3 ms·
There's quite a bit of hyperbole in this talk. Some web apps do in fact come close to native, but to the trained eye of a Facebook software engineer it will fee
by marknutter 12y ago
There's quite a bit of hyperbole in this talk. Some web apps do in fact come close to native, but to the trained eye of a Facebook software engineer it will feel miles behind. Your average Joe doesn't give a shit, as long as they can use the app. If they did, Facebook's Paper wouldn't have been such a flop.
- tomocchino 12y agoThis is absolutely a great point, and honestly, I used this exact argument early on in the development of React Native to convince folks that cared a ton about craft and were super worried about performance, that it's more important to make sure you have a reliable application that adds value to peoples' lives, before you even earn the right to start thinking about craft. My phrasing was somewhat hyperbolic, but I basically said: "Do you honestly think that a person, in the middle of a natural disaster, trying to determine whether or not their family and friends are okay, gives a sh about 60fps animations?" The real value of React Native is that it allows engineers who know React (and React is really, really easy to learn btw), to build great feeling applications without putting in a ton of effort. Sure, it's possible to get close enough on web, but it's really, really hard to do so. One of the things we tout in product infrastructure at Facebook is that when building frameworks, you need to enable engineers to fall into the "pit of success". The asynchronous nature of this implementation allows application logic to be run off the main thread by default, which we think is a huge advantage over a traditional web model.
- marknutter 12y agoThe best part of React Native, if it can deliver on its promises, is that it will provide web developers with a toolset they can use that will satisfy customers or product managers who demand perfect native experiences (whether or not it makes business sense to demand it). I think the poor reviews of Facebook's HTML5 mobile app shook the company to the core and they swung a bit far in the other direction, abandoning the possibility that the web will ever be mobile ready. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle; no, you can't get native performance from the web, but you can get close. And every year it gets a little closer because phones are getting ridiculously powerful. All this said, I think Facebook's approach to the platform fragmentation problem is clever and worth checking out, but I'd still bet on HTML5 over the long term.
- CmonDev 12y agoDon't underestimate the users. They might use different words, but their comments and ratings will tell the story of web/hybrid suffering. Unfortunately web is not meant for apps, but for interactive documents.
- marknutter 12y agoDon't overestimate users either. It's very easy to build for other geeks rather than the General public. Netflix apps are almost all built using web technologies and it doesn't seem to bother most users. I think there's been an overemphasis on pixel perfect UI and on UX in general but people don't want nice UI's, they want useful apps.
- Glide 12y agoFor Netflix, the interface can only get in the way. People are there to watch movies and that's basically it. You can't "nail" the interface like you can with applications you interact with more. It feels like there is a bias against web based apps in general because I usually have a bad experience with them or stop using an application when I get annoyed with the user experience. I'm sure it's possible to create a good user experience with a non-native toolkit. It just seems like the people that really give a damn go native in order to offer a better experience.
- marknutter 12y ago> For Netflix, the interface can only get in the way. I would argue that for most apps, the interface can only get in the way - Facebook included.