for how to create awesome native UX. The problem of creating a unifying native abstraction (like react native or flutter) that is actually effective from the User's POV, is far more attainable, than that of trying to create a consistently awesome PWA with such inconsistent browser support, across a far greater multitude of platforms than the iOS / Android bifurcation in native-land. My $.02. PWAs have always seemed like one of those beautifully idealistic yet totally doomed to fail ideas (at least for several years relative to native-based-approaches). Don't get me wrong, I think the web will ultimately evolve into the new JVM (read: via WASM), and the beatific promise that was foretold by PWA will finally reach the masses. Reality Check: We're not quite there yet. Firefox deleting a legacy, buggy, and dev-time-sink attempt at this, makes total sense to me so they can focus on the other awesome stuff they're doing that actually creates real value for the masses today. To be fair - perhaps they could've handled the ticket on this a bit more gracefully...? But then again - they know their stuff, so I don't blame them entirely :)

albertgoeswoof 6y ago

Right but how does that help users? If you don’t have the resources to build the right interfaces for them, then the business model isn’t working. Telling your customers to install a pwa is a terrible user experience and borderline rude

The_Colonel 6y ago
Not everyone is building a next Instagram for hundreds of millions users. There's a long tail of smaller business niches which might sustain a solo developer / small company and there having one codebase is obviously critical.
_ink_ 6y ago
Rude is telling developers their business model is not good, because they cannot affort to build native apps for Windows, Mac, Gnome, Kde, Android, iOS and web. If you cannot work with PWAs maybe you just aren't in the targeted user group.
doteka 6y ago
Hard disagree for the long tail of apps. My company’s payroll admin system uses a PWA as a mobile interface. I don’t need slick ui there, I need to view my payslips (click a link to open a pdf) and request time off (fill in a 4-field form). It’s perfectly fine for this usecase and there is no conceivable business value in pouring more resources into it. News flash: a majority of applications is simple CRUD like this. They don’t need a native UI or performance. They just need an icon on your homescreen.
twobitshifter 6y ago
Actually I find that the user experience on PWAs and Electron apps is better than that on native desktop apps. Developers have always been challenged in building desktop apps because the available toolkits are generally crusty, limited, and complex. GTK, TK, QT, Windows Forms, don’t compare well against what can be done in the DOM.
postalrat 6y ago
Nobody is telling users to install a PWA. Just because a site has all the features to be considered a PWA doesn't mean your user must use them. But they are telling users to install apps. Sites that depend on advertising want to force the app down your throat to eliminate ad blockers and to better track you.

jefftougas 6y ago

The core problem with PWAs is that ultimately the success of the overall idea is held hostage by the level of consensus across the browser development teams. Whilst they "collaborate" on "common" web standards (they being many, btw), iOS and Android (note: only 2) have very well defined apis for how to create awesome native UX. The problem of creating a unifying native abstraction (like react native or flutter) that is actually effective from the User's POV, is far more attainable, than that of trying to create a consistently awesome PWA with such inconsistent browser support, across a far greater multitude of platforms than the iOS / Android bifurcation in native-land. My $.02. PWAs have always seemed like one of those beautifully idealistic yet totally doomed to fail ideas (at least for several years relative to native-based-approaches). Don't get me wrong, I think the web will ultimately evolve into the new JVM (read: via WASM), and the beatific promise that was foretold by PWA will finally reach the masses. Reality Check: We're not quite there yet. Firefox deleting a legacy, buggy, and dev-time-sink attempt at this, makes total sense to me so they can focus on the other awesome stuff they're doing that actually creates real value for the masses today. To be fair - perhaps they could've handled the ticket on this a bit more gracefully...? But then again - they know their stuff, so I don't blame them entirely :)