4 ms·

What does it look like for the web to lose?

27 points by samwillis 4y ago

xg15 4y ago
> Why do companies like Apple and Google want you to write native apps over web apps? I can’t pretend to know the minds of entire industry giants, but control seems like one easy answer. > It’s less clear to me why Google/Android went the same route as native apps. Google has an awful lot of incentive to make the web as good as it can be and has largely done a good job of that. You can get Progressive Web Apps into the Google Play Store, but it’s a bit of a second-class citizen, which seems bizarre. I'm all for not centralizing the web, but the web stack always seemed like a bad hill to die on. Purely from a technical standpoint, web tech is still vastly inferior to what you can do with native apps. Seems to me that aside from the politics and power play, there are also lots of valid technical reasons why platforms would prefer native apps to web apps.
- samwillis 4y ago
  99% of apps would be perfectly capable as web apps. The narrative that the web platform is not capable is pushed by the platforms but when you actually take a look at what's possible you see just what can be achieved. This analysis of how we got here via Apple and Google's actions is really good: https://toot.cafe/@slightlyoff/109632248664696707 https://toot.cafe/@slightlyoff/109632248664696707
- vlod 4y ago
  Financially, it's in their best interest to focus their resources on native apps. >web tech is still vastly inferior to what you can do with native apps. >there are also lots of valid technical reasons why platforms would prefer native apps to web apps. Unless we start fixing this, then it will never get better. Generally I don't like that Apple/Google are gatekeepers. If I want to create another fart-app and charge for it, why should Apple say no. If I don't want to use their web api for my own browser, why can't I? Remember for this privilege I get charged a percentage. Meh.
  - darthrupert 4y ago
    If Apple is not allowed to charge for their platform, should developers be not allowed to charge for software?
    - vlod 4y ago
      Competition helps consumers with pricing. We don't have that now. Apple can and does charge whatever they want. From a capitalistic point of view that's fine IMHO. But not allowing alternative app-stores and controlling what apps there can do (i.e. forced to use their dated webview and their payment options, can't have copy/links to point to alternative payments etc) or simple stalling apps in the inconsistent 'review' process for weeks/months, hurts the consumer and developer. i.e. lack of market forces. If your city/country had just one supermarket with unlimited shelf space (i.e. the Apple app store), they could and will charge whatever checkout-fee they wanted (which ultimately gets passed onto the consumer). They disallow alternative stores from springing up that could cater for alternatives. They can prevent your cereal from appearing on the shelf because it's not unique enough or goes against their politics/principals. I'm an adult I don't need to be coddled. With this in mind, one can understand why people are starting to use the word 'monopoly' more and more. I believe in the free market and that's why I write for the web, where there's free competition. Feel free to compete with me and charge whatever you can.
- Isamu 4y ago
  Yeah people don’t remember but when the iPhone came out there was no support for native apps for a while and they were pushing web apps. And so developers were grumbling about this and of course Apple was evil because they didn’t allow native app development.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
steve1977 4y ago
Let’s rephrase that and ask “why should the web win”? As developer, the only advantage I see is to only write things once. But that comes with many disadvantages: worse programming languages, worse frameworks, worse tooling. So in the end, it might even be easier to write an app twice natively than doing it once for the web.

27 points by samwillis 4y ago

xg15 4y ago

> Why do companies like Apple and Google want you to write native apps over web apps? I can’t pretend to know the minds of entire industry giants, but control seems like one easy answer. > It’s less clear to me why Google/Android went the same route as native apps. Google has an awful lot of incentive to make the web as good as it can be and has largely done a good job of that. You can get Progressive Web Apps into the Google Play Store, but it’s a bit of a second-class citizen, which seems bizarre. I'm all for not centralizing the web, but the web stack always seemed like a bad hill to die on. Purely from a technical standpoint, web tech is still vastly inferior to what you can do with native apps. Seems to me that aside from the politics and power play, there are also lots of valid technical reasons why platforms would prefer native apps to web apps.

samwillis 4y ago
99% of apps would be perfectly capable as web apps. The narrative that the web platform is not capable is pushed by the platforms but when you actually take a look at what's possible you see just what can be achieved. This analysis of how we got here via Apple and Google's actions is really good: https://toot.cafe/@slightlyoff/109632248664696707 https://toot.cafe/@slightlyoff/109632248664696707
vlod 4y ago
Financially, it's in their best interest to focus their resources on native apps. >web tech is still vastly inferior to what you can do with native apps. >there are also lots of valid technical reasons why platforms would prefer native apps to web apps. Unless we start fixing this, then it will never get better. Generally I don't like that Apple/Google are gatekeepers. If I want to create another fart-app and charge for it, why should Apple say no. If I don't want to use their web api for my own browser, why can't I? Remember for this privilege I get charged a percentage. Meh.
- darthrupert 4y ago
  If Apple is not allowed to charge for their platform, should developers be not allowed to charge for software?
  - vlod 4y ago
    Competition helps consumers with pricing. We don't have that now. Apple can and does charge whatever they want. From a capitalistic point of view that's fine IMHO. But not allowing alternative app-stores and controlling what apps there can do (i.e. forced to use their dated webview and their payment options, can't have copy/links to point to alternative payments etc) or simple stalling apps in the inconsistent 'review' process for weeks/months, hurts the consumer and developer. i.e. lack of market forces. If your city/country had just one supermarket with unlimited shelf space (i.e. the Apple app store), they could and will charge whatever checkout-fee they wanted (which ultimately gets passed onto the consumer). They disallow alternative stores from springing up that could cater for alternatives. They can prevent your cereal from appearing on the shelf because it's not unique enough or goes against their politics/principals. I'm an adult I don't need to be coddled. With this in mind, one can understand why people are starting to use the word 'monopoly' more and more. I believe in the free market and that's why I write for the web, where there's free competition. Feel free to compete with me and charge whatever you can.
Isamu 4y ago
Yeah people don’t remember but when the iPhone came out there was no support for native apps for a while and they were pushing web apps. And so developers were grumbling about this and of course Apple was evil because they didn’t allow native app development.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

steve1977 4y ago

Let’s rephrase that and ask “why should the web win”? As developer, the only advantage I see is to only write things once. But that comes with many disadvantages: worse programming languages, worse frameworks, worse tooling. So in the end, it might even be easier to write an app twice natively than doing it once for the web.