4 ms·

> The best part of this article is this comment For me that was the worst part since... > Cross-platform compatibility makes an app greater This is largely a

> The best part of this article is this comment For me that was the worst part since... > Cross-platform compatibility makes an app greater This is largely a developer's concern, not a user's concern unless the user uses multiple platforms and wants exactly the same app everywhere regardless of other issues - in practice this is a niche situation and the most people use either a single platform or two platforms that are still considerably different (ie. mobile phone and desktop/laptop) where having the same UX is actually a negative. On the other hand, cross-platform compatibility actually makes apps lesser because they are designed with a lowest-common denominator approach where each apps uses its own controls, its own framework and libraries, etc for things that the native platform already provides - while not taking advantage (or using at a very surface level) functionality that is exclusive to the user's platform (e.g. Services on macOS - cross-platform applications either do not support it at all or have some surface support for things like text). > No installation makes an app better. No installation in the web app sense means that the user is not in control over the applications they are using - one can't just decide to stay on an older version because the developer broke the UI in an attempt to improve the UX while having no idea how people use their application (or trying to target some imaginary "common user" that supposedly had no interest in their app but now that they "improved" the UX everyone would fall in love with it) - they have to keep using the latest and "greatest" version (a very common story). Similarly if the developer shuts down the server or closes shop or drops dead the application is forever lost. Also installation in rarely an issue in most platforms - and macOS has the simplest among all. > Simple collaboration and sharing with anyone, including people on weird devices like Chromebooks, makes an app greater While this can be useful functionality, in practice many web applications do not really "collaborate" with other web applications but instead just provide multiple sessions over the same application and all data is held hostage to them. Even with open source web applications that you can host yourself, it is very rare for multiple web applications to be able to share data with each other. > Automatic updating makes an app greater. See my comment on not installing. > Being able to open the app I normally use on my desktop on my phone in a pinch makes an app greater. This means that either the phone UX or the desktop UX are going to suffer to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of the other one. Either case does not make an app "greater". > Not locking me into using a Mac makes an app greater. And again this is only true if you are not a macOS user.

tashoecraft 5y ago
You can be right as much as you want, but the majority of users do not care. Native apps are better in so many ways, and users continue to not care. And that’s what apple is just ignoring. That’s what users like you are missing.
- badsectoracula 5y ago
  That is because "the majority" of users are very often not in a position to be able to judge why they should care nor even know what they are missing. E.g. if all one uses on their brand new Mac is Electron or other lowest-common-denominator apps and web apps and they never take advantage of something like Services then they wont even know what that menu is about - and these applications wont even teach them about it. At that point the Mac becomes just an expensive, sleek looking device running an OS with a fancy theme that you but might as well replace with a similar looking fancy device running Windows or GNOME - there is no real reason to use it beyond being fashionable or as a status symbol akin to some clothing and accessory brands.
  - SllX 5y ago
    Strangely enough there’s still enough native to the platform that even the best notebook that can run Electron is still actually a compelling advantage because I would still have Spotlight, I would still have Quick Look, I would still have a POSIX environment, I would still have Exposé, I would still have the ability to globally reassign menu hot keys, I would still have the best PDF handling on any desktop environment I’ve ever used, I would still have Safari, I would still have Time Machine, I would still have Look Up, and I would still have Live Text. Loathe that I am to admit it, even the Finder ain’t half bad compared to the nonsense out there I could be using instead and I’ve made my peace with its deficiencies. I wouldn’t be happy without the excellent suite of native 3rd party software and I’m not happy about 1Password’s decision to go from native to Electron, but the core Macintosh operating system features are still a compelling package.
    - elpescado 5y ago

tashoecraft 5y ago

You can be right as much as you want, but the majority of users do not care. Native apps are better in so many ways, and users continue to not care. And that’s what apple is just ignoring. That’s what users like you are missing.

badsectoracula 5y ago
That is because "the majority" of users are very often not in a position to be able to judge why they should care nor even know what they are missing. E.g. if all one uses on their brand new Mac is Electron or other lowest-common-denominator apps and web apps and they never take advantage of something like Services then they wont even know what that menu is about - and these applications wont even teach them about it. At that point the Mac becomes just an expensive, sleek looking device running an OS with a fancy theme that you but might as well replace with a similar looking fancy device running Windows or GNOME - there is no real reason to use it beyond being fashionable or as a status symbol akin to some clothing and accessory brands.
- SllX 5y ago
  Strangely enough there’s still enough native to the platform that even the best notebook that can run Electron is still actually a compelling advantage because I would still have Spotlight, I would still have Quick Look, I would still have a POSIX environment, I would still have Exposé, I would still have the ability to globally reassign menu hot keys, I would still have the best PDF handling on any desktop environment I’ve ever used, I would still have Safari, I would still have Time Machine, I would still have Look Up, and I would still have Live Text. Loathe that I am to admit it, even the Finder ain’t half bad compared to the nonsense out there I could be using instead and I’ve made my peace with its deficiencies. I wouldn’t be happy without the excellent suite of native 3rd party software and I’m not happy about 1Password’s decision to go from native to Electron, but the core Macintosh operating system features are still a compelling package.
  - elpescado 5y ago