5 ms·

It's meaningless to say that users didn't want them when PWA were so difficult to install and every company was forced to invest in writing a native app instead

It's meaningless to say that users didn't want them when PWA were so difficult to install and every company was forced to invest in writing a native app instead. Of course users prefer native apps but they're incredibly expensive to maintain. Developers need the option of a PWA.

etchalon 4y ago
I'm not sure that "who cares what users want" is a valid product strategy.
olliej 4y ago
I will always choose a better quality app if its available, the problem is if you have a bunch of low cost shitty applications then no one creating actually good apps can compete on price. At that point the only option is for good apps to be astronomically expensive, or every app becomes another shitty PWA that doesn't work well at all. My honest impression is that the entire "PWAs are good" are basically the crowd that make cheap apps discovering a way to sell to Mac users without having to actually make quality software. Any time I encounter a PWA or a chrome wrapper "native" app it's just another chance to experience an app that can't do basic things like "find" correctly. The entire argument for PWAs is "it's cheaper". I have not once seen a "it results in a better UX or app".
- h0l0cube 4y ago
  > The entire argument for PWAs is "it's cheaper". Not necessarily cheaper to make but your revenue isn’t cut by 30%. Also your app can run almost instantly by visiting a link. App Clips and Instant Apps don’t really cut the mustard unless your app is tiny
threeseed 4y ago
We've had native wrappers with PWA style payloads for nearly 15 years. Installing to the home screen is not the reason they never took off. It's because the user experience on them is terrible compared to native. Really is as simple as that.
- h0l0cube 4y ago
  > It's because the user experience on them is terrible compared to native … because there’s perverse incentives to keep it that way
  - threeseed 4y ago
    No it's because the web was designed for web pages. It was not designed for highly dynamic, fluid, responsive experiences.
    - h0l0cube 4y ago
      Lots of platforms have exceeded their original use cases. It’s like saying *nix wasn’t designed to host desktop GUIs, so we should make a whole new operating system to afford that purpose.
      - timeon 4y ago
        That is just analogy not argument.
        h0l0cube 4y ago
        Okay then. Can you make an argument as to why a browser can't provide a native-like experience? (Aside from perverse motivations.)
        etchalon 4y ago
        Ignoring that HTML, CSS and JS have specific performance tradeoffs that allow for flexibility and universality, I'd go with "because I can't name any cross-platform tooling that has ever felt as good as a platform-native alternative".
        h0l0cube 4y ago
        Certainly that’s a fallacious argument of a different kind. > specific performance tradeoffs But you don’t specify. Android is built upon the JVM which is affected by GC pauses much the same as JavaScript, but the performance issues are solvable in the browser as much as they have been in the ‘native’ Android domain
timeon 4y ago
> expensive to maintain This reflects trends in software development. Cheap and easy for developer. Poor user experience.

etchalon 4y ago

I'm not sure that "who cares what users want" is a valid product strategy.

olliej 4y ago

I will always choose a better quality app if its available, the problem is if you have a bunch of low cost shitty applications then no one creating actually good apps can compete on price. At that point the only option is for good apps to be astronomically expensive, or every app becomes another shitty PWA that doesn't work well at all. My honest impression is that the entire "PWAs are good" are basically the crowd that make cheap apps discovering a way to sell to Mac users without having to actually make quality software. Any time I encounter a PWA or a chrome wrapper "native" app it's just another chance to experience an app that can't do basic things like "find" correctly. The entire argument for PWAs is "it's cheaper". I have not once seen a "it results in a better UX or app".

h0l0cube 4y ago
> The entire argument for PWAs is "it's cheaper". Not necessarily cheaper to make but your revenue isn’t cut by 30%. Also your app can run almost instantly by visiting a link. App Clips and Instant Apps don’t really cut the mustard unless your app is tiny

threeseed 4y ago

We've had native wrappers with PWA style payloads for nearly 15 years. Installing to the home screen is not the reason they never took off. It's because the user experience on them is terrible compared to native. Really is as simple as that.

h0l0cube 4y ago
> It's because the user experience on them is terrible compared to native … because there’s perverse incentives to keep it that way
- threeseed 4y ago
  No it's because the web was designed for web pages. It was not designed for highly dynamic, fluid, responsive experiences.
  - h0l0cube 4y ago
    Lots of platforms have exceeded their original use cases. It’s like saying *nix wasn’t designed to host desktop GUIs, so we should make a whole new operating system to afford that purpose.
    - timeon 4y ago
      That is just analogy not argument.
      - h0l0cube 4y ago
        Okay then. Can you make an argument as to why a browser can't provide a native-like experience? (Aside from perverse motivations.)
        etchalon 4y ago
        Ignoring that HTML, CSS and JS have specific performance tradeoffs that allow for flexibility and universality, I'd go with "because I can't name any cross-platform tooling that has ever felt as good as a platform-native alternative".
        h0l0cube 4y ago
        Certainly that’s a fallacious argument of a different kind. > specific performance tradeoffs But you don’t specify. Android is built upon the JVM which is affected by GC pauses much the same as JavaScript, but the performance issues are solvable in the browser as much as they have been in the ‘native’ Android domain

timeon 4y ago

> expensive to maintain This reflects trends in software development. Cheap and easy for developer. Poor user experience.