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

Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

atrium.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 587 posts

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#211

Post by sinatra »

nostrademons wrote: post #200
sinatra wrote: post #14

IMHO, the reasons mentioned are not very convincing. Your goal, when starting a product, is to find whether you serve a real user need or not. So, start with a website or a mobile app depending on what suits your users needs better. Where would a user naturally go (web or mobile) for that need? That's the platform you start with.

Very frequently, the right answer for an MVP is something like "an e-mail newsletter" or "a Salesforce extension" or "a CSV file" or "an IDE plug-in" or "throwing a pizza party for your target market and performing the service for them yourself". I've seen startups charge $3K+/month to dump a CSV file on a client's FTP server. Go where the user can most conveniently make use of your product; for a lot of businesses,…

I agree. In many cases, don't start with either (app or site). In other cases (or in cases where you've grown up to the point of needing an app or site), start with one that is right for your user.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#212

Post by chaostheory »

EduardoBautista wrote: post #191
chaostheory wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who can't stand javascript, typescript was made for you

Typescript is just a huge bandage. It doesn't change that JavaScript has horrible tooling that changes every full moon. Not to mention it still keeps many of JavaScript's horrible warts.

When you can't avoid Javascript (which is extremely likely now), Typescript is a huge boon. Not everyone has the luxury of working solely on the backend.

Which "warts" does Typescript keep from Javascript?

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#213

Post by PaulHoule »

tracker1 wrote: post #152
PaulHoule wrote: post #60

I am moving towards "Windows app first"; Windows still has dominant market share among Desktop users. You might impress investors and developers with Mac and Linux support, but far too many people are developing for platforms where the users are not and wondering why their stuff isn't catching on.

Meh... I'd lean towards web app first, wrapping in cordova for ios/android and electron for desktop at first... adding in more native features as time moves forward, probably react native for {platform} as a second stage.

What I am aiming for is an application that never locks up and never makes you wait without clear indication if it is making progress or not. I could care less about many "Native Features" but latency is king. I am sick and tired of looking at spinning beach balls and such.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#214

Post by woogle »

da_chicken wrote: post #185
vesak wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't have time to research whether or not they are going to abuse my privacy or have some horrendous TOS. Do you think that web apps are better in that regard?

Yes. I don't give them permission to run code on my device arbitrarily and perpetually. Think of it like this: If Hacker News required a fat client to function on your desktop, would you actually be here at all?

While I agree on your point, your comment made me smile as I’m reading HN using a mobile app

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#215

Post by michaelmrose »

trophycase wrote: post #163
ecp9 wrote: post #137

I don't even bother installing apps anymore, I don't have time to research whether or not they are going to abuse my privacy or have some horrendous TOS. I got my core 10 apps and haven't bought a new one in a year.

I figure most things don't need an app unless they are trying to take more data anyway. Anything telling me to install an app whose mobile experience is fine already is very fishy to me. I'm looking at you, Reddit.

Reddit lives on ad revenue. Mobile web reddit is not in fact incredibly optimal which is why a bunch of third party apps exist. These third party apps make it impossible to show ads save for promoted posts which people don't seem to like. Thus the official reddit app.

I prefer "Reddit is Fun" which seems to load faster than mobile web reddit and notify me on comment replies.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#216

Post by rixrax »

wvenable wrote: post #169
casper345 wrote: post #111

80% of apps are uninstalled in the first 10min (especially if they ask for information or creating an account). Once uninstalled very unlikely they will ever install again. In my dev shop, I always advise clients to look into website MVP over apps unless IT IS CRITICAL to the functionality. Websites can always bring back ppl who were initially uninterested. Faster development/instant updates. Better tracking and UX a…

How many websites ever get passed the signup stage? I often will leave as soon as I'm tasked with creating an account and I'm not likely to come back.

What is especially frustrating that many sites don’t allow Mailinator and other similar ‘one-time’ email systems to be used for registering an account. No way I am going to give you my email address up front before seeing the product.

Now the solution is of course to have a separate gmail account to register. Most sites still allow user+site@gmail.com address syntax so that I can sometimes see who are leaking where.

I would be curious to know if there is some credible A/B testing showing that for a relatively unknown new product blocking Mailinators and it’s kin somehow results as a better conversion?

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#217

Post by dec0dedab0de »

phs2501 wrote: post #167
dec0dedab0de wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw it for the first time last night. I think it was Vimeo. It was actually much better than the "try our app" popup, because it was android asking if i wanted to use the instant app, and when i said no it just went away.

That's more reasonable. I wonder if these work via Firefox? Maybe that's why I've never seen them.

I normally use firefox too, maybe I accidentally opened the link in chrome last night. I don't have my phone around to test. I just remember thinking "ahh that's kind of neat" before clicking no.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#218

Post by ed312 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #159
jermaustin1 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this concept. Using the smart phone more like a PDA than a tiny laptop. What are your 10 core apps if you don't mind sharing?

For me: Personal Capital (finance), WhatsApp, Slack, Overcast (podcasts), Kindle, Dark Sky (hyper accurate weather app), Google Authenticator, Lyft, RENPHO (my smart scale’s app), 1Password Everything else is very situational and totally optional.

off topic of the thread: do you have a strong opinion of Dark Sky vs Weather Underground?

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#219

Post by djhalon »

woogle wrote: post #214
da_chicken wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I don't give them permission to run code on my device arbitrarily and perpetually. Think of it like this: If Hacker News required a fat client to function on your desktop, would you actually be here at all?

While I agree on your point, your comment made me smile as I’m reading HN using a mobile app

I'm curious, did you start using HN with the mobile app or migrate to it after you realized the usefulness of the website?

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#220

Post by scarface74 »

reaperducer wrote: post #208
scarface74 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iOS doesn’t support push notifications for web pages.

Are Safari push notifications desktop only? https://developer.apple.com/notifications/safari-push-notifi...

Yep, desktop only

https://www.izooto.com/blog/ios-push-notifications-safari

And this might be why....

Web Push Notifications have clearly made difference in every marketing campaign it gets involved in.

Post reply on HN