281–290 of 451 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Native apps are the new desktop apps. OK for gaming, overkill and gaping privacy hole for everything else.
Because web apps are certainly very good at protecting privacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with emulating a FAT32 disk? I mean, the expected workflow is: I hook up the device to the computer, it shows up as a storage medium in my system. I can move files between the device and my computer as if it was an external disk or USB drive. Anything on top of that is designed to be annoying.
FAT32 is a terribly outdated filesystem and should just not be used today, period. The filesize and name restrictions are awful. Mrkrabo does have a point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a developer, I would love push notifications in safari. The only alternative is a native app, which is much more work.
As a user, I think crappy or unethical web developers would ruin it for everybody. At least with native apps, there's a somewhat consistent way for me to manage notifications (and I have 95% of them turned off).
Notifications are tough to do as is - and a core user need. You and I might turn them off, but many people rely on them heavily. If I have responsive web app with notifications - that's the dream for me. because I don't want to have to build a native app JUST for that. Nor, should many others need to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can make a a native app, which will always be better than a webapp. As an iOS user, I have no intention of ever using webapps (including things like Cordova apps). If you can’t be bothered to make a iOS-native app with iOS native look, feel and features then just don’t bother.
As an iOS user, do you ever use websites that are more than plain hypertext, even if they don't try to have an iOS native look?
That's fine for them, but ultimately, I think we've got far too many apps with crappy UIs.
So what's the the real value to the platform and the people who use it for another source of them?
I hate using web apps. On desktop, mobile, wherever. The author's list of things they want supported by Mobile Safari is just aggravating: > Here are a list of things you still can’t do with mobile safari due to Apple’s refusal to support them: > > Create an app loading screen > Use push notifications > Add offline support > Create an initial app UI to load instantly > Prompt installation to the home screen through b…
I use the Facebook site added to my homescreen rather than a native app. Uses way less space & does everything I want Facebook to be able to do. I don't want push notifications from every site, but in this case it's valuable. I wish it worked offline-first, but I know it's something they're looking at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not surprising of Apple. They've always been a walled garden, that's why I don't buy their products. I like to own products that give me full control as a user. When the iPod came out, I never understood why I couldn't just drag the music files directly onto the device and I had to get iTunes and use iTune's tedious interface. Now they have the app store; another unnecessary restriction. As a developer, it's…
The "walled garden" is what prevents the horrendous disjointed mess that is the Android phone market. Sure, for a guy who likes hacking around stuff, it's fun for you. But for everyone else, there is a thousand different phones, with a thousand different interfaces, all running different versions of the Android OS, that will never be updated by the phone manufacturer. I understand where you're coming from, I do. But…
Your argument seems to indicate that you just like iPhones better. Otherwise, I think you would have said "I'd prefer that our company either standardize on one model of Android phone or the iPhone." because both would have the same effect - things would be easier to troubleshoot and manage since everyone would be running the same thing.
Anyway, currently as an iPhone user I think Apple comes up massively short on basic features. For instance - on an $800 phone they're missing a physical message-waiting indicator light! That's completely absurd to me. Some others: You can't have multiple users (and this is big for the Enterprise). You can't put app icons wherever you want, you have to stick them all together in one big pile on the screen. You can't see the time a text message came in until you perform a non-obvious gesture. You can't see anything useful in the call history list until you click an item. You can't even change the default browser!
It's no wonder to me why Enterprise customers don't standardize on the iPhone - they'd be giving up all control to Apple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at it from the opposite perspective though: "because I only want to develop webapps, the web itself should be bloated to contain everything I need to create apps already possible elsewhere." "Because that's not the way I want to develop" is not a good enough reason to increase complexity, security footprint, and unintended side effects.
That's cheeky. "because I only want to develop webapps, the web itself should be bloated to contain everything I need to create apps already possible elsewhere." I think the point is rather that single-codebase "productivity apps" that satisfy basic modern experience expectations (like "I could run it offline") are not possible elsewhere - but they should be. And they would be, if some browser vendors cared about the…
Developing for a single platform and being able to run everywhere is great. I'm not sure what your "not possible elsewhere" is referring to, though. Java is one example of a language that's possible to deploy pretty much everywhere. Or do you mean natively in a browser?
While it's true that as a developer I'm free to use or not use any newly-introduced features and standards, as a consumer I don't have that choice. I either continue to use the sites and services I did before they changed everything, or I have to find an alternative which may not exist. Remember all the sites that required flash to run? That's what I want to avoid with responsive web apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not surprising of Apple. They've always been a walled garden, that's why I don't buy their products. I like to own products that give me full control as a user. When the iPod came out, I never understood why I couldn't just drag the music files directly onto the device and I had to get iTunes and use iTune's tedious interface. Now they have the app store; another unnecessary restriction. As a developer, it's…
The "walled garden" is what prevents the horrendous disjointed mess that is the Android phone market. Sure, for a guy who likes hacking around stuff, it's fun for you. But for everyone else, there is a thousand different phones, with a thousand different interfaces, all running different versions of the Android OS, that will never be updated by the phone manufacturer. I understand where you're coming from, I do. But…
I think a lot of commenters here are missing the point and getting distracted by push notifications (who wants a website spamming them with notifications?) and loading screens (hardly a feature). Apple supporting PWA (Progressive Web Apps) is hugely important because it enables a future where web apps can natively support browser, Mac/Windows/Linux desktop, and mobile iPhone/Android/Windows native mobile with a singl…
At the same time, you're no longer focusing on what makes each platform unique, and just giving them all a lowest common denominator. That's not really good either.
"This means I had to learn an entirely new technology stack"
Learning new things is good.
"Until Apple adds PWA support, I can't make as good stuff, and people can't use the better stuff."
This is absolutely wrong, and is just an excuse. You can make great stuff, and people can use it. You just need to put in effort.