4 ms·

It's fascinating to see so many folks out there supporting web apps, because I personally don't like using them. They're fine for tasks I don't care about being

It's fascinating to see so many folks out there supporting web apps, because I personally don't like using them. They're fine for tasks I don't care about being pleasant, like, say, quickly buying something online. But for anything I consider work, that takes toil, like writing, editing media, or programming. I'll avoid using web apps, these tasks are hard enough on their own, I don't want to make them harder by using software that, to me, lacks joy (due to it not hitting my bottom line in performance, reliability, or even beauty). I just hope enough folks out there continue to appreciate native apps, because I think my continued joy at being in tech depends on it.

mikedelfino 2y ago
Does Visual Studio Code qualify as a desktop app?
- robenkleene 2y ago
  Visual Studio Code is an interesting case study. I don't know how I'd categorize it. In the past I've noted how absolutely glacial it is with some tasks, and it's baffling to me how this stuff doesn't drive folks insane (much like the enjoyment of web apps is baffling to me), I guess people just care about different things: 1. It takes nine times as long as Vim to open a minified JavaScript file, and then format it with Prettier: https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1285631026648276993 https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1285631026648276993 2. It takes 14 times as long to open an empty text file than BBEdit: https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1257724392458661889 https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1257724392458661889 (Note those time trials are years old, this may be different now.) But even though VS Code is objectively slow for some tasks, I would still categorize it as extremely high-quality software. So at the end of the day, I don't know. VS Code isn't for me, but I'm not confounded by it having fans the same way I'm confounded by web apps in general having fans.
prmph 2y ago
Native apps don't offer deep liking and bookmarking. You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. Your data is usually tied to the specific devices you are using. Unless carefully designed, desktop apps might not be responsive or adaptive to various viewport sizes. I know native apps are likely faster and use the full capabilities of he device, but the advantages of web apps are too many. Also, web app failing to inspire joy is a indictment of developers who don't care, not of the medium itself.
- cosmic_cheese 2y ago
  All these depend a lot on the app in question. Native mac apps for example get a whole tabbing system for free so long as they support multiple windows (and most apps that one might want tabs in do). Deep linking is not difficult to implement in native apps and in fact some do. As far as tying data to devices goes, with the exception of apps built around databases this is usually trivially changed by placing the data in question in a folder synced with SyncThing/iCloud/OneDrive/etc and most importantly gives you the choice, whereas many web apps will happily keep you pent up in their cloud with little or no capability to export full-fidelity data.
- xyzzy_plugh 2y ago
  > Native apps don't offer deep liking and bookmarking. You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. Sure they do, and sure you can. It's up to developers to support, but it's certainly doable. I think you hit the nail on the head in the subsequent sentence: native apps need to be carefully designed to compete with web apps. No one cares enough to do that.
- robenkleene 2y ago
  > Native apps don't offer deep linking and bookmarking. Sharing files is trivial, and just putting files in a folder is the file-native to find something again (i.e., bookmark). Personal preference whether one of these systems is better or worse than the other, personally I'd just call them different. But I would specifically callout collaboration on a single document as a strong suit of web apps. E.g., two people editing the same document (like a Google Doc) is pretty much the only task that I'd prefer a web app for. Also referencing a single specific line in a document. Again I use web apps for doing that (e.g., find the exact line number of some code on GitHub to share), but I can't say I enjoy the process. > You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. I'm mainly talking about desktop apps, which today almost always support multiple windows and/or tabs. Might be missing what you're getting at here, are you talking about mobile apps? I'm pretty sure iOS also supports multiple instances of apps, but I don't need this functionality often enough myself to care. Again, maybe I'm missing what you mean here? > Your data is usually tied to the specific devices you are using. I don't think this has been problem since the first release of Dropbox in 2007? Again I might be missing something, but native apps are either file-based in which you can easily sync the file, or are a front-end for a database, in which most apps have a way to sync across devices? Syncing is kind of table-stakes for apps these days. > Unless carefully designed, desktop apps might not be responsive or adaptive to various viewport sizes. I'd argue this is more of a problem on the web than desktop, a well-designed desktop app will enforce a sensical minimum window size, whereas in my experience most web apps absolutely fall apart when you shrink them too small. > Also, web app failing to inspire joy is a indictment of developers who don't care, not of the medium itself. I don't agree with this type of reasoning, i.e., I don't look at a technology and say "there's nothing stopping it from making great software!" Instead I look at how great software is being made, and then prefer that technology. At the end of the day the only real proof that great software can be made using a technology is the great software itself.

mikedelfino 2y ago

Does Visual Studio Code qualify as a desktop app?

robenkleene 2y ago
Visual Studio Code is an interesting case study. I don't know how I'd categorize it. In the past I've noted how absolutely glacial it is with some tasks, and it's baffling to me how this stuff doesn't drive folks insane (much like the enjoyment of web apps is baffling to me), I guess people just care about different things: 1. It takes nine times as long as Vim to open a minified JavaScript file, and then format it with Prettier: https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1285631026648276993 https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1285631026648276993 2. It takes 14 times as long to open an empty text file than BBEdit: https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1257724392458661889 https://twitter.com/robenkleene/status/1257724392458661889 (Note those time trials are years old, this may be different now.) But even though VS Code is objectively slow for some tasks, I would still categorize it as extremely high-quality software. So at the end of the day, I don't know. VS Code isn't for me, but I'm not confounded by it having fans the same way I'm confounded by web apps in general having fans.

prmph 2y ago

Native apps don't offer deep liking and bookmarking. You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. Your data is usually tied to the specific devices you are using. Unless carefully designed, desktop apps might not be responsive or adaptive to various viewport sizes. I know native apps are likely faster and use the full capabilities of he device, but the advantages of web apps are too many. Also, web app failing to inspire joy is a indictment of developers who don't care, not of the medium itself.

cosmic_cheese 2y ago
All these depend a lot on the app in question. Native mac apps for example get a whole tabbing system for free so long as they support multiple windows (and most apps that one might want tabs in do). Deep linking is not difficult to implement in native apps and in fact some do. As far as tying data to devices goes, with the exception of apps built around databases this is usually trivially changed by placing the data in question in a folder synced with SyncThing/iCloud/OneDrive/etc and most importantly gives you the choice, whereas many web apps will happily keep you pent up in their cloud with little or no capability to export full-fidelity data.
xyzzy_plugh 2y ago
> Native apps don't offer deep liking and bookmarking. You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. Sure they do, and sure you can. It's up to developers to support, but it's certainly doable. I think you hit the nail on the head in the subsequent sentence: native apps need to be carefully designed to compete with web apps. No one cares enough to do that.
robenkleene 2y ago
> Native apps don't offer deep linking and bookmarking. Sharing files is trivial, and just putting files in a folder is the file-native to find something again (i.e., bookmark). Personal preference whether one of these systems is better or worse than the other, personally I'd just call them different. But I would specifically callout collaboration on a single document as a strong suit of web apps. E.g., two people editing the same document (like a Google Doc) is pretty much the only task that I'd prefer a web app for. Also referencing a single specific line in a document. Again I use web apps for doing that (e.g., find the exact line number of some code on GitHub to share), but I can't say I enjoy the process. > You can't easily open multiple instances of the app in multiple tabs. I'm mainly talking about desktop apps, which today almost always support multiple windows and/or tabs. Might be missing what you're getting at here, are you talking about mobile apps? I'm pretty sure iOS also supports multiple instances of apps, but I don't need this functionality often enough myself to care. Again, maybe I'm missing what you mean here? > Your data is usually tied to the specific devices you are using. I don't think this has been problem since the first release of Dropbox in 2007? Again I might be missing something, but native apps are either file-based in which you can easily sync the file, or are a front-end for a database, in which most apps have a way to sync across devices? Syncing is kind of table-stakes for apps these days. > Unless carefully designed, desktop apps might not be responsive or adaptive to various viewport sizes. I'd argue this is more of a problem on the web than desktop, a well-designed desktop app will enforce a sensical minimum window size, whereas in my experience most web apps absolutely fall apart when you shrink them too small. > Also, web app failing to inspire joy is a indictment of developers who don't care, not of the medium itself. I don't agree with this type of reasoning, i.e., I don't look at a technology and say "there's nothing stopping it from making great software!" Instead I look at how great software is being made, and then prefer that technology. At the end of the day the only real proof that great software can be made using a technology is the great software itself.