Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

hueniverse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 322 posts

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#41

Post by aeorgnoieang »

joeblau wrote: post #18
brlewis wrote: post #4

"One app for iOS, one for Android, and I got over 90% consumer coverage" What's the consumer coverage for Mobile Chrome + Mobile Safari? Giving up on total cross-browser compatibility doesn't have to mean writing native apps.

The coverage is probably pretty high, but you're limited by each browsers respective feature set. There may be functionality that you can't ship due to limits on multiple browsers. Other issues arise if you factor in sites which needs to take into account all browsers; You'll end up bloating your JS/CSS to handle all of these conditions impacting mobile page size. It can be done, if the product is fairly simple, but…

"Giving up on total cross-browser compatibility" seems like it would entirely avoid "sites which needs to take into account all browsers".

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#42

Post by andrewclunn »

He forgot to mention how web frameworks come and go, and then you've got this legacy code nightmare. Also breaking upgrades and dependency hell. I'm a front end web developer, and yeah. If your building something simple, the web is the way to go, but his complaints are totally on spot.

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#44

Post by dzolvd »

54mf wrote: post #23

"You want mobile notifications? Sure, but not on mobile Safari." You can do this with PhoneGap. "Multiple line ellipsis? Sure, but only on webkit." Okay, yeah, this sucks. "Consistent rendering size across browsers? Just fuck off." This is probably your fault. "We fix a layout bug on Safari and break something on Edge." This is probably your fault. "We change font size on Chrome and now all you can see on Firefox is…

This. +1 for PhoneGap, we are sharing a single codebase between a mobile web interface, iOS app, and android app and have managed to keep it fairly clean.

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#45

Post by weego »

asimuvPR wrote: post #25
mikestew wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is also pretty substantive. Fuckity fuck fuck fuck you, and shut the fuck up, dear reader. More fuckity fuck because the author has a keyboard macro that expands "," to "fuck". I don't know, I thought it was pretty much a waste of my time. Read the top of the page you're looking at right now, read my first sentence. There, saved you a few minutes.

It does make a couple of interesting points: 1. The cost of building an app can be calculated in the back of a napkin. The cost of a web app that works consistently across devices? Not so much. 2. The cost of building backend services has been commoditised to a degree. Front end web development? Its downright hard finding someone that can do good front end web work. 3. The reality that big companies (silos) will push…

If the idea of the cost of an android app is will it work fine on a Samsung galaxy 1 behind the current gen then sure a napkin will work.

I feel like doing anything non trivial for Android with a wide target audience is not always any more reliable than the Web experience claimed in the article

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#47

Post by forgotAgain »

dang wrote: post #3

Although a rant, this is also pretty substantive. We've replaced the baity title with a representative sentence from the article in the hope that commenters will follow suit.

Substantive but not new and something that could have been said in much fewer words. If the baity title had been left alone I would have been saved a waste of time.

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#49

Post by tootie »

mikeryan wrote: post #17

One app for iOS, one for Android, and I got over 90% consumer coverage However with a huge friction point of requiring users to download and install an app.

And not being searchable or deep linkable or shareable.

Re: It’s cheaper to build multiple native applications than one responsive web app

#50

Post by stcredzero »

deanCommie wrote: post #38
54mf wrote: post #23

"You want mobile notifications? Sure, but not on mobile Safari." You can do this with PhoneGap. "Multiple line ellipsis? Sure, but only on webkit." Okay, yeah, this sucks. "Consistent rendering size across browsers? Just fuck off." This is probably your fault. "We fix a layout bug on Safari and break something on Edge." This is probably your fault. "We change font size on Chrome and now all you can see on Firefox is…

Did we read the same article? What is this condescending bullshit. Nobody is arguing these things CAN'T be done, just that it's too much effort on the web, and the only web devs that know the ins and outs of every browser enough to make it work are unaffordable and unavailable.

the only web devs that know the ins and outs of every browser enough to make it work are unaffordable and unavailable.

The market has spoken. Doing those things is hard enough, people can charge lots for it.

That sucks. "Sucks" == suffering. Suffering == opportunity. (Deliberate Yodaism. Actually high market price == market opportunity.)

Post reply on HN