3 ms·
There are many reasons to prefer an app, most of which are ways OS makers have crippled web apps for reasons that TOTALLY HAVE NOTHING TO DO with the fact that
by johnecheck 2mo ago
There are many reasons to prefer an app, most of which are ways OS makers have crippled web apps for reasons that TOTALLY HAVE NOTHING TO DO with the fact that they get a 30% cut if the user chooses the native app.
- esaym 2mo agoYes, this
- tcfhgj 2mo agoOne important which is not included: web apps are resource hogs
- stackghost 2mo agoElectron and React apps, perhaps. It's completely feasible to build a webapp that is lightweight. I have done it several times.
- gxs 2mo agoOr just shitty developers that never give things a second - just sayin
- tcfhgj 2mo agoput the same optimization effort into a native app
- johnecheck 2mo agoWhy?
- tcfhgj 2mo agoto avoid comparing apples with oranges
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- pjmlp 2mo agoWebviews are not much better since Window 98 Active Desktop, yet here we are.
- palata 2mo agoThis is wrong. The most important reasons why I prefer mobile apps are the same as why I prefer desktop programs. - I can download it once and then use it. - I can see when it gets updated (versus a website that gets updated every time I load it). For security reasons it's better, I can even verify my app with other people online and make sure we run the same thing. - End-to-end encryption doesn't make much sense in a webpage, because I fundamentally have to trust the server (which serves me the whole app I run every time). If you care about end-to-end encryption, you want an app. - For open source apps, I can audit the code, possibly edit it, and use it. I cannot do that with a webpage. - I exclusively use free apps, so 30% of zero is... zero.
- Akronymus 2mo ago> - I can see when it gets updated (versus a website that gets updated every time I load it). For security reasons it's better, I can even verify my app with other people online and make sure we run the same thing. in many cases this is no longer the case. Discord, for example, has introduced capabilities to update parts of the app without goung through the play store on android, same with youtube. Which they obviously use to enshittify things against your will.
- palata 2mo agoI understand your point, but I am not sure how relevant it is to use bad practice as a criticism of the technology itself. Like I can write a modern C++ program that will be orders of magnitudes slower than an interpreted Java program from the 90s. But that does not mean that C++ is slower than interpreted Java: just that I can't write software, right? If I care about security, then I choose apps that I believe are built correctly. I do happen to believe that ProtonMail is built correctly, and Signal as well. But it remains that because of how the technology works, the end-to-end encryption happening in ProtonMail requires me to trust the server, which defeats the point of end-to-end encryption in the first place [1]. [1]: to be fair, it does not defeat the purpose of ProtonMail entirely. It helps me trust that ProtonMail doesn't massively store data of all the users. But it is weaker because Proton can easily target me personally, and Signal cannot.
- 2mo ago