5 ms·
The author is not contesting that the app experience is better. Yeah, the web experience is worse -- because the product people are treating the entire web pre
by montroser 1y ago
The author is not contesting that the app experience is better. Yeah, the web experience is worse -- because the product people are treating the entire web presence as a _marketing surface_ for the app. So, the web version is basically an ad for the app. This is true of Reddit, Yelp, and others. How could it not be worse?
It's too bad because it's not like the web is incapable of providing a beautiful ux for those products. But then so why do you think these companies employ massive teams of devs, for Android, and then again for iOS, reimplementing their functionality on every platform? All that to provide you with that sweet extra smooth native "feel", 2% nicer than the web could do? No, it's not for you...
- dylan604 1y ago> No, it's not for you... This is key. Companies pushing apps is not for your benefit. It's so they can further monetize you right under your nose and with your full permission by accepting their EULA. This is just a furtherance of the if you don't pay for the product you are the product.
- charcircuit 1y agoCompanies still have to provide value for them to attract users. It's cynical to only look at the value the company gets and ignoring the value users and advertisers get.
- immibis 1y agoCompanies have to provide the perception of providing value.
- johnnyanmac 1y agoI argue that this decade shows you do not have to provide value. You capture the market yester-decade and then you can hold the users hostage as you do any and everything to appeal to shareholders and advertisers. This is indeed a short term strategy, but tech companies right now are thinking very short term.
- notyourwork 1y agoAgreed, this is post-capture monetization.
- charcircuit 1y agoHow do you hold users hostage without providing them value?
- johnnyanmac 1y agoNostalgia, network effects, and boiling thr frog. Then you build on that with business incentives; you may not like Facebook, but you need to advertise there because that's where everyone is. Basically, you rely on goodwill from yester-year and slowly ad in intrusive stuff that users adjust to. Thars enshittification in its raw essence. Admittedly, this mostly works because the general user is not "active" and will not take the time to migrate unless something absolutely scandalous happens. For them, it's easier putting up with ads than trying to log into an ad free substitute.
- charcircuit 1y agoNostalgia changes how people perceive value. Network effects is about how exponential value can be gained from linear user growth. Boiling the frog us about slowly doing things to avoid changing how people perceive value. None of these are a sign a product has no value. No one would advertise with Facebook if there was no value from purchasing ad space. The billions of dollars people spend is evidence there is value there for advertisers. >will not take the time to migrate Sure, people don't actively seek to maximize the value they receive, but that doesn't mean what they are currently getting value from doesn't have value.
- thfuran 1y ago> None of these are a sign a product has no value. You described the majority of those as being about the perception of value rather than value. >No one would advertise with Facebook if there was no value from purchasing ad space. The billions of dollars people spend is evidence there is value there for advertisers No one is disputing that the advertisers are getting value. The pursuit of advertiser value at the expense of users is the complaint.
- II2II 1y agoTake Reddit, which is one of the few sites mentioned here that I use. At least initially, the value provided is getting rid of the constant prompts to load the site in the Reddit app. Even though I use old.reddit.com, which doesn't have those prompts, there are times when it redirects me to the new website automatically. Does it offer value beyond getting rid of those messages? Perhaps, but I doubt that it is the type of value that I would be looking for.
- charcircuit 1y agoHow about the value of being able to talk to people who share the same hobby you do. Or the value of being able to see a community made wiki about some topic you are trying to learn about. Even being able to see cat pictures is valuable to people.
- thfuran 1y agoYou can do that on the website.
- charcircuit 1y agoI never claimed it doesn't.
- thfuran 1y agoThen what was your claim?
- charcircuit 1y agoThat the mobile app is providing value to people. So companies paying to make the app are also providing value to people.
- dylan604 1y agoif the website already provides the value, there is no need for the app. instead, they cripple the website to push people to the app. why? it is more profitable for the company because of the data they can get from the app. doesn't matter if the UX is worse for the user. they only need to make it just usable enough
- thfuran 1y agoWe have moved beyond that. Even if you pay, you’re usually still the product.
- dylan604 1y agomoving beyond is usually what happens when something is furtheranced
- bornfreddy 1y agoIt is - from the company point of view.
- dylan604 1y agoIsn’t that precisely the point with this thread? It’s all from the company’s perspective. They’ve just gaslit the users into thinking it is from the user’s perspective.
- fiddlerwoaroof 1y ago> It's too bad because it's not like the web is incapable of providing a beautiful ux for those products. I’ve never seen a web app I was happy with being a web app. I understand that a lot of people prefer web-based tools but a lot of us cannot stand them and try to get our work out of the browser as much as possible because we dislike the UX of the browser platform.
- aiisjustanif 1y agoHow about Google Flights as an example?
- fiddlerwoaroof 1y agoI’ve never really used Google flights: I tend to buy delta tickets either on my desktop via the website or via the Delta mobile app. I prefer the Apple Weather app on desktop and mobile to weather websites, though; and, I prefer the Google Map mobile app to mobile website.
- DirkH 1y agoG maps is surprisingly doable. Been using it as a web app for years now whenever my main map app CityMapper fails.
- hiAndrewQuinn 1y agoThe web is definitely incapable of hacking the speed of light, though. And if you want truly instantaneous search - I mean deterministic, keystroke by keystroke - you have to put your data as close to the customer as possible, ideally right on the same device, ideally right in the same process. Is this necessary for most commercial projects? Of course not. But many of the programs I consider the nicest to work with today are that way precisely because someone fought back against the call of the network.
- ludicrousdispla 1y agoI wonder if that explains why focus and scroll (via arrow keys and page up/down) is broken on so many websites.