4 ms·

> Why was the movement for push on ios then, if it never worked? Is it a kind of thing that everybody “wants” but no one buys? It's the kind of thing that cons

> Why was the movement for push on ios then, if it never worked? Is it a kind of thing that everybody “wants” but no one buys? It's the kind of thing that consumers want but corps don't as it allows individual app developers to easily self-host efficient realtime notification instead of being locked in to centralised proprietary services from Apple & Google.

llm_nerd 3y ago
Do consumers actually want it? This feels like developer projections. The GP have a point: For years we heard that mobile web apps were almost there but for the laggard Apple (see all of the "Safari is the new IE" comments). The argument never made any sense given that Android hits monopoly levels in many areas, and has an enormous global base of over a billion users, yet mobile web apps see extraordinarily little uptake. But it was an argument nonetheless. So now Apple made mobile web apps first class and implemented all of the must-haves and mobile web apps...still have negligible uptake. And the panacea platform still has critical defects that make it a subpar experience regardless. The new IE?
- lucideer 3y ago
  > Do consumers actually want it? This feels like developer projections. Asking whether consumers want any developer API they clearly don't know exists is always tricky as is going to be a "want" by proxy. First and foremost, there's cost. Developers will pass on FCM service costs in app pricing which is clearly bad for consumers. Service choice encourages price competitiveness. But beyond that, in this case, I would also say that consumers installing a secure messaging client or non-Google email client likely don't want Google collecting metadata on all of their secure messages (& potentially actual data on their plaintext messages - regional legal compliance depending). > For years we heard that mobile web apps were almost there but for the laggard Apple Both Google and Apple each have their primary focus areas when it comes to marketing & propaganda - for Apple, its privacy (the justification for their walled gardens); for Google, they're pushing the web forward. Neither are true. The reality Google have always been behind what's actually needed in implementing true PWAs (despite inventing the term) - calling out Apple was a distraction tactic. Google will only ever push PWAs to the point that they don't interfere with their adjacent revenue priorities. Which is often. > The new IE? Nothing new about it. Chrome has been the new IE almost since inception. Here's an entertaining sendup from 13 years ago, just 3 years after its inception - the parallel to Chrome was already obvious enough at the time to not even require mention: https://brucelawson.co.uk/2010/in-praise-of-ie6/ https://brucelawson.co.uk/2010/in-praise-of-ie6/

llm_nerd 3y ago

Do consumers actually want it? This feels like developer projections. The GP have a point: For years we heard that mobile web apps were almost there but for the laggard Apple (see all of the "Safari is the new IE" comments). The argument never made any sense given that Android hits monopoly levels in many areas, and has an enormous global base of over a billion users, yet mobile web apps see extraordinarily little uptake. But it was an argument nonetheless. So now Apple made mobile web apps first class and implemented all of the must-haves and mobile web apps...still have negligible uptake. And the panacea platform still has critical defects that make it a subpar experience regardless. The new IE?

lucideer 3y ago
> Do consumers actually want it? This feels like developer projections. Asking whether consumers want any developer API they clearly don't know exists is always tricky as is going to be a "want" by proxy. First and foremost, there's cost. Developers will pass on FCM service costs in app pricing which is clearly bad for consumers. Service choice encourages price competitiveness. But beyond that, in this case, I would also say that consumers installing a secure messaging client or non-Google email client likely don't want Google collecting metadata on all of their secure messages (& potentially actual data on their plaintext messages - regional legal compliance depending). > For years we heard that mobile web apps were almost there but for the laggard Apple Both Google and Apple each have their primary focus areas when it comes to marketing & propaganda - for Apple, its privacy (the justification for their walled gardens); for Google, they're pushing the web forward. Neither are true. The reality Google have always been behind what's actually needed in implementing true PWAs (despite inventing the term) - calling out Apple was a distraction tactic. Google will only ever push PWAs to the point that they don't interfere with their adjacent revenue priorities. Which is often. > The new IE? Nothing new about it. Chrome has been the new IE almost since inception. Here's an entertaining sendup from 13 years ago, just 3 years after its inception - the parallel to Chrome was already obvious enough at the time to not even require mention: https://brucelawson.co.uk/2010/in-praise-of-ie6/ https://brucelawson.co.uk/2010/in-praise-of-ie6/