Live data from Hacker News

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

hueniverse.com

141–150 of 322 posts

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

#141

Seems like you're deferring one dragon for another. Deliver the project got easier; "Control the customer" got significantly harder. You've now got someone's app store in the middle of your customer relationships and are exposed to approval drama, various forms of revenue squeeze, and other meddling from the platform owner. What happens if the folks running the platform decide to launch their own offering? Speaking a…

Apps don't have to be downloaded from stores, thought that certainly does make things nice.

On iPhone they do, and I doubt you'll have much luck getting the average Android user to side-load either.

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

#142
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…

> You can disable autocomplete

You can, but it makes you pretty much the literal devil.

Don't disable my autocomplete.

> TL;DR: "We tried to make a responsive web app act like a native app and it didn't work because it doesn't work, and that makes me a grumpy goose."

It makes him grumpy because he can't get users what they want.

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

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehhh.... These examples seem really amateurish to me. You'll run into lots of issues developing for the web, sure, it's not perfect. Especially web "apps" that need to work cross-browser. But the listed problems stem from not understanding your platform, not problems inherent to the web itself. To make an analogy, it's like the equivalent writing a native app where input and UI rendering are handled by the same threa…

I thought the attraction of web development was that you just write something once and it works on all browsers. If you have to write it 8 times then what's the attraction? Often people show me "tech demos", by which they apparently mean something you'd never bother to show anyone else if it was an app or a game, but because it's running in a browser window and because it doesn't look like yet another shitty website…

> I thought the attraction of web development was that you just write something once and it works on all browsers. If you have to write it 8 times then what's the attraction?

You generally only have to write it once. But you've gotta write it right. The other attractions are no installs, just visit a web page. No users with "out of date" clients, you just serve the updated page to users. A sandboxed environment to run in. Ease of sharing (URLs). The DOM, while slow, is also rather nice if your layout model resembles documents. There's a million reasons why web might be the better choice. There's also a million reasons to prefer native.

> Often people show me "tech demos", by which they apparently mean something you'd never bother to show anyone else if it was an app or a game, but because it's running in a browser window and because it doesn't look like yet another shitty website (because it has something that moves, or which you can interact with in some limited way) it's supposed to somehow impress me. I don't get it.

Usually these are showing off new features available in the browser that weren't present before. And they can do a hell of a lot more than let you interact with it in some limited way, or move an object. How about an entire 3d Modeling Application in your browser? (Warning may lag a mobile device or slow PC)

http://www.3dtin.com/

But these are crazy, cutting-edge things that are still best done natively. Most of the time you're not making a 3d Modeling application. 99% of the time an "app" is something that shows text and images, and takes text (and sometimes images) from the user. You can make it super flashy, and that's where a native app would excel. But does it really need to be flashy? Does a cruise line's ticket booking app really need to show water flowing across the screen while you load the next page, and a tugboat pulling in prices? Or are these gimmicks that will just end up pissing off the user?

I guess I really just disagree with the blanket statements by the author. Native probably was a better call for their app, but they don't focus on why. Just that web supposedly sucks... Instead of learning the strong suites of web and native, and why they thought web worked for their app but it didn't, they've "learned" to not touch the web. Which I think is the wrong lesson.

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

#144
post #66

I don't think that's remotely true if you keep the responsive web app simple. YNGNI and KISS and what not. I've been doing this for over ten years. In that time I've seen large web applications built for under 4k; I've also seen massively overbuilt simple applications go for 50k+. It comes down to often how needlessly complex you make the stack. If you stick with solid simple guaranteed tech instead of cutting edge y…

What would you consider the web of a couple years ago/solid simple guaranteed tech?

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

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author is already addressing this: Yes, you can build 2007 websites much better now. They will be consistent across platforms and perform great. But my 12 year olds don’t want 2007 websites. They want 2016 apps.

12 year olds don't have money, I would wait till people are at least 16 to care if they use my app...

[deleted]

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

#146
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just check a couple times a day... honestly, I'm usually too busy when I'm not checking HN to deal with a reply right at any given moment anyway. It's a forum.

As do I, but the conversations I have on HN are more fascinating to me, so I'd actually rather have push-notifications on HN than Reddit. The biggest thing is still a better way to browse/post on iOS.

Dunno, I'd be okay with web notifications via chrome.

Though that some clickbait sites are asking for that permission is really irritating... I mean more so than interstitial or late-loading ads that push content down.

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

#147
post #40

Ehhhh, I really haven't had these issues with any of the meteor apps I've made. Even getting swiping and full page animation transitions has been relatively simple. My experience is anecdotal, but I actually left being android developer to do mobile web and I've found the experience to be far easier.

Similar experience here using Meteor + Ionic, exported with Cordova. I also feel like the skills I'm developing in web development are much more widely applicable than learning a particular mobile OS.

I often hear this. I tend tp agree but what exactly do you mean? That Javascript is used more widely?

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

#148
One thing we tend to forget as developers is that in any industrial process, there needs to be technical limitations enforcing requirements before requirements enforce technical specifications. We tend to be too easy because everything seems achievable with software systems.

A project should start by considering political things such as: is it smart to have this particular application hosted in a marketplace. Right after that, the chief engineer should be consulted to know the technical approach (platform, stack, etc...) that should be used, and the technical limitations that the requirements should observe to allow the development effort to be successful and efficient.

The more self-imposed technical constraints are observed, the more successful and easy the development will be - and passed a certain point, the more difficult it becomes to sell the product or service.

Applying this reasoning to the article, to me the problem is the very thing they have decided to develop.

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

#149
post #15

I guess he hasn't heard of React Native...

React Native is no panacea. For example, Discord has found it unsuitable for Android so far. [1] https://discord.engineering/using-react-native-one-year-late...

They tried it for Android at the "early stages". It may be better now ?

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

#150
The author of the article ignores user experience: it is much nicer to use a web app than install yet another app. Personally I don't like installing web apps, even if they don't ask for a lot of permissions. Also re: notifications: I think most users don't like to be interupted by notifications.
Post reply on HN