6 ms·

> I don't know who invented that "As a user" thing, but I find it completely stupid. In my view it is just used as a justification for anything one wants when t

> I don't know who invented that "As a user" thing, but I find it completely stupid. In my view it is just used as a justification for anything one wants when they don't have a better argument. > "As a user", I want to own the product I pay for. Ironically, you're the one who lacks a concrete argument, which is why you're attacking the wording of my statement, rather than the substance of it. You're honing in on the first three words of my sentence, because you can't debate the argument on its merits. You then use the exact same wording in your final sentence, but encase it in quotes as if that somehow absolves you of your hypocrisy. Given that this website is frequented by software developers, I think there's a useful distinction to be made between thinking about problems in terms of their development, versus thinking about them in terms of their utility to end users. > Not at all, I was just giving a real-world example of sandboxing of apps at scale. It would be charitable of me to call it a "real-word example". You simply said "Android does that sandboxing by default", without a single supporting statement or example, despite your so-called extensive knowledge of sandboxing. > If your baseline is sending a full web browser with every app you make, on desktop you could run each app in a VM and it would obviously be better. No one is "sending a full web browser with every app you make". Browsers come preinstalled on every popular operating system. > An app can't make a request unless it has the internet permission, what's your point? What in the world is "the internet permission"? I've never had an operating system ask me if I'd like to grant an app "the internet permission". Have you operated a computer before? > Do you know anything about sandboxing, or are you throwing that there for the sake of the argument? > Oh right, I guess you don't really know about sandboxing then. So it won't be a super constructive debate given that your position is apparently fundamentally based on your intuition about sandboxing. As someone who's written both web apps and desktop apps, I do in fact know a considerable amount about sandboxing. Do you know anything about sandboxing? You're questioning my knowledge to deflect from your lack of a coherent rebuttal. What exactly have you written during this conversation to demonstrate your comprehensive knowledge of sandboxing? You're concluding that I lack knowledge on sandboxing because I admitted to not having single-handedly written an operating system or web browser? Really? Are you writing an OS in your free time when you're not writing about the mysterious "internet permission"? > My point is that webapps move everything into the browser, going towards a world where something like ChromeOS is the only valid way to use a computer. I want to choose my OS, I don't want to rent an OS provided by BigTech You've got it backwards. If I want to add support for users running a free open-source operating system like Linux, as a web app developer I don't have to do anything special. Linux can run web browsers, and therefore it can run web apps. Case in point is Photoshop. Neither Photoshop nor the rest of the Adobe Creative Suite runs on Linux, but the Photoshop web app does, because web apps are universal. There's a reason why Apple took years to finally add push notification support to iOS web apps, because web apps threaten the mobile operating system duopoly.

palata 3y ago
> Ironically, [...] You then use the exact same wording in your final sentence Thanks for explaining to me what I did ;-). > You simply said "Android does that sandboxing by default", without a single supporting statement or example Are you questioning the fact that Android apps are sandboxed? If yes, you may need to do some reading on your own. I am not here to teach you how Android works. > No one is "sending a full web browser with every app you make". All the webapps that try to look like Desktop apps have to ship a browser with them. You mentioned VScode, right? > What in the world is "the internet permission"? I've never had an operating system ask me if I'd like to grant an app "the internet permission". Have you operated a computer before? Oh come on... you just don't have the slightest idea how native apps work, do you? It's literally called "android.permission.INTERNET". Have you ever tried something not web? > Are you writing an OS in your free time when you're not writing about the mysterious "internet permission"? As a matter of fact, not an OS but embedded distributions. That... wait for it... use sandboxing. Do I need to get back on the "mysterious" internet permission? Wait, here's a link to help you: https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-ops/connecting https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-o.... > as a web app developer I don't have to do anything special. Not even Google "Internet permission" before dismissing someone's point. I love that kind of webapp developers. > because web apps threaten the mobile operating system duopoly. They threaten every platform by making everything a ChromeOS system (no, not literally ChromeOS, but something based more and more around Chromium, which is owned by Google).
- throwitaway1123 3y ago
  > Thanks for explaining to me what I did ;-). You're welcome. > Are you questioning the fact that Android apps are sandboxed? If yes, you may need to do some reading on your own. I am not here to teach you how Android works. I'm not questioning whether or not Android apps are sandboxed. I'm questioning how well they're sandboxed relative to web apps, which is why I gave you several examples of capabilities that a native app has that a web app does not. You're losing the thread of the conversation. > All the webapps that try to look like Desktop apps have to ship a browser with them. You mentioned VScode, right? > Not even Google "Internet permission" before dismissing someone's point. I love that kind of webapp developers. I never said anything about VSCode. You can't even remember what we've talked about. I love that kind of commenter. We're not talking about desktop apps that use web technologies vs desktop apps that don't. We're talking about desktop (and now apparently mobile) apps vs web apps that run in the browser. Allow me to quote your original comment that I replied to as a memory refresher: "I, for one, don't want them rendered in my browser. I have an OS that can run apps, and I want my browser to be an app that renders simple HTML pages." This is what we are debating. You want to shift this conversation into a flamewar about desktop apps built with Electron, because you know your actual argument has less merit. This whole conversation has consisted of you shifting goal posts, and retreating to a lesser version of your original argument. I'm still waiting for you to compare the security of desktop apps to web apps, which was my entire original point. > Oh come on... you just don't have the slightest idea how native apps work, do you? It's literally called "android.permission.INTERNET". Have you ever tried something not web? I'm talking about permissions that a user has to intentionally grant via an explicit prompt, not a list of bullet points that appear to a user if they happen to view an app's detail page [1]. Your own link explains it best: "Note: Both the INTERNET and ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE permissions are normal permissions, which means they're granted at install time and don't need to be requested at runtime."[2] But you were actually responding to my comment about CORS when you brought up "the internet permission", which unlike the coarse grained permissions that most operating systems offer allows any website to prevent any other website from accessing its resources. Which means I can't use a web app to form a botnet that attacks some innocent server, unless that server explicitly allows it via a CORS header (and also ignores the incoming origin header). A desktop app can connect to any domain it wants, and can even directly connect to the server's ip and impersonate a legitimate client by forging the origin and user-agent headers. > They threaten every platform by making everything a ChromeOS system (no, not literally ChromeOS, but something based more and more around Chromium, which is owned by Google). No...they don't. Have you forgotten that Firefox and Safari exist, or should I send you a link to their home pages? But even if we put that aside, during this entire discussion you've been championing Android which is...wait for it... developed by Google. Please tell me you're being intentionally obtuse? [1] https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/permissions/overview#install-time:~:text=When%20you%20declare%20install%2Dtime%20permissions%20in%20your%20app%2C%20an%20app%20store%20presents%20an%20install%2Dtime%20permission%20notice%20to%20the%20user%20when%20they%20view%20an%20app%27s%20details%20page%2C%20as%20shown%20in%20figure%202.%20The%20system%20automatically%20grants%20your%20app%20the%20permissions%20when%20the%20user%20installs%20your%20app https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/permissions/overv.... [2] https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-ops/connecting https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-o...

palata 3y ago

> Ironically, [...] You then use the exact same wording in your final sentence Thanks for explaining to me what I did ;-). > You simply said "Android does that sandboxing by default", without a single supporting statement or example Are you questioning the fact that Android apps are sandboxed? If yes, you may need to do some reading on your own. I am not here to teach you how Android works. > No one is "sending a full web browser with every app you make". All the webapps that try to look like Desktop apps have to ship a browser with them. You mentioned VScode, right? > What in the world is "the internet permission"? I've never had an operating system ask me if I'd like to grant an app "the internet permission". Have you operated a computer before? Oh come on... you just don't have the slightest idea how native apps work, do you? It's literally called "android.permission.INTERNET". Have you ever tried something not web? > Are you writing an OS in your free time when you're not writing about the mysterious "internet permission"? As a matter of fact, not an OS but embedded distributions. That... wait for it... use sandboxing. Do I need to get back on the "mysterious" internet permission? Wait, here's a link to help you: https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-ops/connecting https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-o.... > as a web app developer I don't have to do anything special. Not even Google "Internet permission" before dismissing someone's point. I love that kind of webapp developers. > because web apps threaten the mobile operating system duopoly. They threaten every platform by making everything a ChromeOS system (no, not literally ChromeOS, but something based more and more around Chromium, which is owned by Google).

throwitaway1123 3y ago
> Thanks for explaining to me what I did ;-). You're welcome. > Are you questioning the fact that Android apps are sandboxed? If yes, you may need to do some reading on your own. I am not here to teach you how Android works. I'm not questioning whether or not Android apps are sandboxed. I'm questioning how well they're sandboxed relative to web apps, which is why I gave you several examples of capabilities that a native app has that a web app does not. You're losing the thread of the conversation. > All the webapps that try to look like Desktop apps have to ship a browser with them. You mentioned VScode, right? > Not even Google "Internet permission" before dismissing someone's point. I love that kind of webapp developers. I never said anything about VSCode. You can't even remember what we've talked about. I love that kind of commenter. We're not talking about desktop apps that use web technologies vs desktop apps that don't. We're talking about desktop (and now apparently mobile) apps vs web apps that run in the browser. Allow me to quote your original comment that I replied to as a memory refresher: "I, for one, don't want them rendered in my browser. I have an OS that can run apps, and I want my browser to be an app that renders simple HTML pages." This is what we are debating. You want to shift this conversation into a flamewar about desktop apps built with Electron, because you know your actual argument has less merit. This whole conversation has consisted of you shifting goal posts, and retreating to a lesser version of your original argument. I'm still waiting for you to compare the security of desktop apps to web apps, which was my entire original point. > Oh come on... you just don't have the slightest idea how native apps work, do you? It's literally called "android.permission.INTERNET". Have you ever tried something not web? I'm talking about permissions that a user has to intentionally grant via an explicit prompt, not a list of bullet points that appear to a user if they happen to view an app's detail page [1]. Your own link explains it best: "Note: Both the INTERNET and ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE permissions are normal permissions, which means they're granted at install time and don't need to be requested at runtime."[2] But you were actually responding to my comment about CORS when you brought up "the internet permission", which unlike the coarse grained permissions that most operating systems offer allows any website to prevent any other website from accessing its resources. Which means I can't use a web app to form a botnet that attacks some innocent server, unless that server explicitly allows it via a CORS header (and also ignores the incoming origin header). A desktop app can connect to any domain it wants, and can even directly connect to the server's ip and impersonate a legitimate client by forging the origin and user-agent headers. > They threaten every platform by making everything a ChromeOS system (no, not literally ChromeOS, but something based more and more around Chromium, which is owned by Google). No...they don't. Have you forgotten that Firefox and Safari exist, or should I send you a link to their home pages? But even if we put that aside, during this entire discussion you've been championing Android which is...wait for it... developed by Google. Please tell me you're being intentionally obtuse? [1] https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/permissions/overview#install-time:~:text=When%20you%20declare%20install%2Dtime%20permissions%20in%20your%20app%2C%20an%20app%20store%20presents%20an%20install%2Dtime%20permission%20notice%20to%20the%20user%20when%20they%20view%20an%20app%27s%20details%20page%2C%20as%20shown%20in%20figure%202.%20The%20system%20automatically%20grants%20your%20app%20the%20permissions%20when%20the%20user%20installs%20your%20app https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/permissions/overv.... [2] https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-ops/connecting https://developer.android.com/develop/connectivity/network-o...