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

My App Is Dead in the Water

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#181

Post by foxX »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #100
foxX wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and that is not their fault Except for some corporate environment, I don't see how it's not their fault. It's easier than ever to make an informed decision before using one's wallet and it's every living, functioning human's duty to improve, grow and learn. Totally tired of apps that are nothing else than options-less and incontrolable browsers.

You make a valuable point about personal responsibility that I agree with, so I may have to reconsider my original position. (I upvoted you.) But, I would also point out that while there is much more available information to make such decisions, that info is much less comprehensible to the average consumer, who is almost certainly much less savvy about technology than you are.

Also vendors doing their best with astroturfing and obfuscating their works. I wonder why.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#182

Post by ryandrake »

> 5.2.2 Third Party Sites/Services: If your app uses, accesses, monetizes access to, or displays content from a third party service, ensure that you are specifically permitted to do so under the service’s terms of use.

Interesting.. I had an app in the Apple App Store for some time that essentially scraped a service provider’s web site, allowing the user to invoke features of that site. Essentially wrapping an ugly web site in a pretty iOS interface. Never even considered “getting authorization” from them. It survived in the iOS App Store for a few years until I took it down for other reasons. Wonder how new this rule is or how evenly it’s enforced.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#184

Post by saagarjha »

elboru wrote: post #161
dsjoerg wrote: post #39

Why not launch Safari when the user clicks on an article? And make it clear that you have permission from HN to use their API? Having used your app for exactly one minute, that seems like it would address their concerns and preserve usability.

Yes, I don't know about others but I actually prefer this, I would see it as an improvement, URLs should be opened in a browser not the app, that way you have the full functionality enabled, but then again that's just my personal taste.

On iOS, SFSafariViewController gets you the best of both worlds. The browser is in-app, but you essentially get a full Safari experience.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#185

Post by shadowfacts »

7Z7 wrote: post #127
shadowfacts wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or even just SFSafariViewController set to automatically enter reader mode. Then you're not downloading/displaying content from other sites, but you're still keeping users within your app.

That seems even worse tbh. You are of course still downloading their content, but now you're also leaving out any money making possibilities the host site may have had in place. Even less likely to be considered "permitted".

Reader mode (and the ability to enable it by default [0]) are built-in features—and ones that are used quite frequently by other apps.

Downloading and displaying content from websites in general (not a specific site(s) that you have permission for) seems much less common. I can't think of any other app I've ever seen that does that.

[0]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/sfs...

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#187

Post by sonnyblarney »

scarface74 wrote: post #172
sonnyblarney wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally disagree and the evidence is Android. A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. B) It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. C) The 'Windows' analogy doesn't really hold because mobile OS APIs are totally locked down. Any app installed on Windows/Mac can effectively wipe out your machine. It's a huge ris…

A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-viru... It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. People have been saying the same thing about PCs since the 80s. How has that worked out? An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant ex…

A windows app can do anything do your computer. Spyware, malware, erase the hard drive. No permissions needed.

Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission.

This is perfectly fair.

There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit.

The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform.

"What apps can't I get" ?

Well, this HN reader for one.

There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#188

Post by int_19h »

scarface74 wrote: post #147
sonnyblarney wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We made a deal with the devil when we collectively decided to write and use apps and not the web." No - apps are fine. Even app stores are fine. It's the fact that you can't distribute an app outside an app store ... this is a problem. So basically Apple is the problem, everyone else is fine.

It’s only a “problem” for a relatively few techies. Most people would be better served by a wall gardened. Seeing the mess that the average consumer makes on thier Windows computers is evidence. My mom would never have to worry about getting malware because she searched for a printer driver if she had an iPad. Heck, she wouldn’t have had to worry about a printer driver at all. And if you want to see what happens on m…

A walled garden with a discreet gate that one needs to know how to open would still serve the non-techie crowd perfectly well, without compromising freedom for the rest.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#189

Post by wild_preference »

EpicEng wrote: post #99
wild_preference wrote: post #51

> As for their alternatives, kicking the user out to Safari would significantly reduce the usability of the app. Not at all. When you open a website in Safari from an app, the user gets a first class website-browser experience without your chrome, and a "< Back to your app" button in the menuline.

It opens the page in a WebView. What's the problem?

They're saying it's a better experience. I'm saying I'd rather have it in the browser that I already use. Good example being that I want to keep the article open or accumulate them in Safari instead of have this weird modal article-viewing system in the app.

Various Reddit apps inline articles and I think it's just a worst experience.

Re: My App Is Dead in the Water

#190

Post by scarface74 »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #187
scarface74 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A) Android doesn't have some vast and ugly problem with malfeasance. https://drfone.wondershare.com/android-tips/top-android-viru... It's entirely possible to educate customers that if they go outside of respected shops - they run the risk of problems. People have been saying the same thing about PCs since the 80s. How has that worked out? An android app has very limited API access, moreover, the user has to grant ex…

A windows app can do anything do your computer. Spyware, malware, erase the hard drive. No permissions needed. Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission. This is perfectly fair. There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The…

Android - it's very limited what they can do - and they need permission

Have you seen the list of permissions that allow an app to do basically anything on an Android phone? And if you think asking for permission before an app is granted these widespread permission are good enough, that’s just about as effective as UAC was on Vista.

There is basically no reason for a walled garden - that 'there exists some malware' on Android is not evidence that 'open' is a problem, it's just evidence that 'open will have some problems' - which I admit. The very minor issues that can exist on Android are easily worth the open nature of the platform.

It may be worth it to you but not to the millions of people that click yes to every dialog box. These are the same people that have ten toolbars on their web browser.

Well, this HN reader for one. There are 100x more examples of decent apps being rejected from iOS than there are serious problems in Android.

The people who want an app to read Hacker News are dwarfed by the amount of people who would just as easily install ransomware on their phone as they would on Windows.

I’ll install almost any app on my phone/iPad/AppleTV just to try out because it can’t do any harm. I would have to treat an Android phone like I treat installing software on Windows - only from a few trusted sources.

You can’t even install CloudFlare’s recently released app without it asking for microphone access and file access.

Post reply on HN