3 ms·

How can an organisation start a Web/Desktop project which can never ever be _good_ (not to mention great) and frustrate and annoy its customers all the time? If

by rado 5y ago

How can an organisation start a Web/Desktop project which can never ever be _good_ (not to mention great) and frustrate and annoy its customers all the time? If native is a mess, how is outsourcing the mess to the user justified?

eloff 5y ago
What's the alternative? Be only on one platform? Not viable today. Implement 5 different apps, usually not viable. The platforms are fragmented and the user pays the costs of that in the end, one way or another. If you hide it by increasing development costs, the price of the app ( or amount of ads or premium only features) must go up to compensate and the user pays the cost as well. Edit: downvote all you like, there is still no magical solution.
- anoncake 5y ago
  Microsoft easily has the resources to write 5 chat app UIs.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - eloff 5y ago
    That's a hopelessly simplisitc way of looking at the situation. Every team at Microsoft has different levels of resources, and some would rather spend those resources improving their product rather than writing and maintaining 5 different versions of the frontend part of their product. That's typically the smart choice.
    - anoncake 5y ago
      I really don't care about Microsoft's internal organization or what team has how many resources right now.
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  > What's the alternative? Be only on one platform? Not viable today. Implement 5 different apps, usually not viable. Why are we pretending in this thread that there aren't any cross-platform toolkits? Using that is an entirely valid trade-off between "putting a webshit in its window" and "you have to develop 10 separate native apps".
  - eloff 5y ago
    Are you talking Qt? Xamarin? Those are pretty sucky by comparison to both web and native and they don't feel native. The problem is not that cross platform toolkits don't exist, it's that they're aren't any good enough. Also why are we pretending in this thread that it's impossible to write electron or web apps with more reasonable memory usage? Look at vscode. Electron, as much as I hate to say it, is one of the best options available.
    - pseudalopex 5y ago
      The Qt apps I use are much better than the Electron apps I use. It must be very hard to write Electron apps with more reasonable memory usage if VS Code is the sole example anyone ever has. Sublime Text is my reference for reasonable memory usage and performance. VS Code doesn't measure up.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    > Why are we pretending in this thread that there aren't any cross-platform toolkits? I'm not aware of any cross-platform toolkit that works on windows, mac, linux and the web aside from, well, a browser. > Using that is an entirely valid trade-off between "putting a webshit in its window" and "you have to develop 10 separate native apps". People don't want to pay the cost of native apps, they want to be able to use apps everywhere and have new features often.
- rado 5y ago
  Abstract away the core of the product (data, connectivity etc) behind an internal interpreter, which is the same on all platforms and connects to native UI.

by rado 5y ago

eloff 5y ago

What's the alternative? Be only on one platform? Not viable today. Implement 5 different apps, usually not viable. The platforms are fragmented and the user pays the costs of that in the end, one way or another. If you hide it by increasing development costs, the price of the app ( or amount of ads or premium only features) must go up to compensate and the user pays the cost as well. Edit: downvote all you like, there is still no magical solution.

anoncake 5y ago
Microsoft easily has the resources to write 5 chat app UIs.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- eloff 5y ago
  That's a hopelessly simplisitc way of looking at the situation. Every team at Microsoft has different levels of resources, and some would rather spend those resources improving their product rather than writing and maintaining 5 different versions of the frontend part of their product. That's typically the smart choice.
  - anoncake 5y ago
    I really don't care about Microsoft's internal organization or what team has how many resources right now.
formerly_proven 5y ago
> What's the alternative? Be only on one platform? Not viable today. Implement 5 different apps, usually not viable. Why are we pretending in this thread that there aren't any cross-platform toolkits? Using that is an entirely valid trade-off between "putting a webshit in its window" and "you have to develop 10 separate native apps".
- eloff 5y ago
  Are you talking Qt? Xamarin? Those are pretty sucky by comparison to both web and native and they don't feel native. The problem is not that cross platform toolkits don't exist, it's that they're aren't any good enough. Also why are we pretending in this thread that it's impossible to write electron or web apps with more reasonable memory usage? Look at vscode. Electron, as much as I hate to say it, is one of the best options available.
  - pseudalopex 5y ago
    The Qt apps I use are much better than the Electron apps I use. It must be very hard to write Electron apps with more reasonable memory usage if VS Code is the sole example anyone ever has. Sublime Text is my reference for reasonable memory usage and performance. VS Code doesn't measure up.
- Zababa 5y ago
  > Why are we pretending in this thread that there aren't any cross-platform toolkits? I'm not aware of any cross-platform toolkit that works on windows, mac, linux and the web aside from, well, a browser. > Using that is an entirely valid trade-off between "putting a webshit in its window" and "you have to develop 10 separate native apps". People don't want to pay the cost of native apps, they want to be able to use apps everywhere and have new features often.
rado 5y ago
Abstract away the core of the product (data, connectivity etc) behind an internal interpreter, which is the same on all platforms and connects to native UI.