5 ms·

I exclusively use Discord in a browser tab. I simply won't use a dedicated app for anything that can be done in a web browser.

by kibwen 4y ago

wjamesg 4y ago
Likewise, highly recommended
bob1029 4y ago
> I simply won't use a dedicated app for anything that can be done in a web browser. In 2023, what app experience is still impossible to do in the browser? The only things I can come up with are apps requiring access to outside hardware or files. There are now several entirely unique ways in which a AAA gaming experience could be delivered to a client browser. If we can ship resident evil frames to a Chromebook at 30+fps, is there anything we can't do?
- anonymousab 4y ago
  I believe the discord app has some weird limitations around global shortcuts and push-to-talk when you use the browser tab instead of the desktop app. One use case also used to be that you would use a browser tab for one discord account and the desktop app for another, but container tabs + browser profile switching made that less necessary. And then discord eventually added support for multiple accounts.
  - miohtama 4y ago
    Discord chat works fine in a browser. It is only call options (audio and video codecs?) that give headache.
  - bob1029 4y ago
    > global shortcuts and push-to-talk I think we are just 1 tiny browser API away from this one being solved too. If we can agree on a way to capture the pointer device, I'm sure we could figure out a reasonable way to capture certain user-defined keys. The actual key that is subscribed to can be abstracted away by using some registration API. I think this would eliminate key logger concerns (you'd have to ask the user for every key on their keyboard) E.g.: RequestGlobalHotkey('my-hotkey-id', 'Discord Push to Talk'); and then if the user presses it, we call something like OnGlobalHotkey(e) where the arg contains 'my-hotkey-id' and keypress state.
- Xorlev 4y ago
  > The only things I can come up with are apps requiring access to outside hardware or files That's not even 100% true either [1]. For instance, you can flash Android devices from the browser. The example in [2] talks to an attached Arduino device. [1]: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12576972 https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12576972 [2]: https://developer.chrome.com/articles/usb/ https://developer.chrome.com/articles/usb/
- OkayPhysicist 4y ago
  Discord optimizes streaming your gameplay by injecting DLLs into your game when you go to stream it (I discovered this, and the setting to disable it, after trying to figure out how the hell Puzzle Pirates could crash due to being streamed). I would be very. Very, very surprised to learn a website could do that. Hell, any streaming of whatever separate application you're running seems like it shouldn't be possible from a website.
  - bob1029 4y ago
    Not sure why DLL injection is required or possible (beyond any native browser shenanigans). Screen capture API has been a thing for a while now: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Screen_Capture_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Screen_Capt... It has a UX almost identical to discord with regard to screen/application capture experience.
- toast0 4y ago
  The two things I can think of are: a) communication protocols that aren't encapsulated in http(s), websockets, or webrtc. There's good reasons for some of this, and it's not that limiting, since popular protocols tend to grow some of these encapsulations to circumvent lazy firewalls, but it sticks out to me. Additionally, a page/app can't run a server for other browsers to connect to, it's got to be intermediated with a separate server; it would be difficult to make an offline LAN multiplayer game work. b) reliable non-interactive push messaging and/or background connectivity. Again, there's good reasons, and you wouldn't like every page/app to have this capability, but this capability enables good offline usability by fetching data when available and pushing user driven updates when available. For example, Email should be offline capable, and it should have nearly all the messages that were available when last the device had connectivity, and it should let me compose new messages and replies and queue them until connectivity returns. Maybe it should even speak IMAP and SMTP, but JMAP is probably good enough and browser accessible. Same with other messaging systems, assuming they have queued messages and aren't online only.
criddell 4y ago
I’m the opposite. If there is a well written app on iOS or iPadOS, I’ll use it for the increased privacy protections, lower battery and CPU usage and (sometimes) lower bandwidth consumption. IMHO, mobile operating systems have gotten better than legacy desktop operating systems in a bunch of key areas. But of all the platforms, the web is the worst one. The web has tracking everywhere and often uses a lot of CPU, memory, battery, and bandwidth.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- kibwen 4y ago
  Of the two major mobile OSes, one is literally owned by an ad company and the other is increasingly succumbing to the dark side of advertising. Why would I trust Apple not to do nefarious things with all the tracking they do ("privacy" my ass) when I could just use a browser with an adblocker and do even better?
  - criddell 4y ago
    You don’t think Apple can see what you are doing in your browser?
    - Aachen 4y ago
      can != does (I'm not an Apple user and never will be because, with the highest privilege level being reserved for Apple themselves, I don't own the device / can use it for general computation. It goes against my principles so I'm not some apple apologist, it just doesn't make much sense to assume what you said. Google wouldn't surprise me at all....when using Google Chrome/-ium. That's a choice. On Android, your data is fully in your hands, even if you have to fight tooth and nail for getting it your way.)
      - criddell 4y ago
        I wasn’t trying to imply that they would. Just that if you are worried about Apple spying on you, running an ad-blocker doesn’t do much on that front.
super256 4y ago
If you'd rather use a native application, I can recommend Ripcord[1]. Ripcord is an alternative client. Unfortunately, the developer doesn't seem to make many sales, so some features are not implemented. The demo has infinite days, but it's a good idea to actually donate if you like the project :) [1] https://cancel.fm/ripcord/ https://cancel.fm/ripcord/
- viraptor 4y ago
  Watch out with Discord and 3rd party clients. Their policies suck here and people have been banned for it already https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248 https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248
  - super256 4y ago
    Is that tweet ripcord related? The original tweet to which discord is responding is deleted. I've been using ripcord for half a year now, and my account hasn't been disabled so far. If they actually choose to terminate my account because I'm using a more efficient client, I'm going to be really upset.
    - viraptor 4y ago
      It's all third party clients effectively. Some more context here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25224151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25224151

I exclusively use Discord in a browser tab. I simply won't use a dedicated app for anything that can be done in a web browser.

by kibwen 4y ago

I exclusively use Discord in a browser tab. I simply won't use a dedicated app for anything that can be done in a web browser.

wjamesg 4y ago

Likewise, highly recommended

bob1029 4y ago

> I simply won't use a dedicated app for anything that can be done in a web browser. In 2023, what app experience is still impossible to do in the browser? The only things I can come up with are apps requiring access to outside hardware or files. There are now several entirely unique ways in which a AAA gaming experience could be delivered to a client browser. If we can ship resident evil frames to a Chromebook at 30+fps, is there anything we can't do?

anonymousab 4y ago
I believe the discord app has some weird limitations around global shortcuts and push-to-talk when you use the browser tab instead of the desktop app. One use case also used to be that you would use a browser tab for one discord account and the desktop app for another, but container tabs + browser profile switching made that less necessary. And then discord eventually added support for multiple accounts.
- miohtama 4y ago
  Discord chat works fine in a browser. It is only call options (audio and video codecs?) that give headache.
- bob1029 4y ago
  > global shortcuts and push-to-talk I think we are just 1 tiny browser API away from this one being solved too. If we can agree on a way to capture the pointer device, I'm sure we could figure out a reasonable way to capture certain user-defined keys. The actual key that is subscribed to can be abstracted away by using some registration API. I think this would eliminate key logger concerns (you'd have to ask the user for every key on their keyboard) E.g.: RequestGlobalHotkey('my-hotkey-id', 'Discord Push to Talk'); and then if the user presses it, we call something like OnGlobalHotkey(e) where the arg contains 'my-hotkey-id' and keypress state.
Xorlev 4y ago
> The only things I can come up with are apps requiring access to outside hardware or files That's not even 100% true either [1]. For instance, you can flash Android devices from the browser. The example in [2] talks to an attached Arduino device. [1]: https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12576972 https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/12576972 [2]: https://developer.chrome.com/articles/usb/ https://developer.chrome.com/articles/usb/
OkayPhysicist 4y ago
Discord optimizes streaming your gameplay by injecting DLLs into your game when you go to stream it (I discovered this, and the setting to disable it, after trying to figure out how the hell Puzzle Pirates could crash due to being streamed). I would be very. Very, very surprised to learn a website could do that. Hell, any streaming of whatever separate application you're running seems like it shouldn't be possible from a website.
- bob1029 4y ago
  Not sure why DLL injection is required or possible (beyond any native browser shenanigans). Screen capture API has been a thing for a while now: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Screen_Capture_API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Screen_Capt... It has a UX almost identical to discord with regard to screen/application capture experience.
toast0 4y ago
The two things I can think of are: a) communication protocols that aren't encapsulated in http(s), websockets, or webrtc. There's good reasons for some of this, and it's not that limiting, since popular protocols tend to grow some of these encapsulations to circumvent lazy firewalls, but it sticks out to me. Additionally, a page/app can't run a server for other browsers to connect to, it's got to be intermediated with a separate server; it would be difficult to make an offline LAN multiplayer game work. b) reliable non-interactive push messaging and/or background connectivity. Again, there's good reasons, and you wouldn't like every page/app to have this capability, but this capability enables good offline usability by fetching data when available and pushing user driven updates when available. For example, Email should be offline capable, and it should have nearly all the messages that were available when last the device had connectivity, and it should let me compose new messages and replies and queue them until connectivity returns. Maybe it should even speak IMAP and SMTP, but JMAP is probably good enough and browser accessible. Same with other messaging systems, assuming they have queued messages and aren't online only.

criddell 4y ago

I’m the opposite. If there is a well written app on iOS or iPadOS, I’ll use it for the increased privacy protections, lower battery and CPU usage and (sometimes) lower bandwidth consumption. IMHO, mobile operating systems have gotten better than legacy desktop operating systems in a bunch of key areas. But of all the platforms, the web is the worst one. The web has tracking everywhere and often uses a lot of CPU, memory, battery, and bandwidth.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kibwen 4y ago
Of the two major mobile OSes, one is literally owned by an ad company and the other is increasingly succumbing to the dark side of advertising. Why would I trust Apple not to do nefarious things with all the tracking they do ("privacy" my ass) when I could just use a browser with an adblocker and do even better?
- criddell 4y ago
  You don’t think Apple can see what you are doing in your browser?
  - Aachen 4y ago
    can != does (I'm not an Apple user and never will be because, with the highest privilege level being reserved for Apple themselves, I don't own the device / can use it for general computation. It goes against my principles so I'm not some apple apologist, it just doesn't make much sense to assume what you said. Google wouldn't surprise me at all....when using Google Chrome/-ium. That's a choice. On Android, your data is fully in your hands, even if you have to fight tooth and nail for getting it your way.)
    - criddell 4y ago
      I wasn’t trying to imply that they would. Just that if you are worried about Apple spying on you, running an ad-blocker doesn’t do much on that front.

super256 4y ago

If you'd rather use a native application, I can recommend Ripcord[1]. Ripcord is an alternative client. Unfortunately, the developer doesn't seem to make many sales, so some features are not implemented. The demo has infinite days, but it's a good idea to actually donate if you like the project :) [1] https://cancel.fm/ripcord/ https://cancel.fm/ripcord/

viraptor 4y ago
Watch out with Discord and 3rd party clients. Their policies suck here and people have been banned for it already https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248 https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248
- super256 4y ago
  Is that tweet ripcord related? The original tweet to which discord is responding is deleted. I've been using ripcord for half a year now, and my account hasn't been disabled so far. If they actually choose to terminate my account because I'm using a more efficient client, I'm going to be really upset.
  - viraptor 4y ago
    It's all third party clients effectively. Some more context here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25224151 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25224151