I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores • Hacker News Board

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#401

Post by ascorbic » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 6:53 AM UTC

judah wrote: post #381

saagarjha wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm a non-profit So the only thing that applies to you is the price to have access to a Mac. Since you're a nonprofit, Apple will waive your developer fee, and you wouldn't need in-app purchases anyways. Also, IIRC the cut Apple takes is 30%, not 33%, in line with the rest of their App Store policies.

Author here. That's correct - Apple waived my $99/year fee. I documented that in the post. But my post wasn't about me , it was about the hurdles involved in getting a PWA into the app store. For many people, $99/year + 30% in-app purchases + $1000+ Mac for build and testing + a few Mac Minis for CI servers ...that is a barrier.

If you're of the scale where you need several CI servers for a platform, buying a computer for that platform should be a requirement anyway. The IAP cut is only an issue if you're making money on the app.

BTW, the best solution for your case is VS App Center (https://appcenter.ms), which has a free tier and does CI/CD (on Macs) across platforms.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#402

Post by khedoros1 » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 7:41 AM UTC

chrisweekly wrote: post #400

khedoros1 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> PWA is not that easy, but the UX friction involved with downloading and installing native mobile apps is abysmal. Searching on the app store and hitting "install" is an abysmal amount of friction?

Yes. Compared to links, anyway.

Well....OK, yes, not installing something is less work than installing something. I think that saying "abysmal" is being overly dramatic, though.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#403

Post by RaleyField » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 7:58 AM UTC

alxlaz wrote: post #370

andai wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a really interesting point I haven't heard before: that the silver lining of everyone making electron apps is better Linux support!

The silver is somewhat dulled by the fact that an Electron application is barely better than no application at all, only slightly less heavy than running VirtualBox in seamless mode, and has about the same level of native integration.

> slightly

Dude what are you on about? VirtualBox is 1GB minimum, better 2 and has to virtualize gfx card, meanwhile electron is talking to gfx drivers directly and takes 100-200 MB if used correctly.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#404

Post by rbrtl » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 9:25 AM UTC

mankash666 wrote: post #280

mft_ wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When was the last time you let your refrigerator manufacturer tell you what items are allowed in your OWN FUCKING refrigerator? Why is different for iOS/Apple? Well, if the things I put in my refrigerator started acting like malware, I think manufacturers might start taking a different approach...

But 99.9999% of app store rejections aren't malware related. It's a scapegoat reason of convenience, but not the real reason, v.i.z. Apple's insatiable monopolistic ambition of totalitarianism, of cock-blocking freedom on their devices.

Source please?

If your vitriolic rant has any substance, please present it. Otherwise you just come off as a cock-sure, know nothing asshole.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#405

Post by TheCoelacanth » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 2:46 PM UTC

FridgeSeal wrote: post #320

thomasz wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is circular reasoning. Web Apps are not a replacement for a proper application because they are being sabotaged.

Ok, put it this way: they should be sabotaged if they're never going to be as good as native apps. Seeing as they're not going to be, and Apple has standards for how it's phone behaves and the quality of the ecosystem, I have no problems with them essentially insisting that developers build proper apps.

They're never going to be as good because Apple is sabotaging them. A web app has many advantages over a native app. That is why people visit websites instead of installing an app for every website.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#406

Post by judah » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 2:49 PM UTC

Silhouette wrote: post #104

judah wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, I hear you. Unfortunately, the status quo today is, that's where the users are. I love the free and opened web. I want it to win. I think it will win and eat native apps (PWAs are already making that happen.) But the barriers to this right now are 1) app stores are where users are and 2) some mobile platforms (read: Apple) have a perverse incentive to cripple web apps so that submitting native apps to their stor…

Unfortunately, the status quo today is, that's where the users are. I've seen a few people make this argument, but no real data. Does anyone have any relevant stats about web vs. app store sales, perhaps the ratios between customer numbers and/or revenues through different channels, that they'd be willing to share?

The number of registered users per day has tripled since I added my app to all 3 app stores. Most of the registrations come from Android.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#407

Post by exodust » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 5:47 PM UTC

schrodinger wrote: post #358

amelius wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am glad that websites cannot play audio without the user first interacting with the page. And what makes an app different from a website, really? In my opinion, web browsers need to add privilege controls to websites just like the OS does to apps.

>permissions are reserved for apps that Apple has vetted That apps have been vetted is the difference.

Such vetting is not needed for an action such as playing audio in the background. That is harmless and only needs to be a permission the user chooses to allow when visiting that page.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#408

Post by exodust » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 5:57 PM UTC

rolha-capoeira wrote: post #47

> From minor things like “iOS Safari won’t let you play audio without first interacting with the page” to major, show-stopping things like, “iOS Safari won’t let you play the next song if your app is in the background or if your screen is off.” I disagree that these things are purely because Apple wants your $99/year. Maybe that's part of the story, but not all. I am glad that websites cannot play audio without the u…

> I am also glad that websites can't play audio in the background

If you're saying that web pages should not be allowed to even ask for permission to play background audio, then I disagree with you and Apple 100%.

Nobody should be arguing for anything less than user-controlled choice in the matter of permission to play audio on a website, in the background, any way you like when permitted by user. To deny even the choice, is to feed and validate the theory that Apple has no interest in improving the browser experience because they want to keep that bar low by design, much lower than apps.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#409

Post by exodust » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 6:13 PM UTC

rvanmil wrote: post #153

As a user I am glad Apple is the "loser" in this article and it's the reason I love iOS and hope Apple doesn't change anything in their attitude towards the "free and open" web. I do not trust the web, at all. Access the camera? Nope. The microphone? Are you kidding me. Notifications, GPS, background processing? Fuck no. I am very happy to have Apple as a quality, security and privacy gatekeeper, because I do not hav…

Can't tell if your post is sarcasm.

Your trust of Apple and distrust of the web is irrelevant. Nobody is suggesting automatic permission to these things. There is nothing wrong with asking permission to access your microphone for example. You can always ignore request, or click no thanks.

Any website right now can place a link to an exe file in the text and ask users to "please download". It's your choice whether to go ahead and download. It should be the user's choice whether to allow access to camera or anything like that too. Pretty obvious really.

Re: I built a progressive web app and published it in three app stores

#410

Post by FridgeSeal » Wed, Apr 18, 2018, 11:34 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #405

FridgeSeal wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, put it this way: they should be sabotaged if they're never going to be as good as native apps. Seeing as they're not going to be, and Apple has standards for how it's phone behaves and the quality of the ecosystem, I have no problems with them essentially insisting that developers build proper apps.

They're never going to be as good because Apple is sabotaging them. A web app has many advantages over a native app. That is why people visit websites instead of installing an app for every website.

Almost literally by definition, a webapp isn't going to be as good as a proper application.

If one of the advantages is "front end guys don't have to learn another language" I'm starting to be of the opinion that that's their reticence to use the proper tools, rather than the inherent superiority of JS.

People visit websites because many of them don't need to be apps. I don't need an app (webapp or otherwise) for each of the half/dozen sites I visit once a week. That's just clutter and wasted space, and in the case of a web-app, clutter, wasted space and a shitty app that's no better than simply visiting the website directly.