3 ms·

Rehashing part of my comment from a different article: I don't see why any reasonable developer would choose building the same app on multiple platforms over b

Rehashing part of my comment from a different article: I don't see why any reasonable developer would choose building the same app on multiple platforms over building it once on a standardized platform and having it just work everywhere. That is, of course, if the standardized platform had all the capabilities and great UX of the proprietary platforms. This is where the web often falls short, and the companies behind proprietary platforms have some very sweet incentives to keep it that way, i.e. developer lock-in and maintaining complete control over the platform's direction. Despite all the impediments, I still firmly believe an open platform will triumph eventually, because developers love efficiency, and the current landscape of wasting work on rebuilding for proprietary platforms is anything but efficient. In fact, the web is already capable of competing with native in terms of general UX, not yet quite enough to match or surpass it, but definitely within striking distance. Just take a look at some of the apps made with Ionic: http://showcase.ionicframework.com/ http://showcase.ionicframework.com/ Additional tip for for Android Cordova development: bundling an external WebView like Crosswalk makes quite a bit of difference for <5.0, both in terms of performance and in terms of not having to worry about legacy WebView quirks for older phones.

s73v3r 11y ago
"I don't see why any reasonable developer would choose building the same app on multiple platforms over building it once on a standardized platform and having it just work everywhere." Because it provides a better experience for the user, and because it allows for access to hardware native features.
- lewisl9029 11y ago
  Yes, but that's a side effect of native already having better UX and more capabilities. "That is, of course, if the standardized platform had all the capabilities and great UX of the proprietary platforms. This is where the web often falls short, and the companies behind proprietary platforms have some very sweet incentives to keep it that way, i.e. developer lock-in and maintaining complete control over the platform's direction." Given the choice of a standardized platform that offers the same UX and features, would anyone still choose to develop for proprietary platforms? That ideal standardized platform doesn't exist right now, but the web is getting closer and closer to being that platform. It doesn't make sense to give up all the progress we've made so far and resign to native when the web is already almost there.

s73v3r 11y ago

"I don't see why any reasonable developer would choose building the same app on multiple platforms over building it once on a standardized platform and having it just work everywhere." Because it provides a better experience for the user, and because it allows for access to hardware native features.

lewisl9029 11y ago
Yes, but that's a side effect of native already having better UX and more capabilities. "That is, of course, if the standardized platform had all the capabilities and great UX of the proprietary platforms. This is where the web often falls short, and the companies behind proprietary platforms have some very sweet incentives to keep it that way, i.e. developer lock-in and maintaining complete control over the platform's direction." Given the choice of a standardized platform that offers the same UX and features, would anyone still choose to develop for proprietary platforms? That ideal standardized platform doesn't exist right now, but the web is getting closer and closer to being that platform. It doesn't make sense to give up all the progress we've made so far and resign to native when the web is already almost there.