3 ms·

This might be heresy round here, but I make the same argument for desktop as well. For one example, my native apps use a consistent application menu framework p

This might be heresy round here, but I make the same argument for desktop as well. For one example, my native apps use a consistent application menu framework provided by my OS, yet every time I'm in a browser app I get a completely different experience, with no commonality between different vendors. There's poor integration of copy/paste; no integration with the file system; a 'back' button that nukes the whole app; keyboard shortcuts that kinda sorta work, but only if they don't step on the browser's own... It's like using DOS applications all over again. Until web apps can run in a first-class embedded Javascript runtime with equal access to the OS's native frameworks, web apps are going to continue being second class citizens. Part of me thinks they're only popular now because developers like working on them.

camus2 13y ago
> Until web apps can run in a first-class embedded Javascript runtime with equal access to the OS's native frameworks If they have equal access then they are not webapps anymore,just native apps written with web technologies. A HTML/JS app that doesnt live in the browser is not a web app. "Web apps" are websites, that take advantage of web apis(ajax,...). Web apis can only be found in browsers. Devs cant have it both ways,they cant get native feel,performance and portability. Something portable means something trade-offs regarding the native api. The problem exposed with the op is,do users like web apps? especially on phones,where resources are limited,users impatients and used to the os features and where poor performances are not tolerated. I believe if one really cares about user experience ,one should write native apps,where the core UI isnt a webview. now if your "app" can be a mobile website,no need for an "app" at first place.
mwcampbell 13y ago
I think that if Mac had been the dominant desktop platform, native desktop apps would still be more popular. For one thing, Mac emphasizes UI consistency more than Windows; observe that even Microsoft Office and the (now abandoned) Windows Live Essentials desktop apps don't use native Win32 controls. For that matter, even a lot of Windows utilities don't use standard Win32 coontrols for everything; Microsoft has an internal GUI toolkit called DirectUser that is used in various forms across several MS products. And this brings me to a reason why native Windows apps aren't popular among developers today: lack of a single good native GUI solution. Win32 is plain ugly, and shows its age. Windows Forms was stillborn, as Joel Spolsky said in "How Microsoft Lost the API War". WPF may be good for .NET apps, but Microsoft doesn't use it in their flagship products; that's hardly a vote of confidence. And now there's WinRT/Metro, which is cool... if you want to ignore the large installed base of pre-Win8 users. Is it any wonder that so many developers just decided to use web technologies instead?

camus2 13y ago

> Until web apps can run in a first-class embedded Javascript runtime with equal access to the OS's native frameworks If they have equal access then they are not webapps anymore,just native apps written with web technologies. A HTML/JS app that doesnt live in the browser is not a web app. "Web apps" are websites, that take advantage of web apis(ajax,...). Web apis can only be found in browsers. Devs cant have it both ways,they cant get native feel,performance and portability. Something portable means something trade-offs regarding the native api. The problem exposed with the op is,do users like web apps? especially on phones,where resources are limited,users impatients and used to the os features and where poor performances are not tolerated. I believe if one really cares about user experience ,one should write native apps,where the core UI isnt a webview. now if your "app" can be a mobile website,no need for an "app" at first place.

mwcampbell 13y ago

I think that if Mac had been the dominant desktop platform, native desktop apps would still be more popular. For one thing, Mac emphasizes UI consistency more than Windows; observe that even Microsoft Office and the (now abandoned) Windows Live Essentials desktop apps don't use native Win32 controls. For that matter, even a lot of Windows utilities don't use standard Win32 coontrols for everything; Microsoft has an internal GUI toolkit called DirectUser that is used in various forms across several MS products. And this brings me to a reason why native Windows apps aren't popular among developers today: lack of a single good native GUI solution. Win32 is plain ugly, and shows its age. Windows Forms was stillborn, as Joel Spolsky said in "How Microsoft Lost the API War". WPF may be good for .NET apps, but Microsoft doesn't use it in their flagship products; that's hardly a vote of confidence. And now there's WinRT/Metro, which is cool... if you want to ignore the large installed base of pre-Win8 users. Is it any wonder that so many developers just decided to use web technologies instead?