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

321–330 of 587 posts

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#321

Post by froindt »

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.

>Anything telling me to install an app whose mobile experience is fine already is very fishy to me.

Facebook is my #1 example of this.

The app bloated up like it's primary purpose was to take up space on your phone. So I removed it and used the mobile website.

At first you had to refresh the page to get new messages. No big deal, but a bit annoying.

Then they updated and didn't even need to refresh the page to get an update to the thread you were in.

Then a few years back they decided you can't get messages in the mobile website, you must use their app. Later I learned about mbasic.facebook.com and have to switch to that when friends message me.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#322

Post by freehunter »

disiplus wrote: post #303
freehunter wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run a website where I get asked quite often to make it into a mobile app, and I reply by showing how to add it to the device's homescreen and not need an app. Never ever ever in the few dozen times I've had this conversation has anyone ever actually done it. In fact most responses to that suggestion have been overwhelmingly negative. They want an app, even though it'd just be a wrapper around the site with no added…

well i had a different experience. we dong have a native app, but some of our b2b customers wanted an "app" to use on mobile. The app is responsive so we show them how to add it to homescreen and that's it.

It might be business customers are more willing to jump through hoops. My website is targeted at the general public in a small midwestern town, where technology is a four letter word.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#323

Post by syrrim »

sosborn wrote: post #310
bgarbiak wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instagram is perfectly usable as a website, at least on an iPhone. I guess some features might be missing, but the core stuff is there: browsing, adding photo, filters, stories.

How do you post a photo on instagram in a web browser? I thought that was reserved for the app.

Add a file input -> the users taps it -> ios asks if they want to use an existing photo or take a new one -> take a new photo. Result on android may differ.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#324

Post by dbancajas »

allenu wrote: post #234
avree wrote: post #89

>An App Store developer license costs $99/year, whereas a Namecheap domain is less than $10/month. "A developer license is $99/year, but a website is less than $120/year!" Very weird statement.

Even at $10 a year, it's a very weak statement to make about costs. If you can't afford to pay $90 more a year on something simple for your startup, you have other problems.

My thought as well. 90$ won't make or break someone's startup.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#325

Post by dvaun »

tempestn wrote: post #314

This has always been our philosophy with AutoTempest.com. We do pretty regularly get requests to build an app though, although none of the people asking for it have had an answer to the question, "What are you looking for from an app version that the website doesn't currently offer?" So, at least so far I've decided it makes more sense to focus resources on the website. I do occasionally wonder if I'm passing up on a…

As an aside — I would like to say that I really enjoy your website and the service! It has made shopping for a decent deal in my area a breeze.

I'm curious about what kind of statistics you gather? It would be neat to track price movements across regions, and to see how the market trends for specific body styles and other characteristics during different time periods.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#326

Post by amatecha »

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.

dang, went to find Dark Sky on App Store and it appears to not be available in Canada? sadness :(

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#327

Post by Raphael »

jklinger410 wrote: post #25
shams93 wrote: post #2

Given the fact that most people are already maxed out on apps on their device with just things like facebook and youtube, you're going to be hard pressed to get people to install your app just to try it out. With a progressive web app if they like your app they can add it to their device home screen without installing via the app store and without using up space on their device. Also don't need to pay Apple $100 a ye…

>if they like your app they can add it to their device home screen without installing via the app store and without using up space on their device As far as I'm concerned, until evidence to the contrary is provided, most people either don't do this or know how. Relying on a pinned app for smart phones is a good way to kill your startup. >you're going to be hard pressed to get people to install your app just to try it…

I wonder what would happen if you provided instructions for pinning a web app on popular platforms. Would users ignore this new information?

Many websites in the past have provided instructions for bookmarking.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#328

Post by leadingthenet »

jdietrich wrote: post #125
sgt wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For one, you have a chance of actually finding quality native apps. Web apps are not completely optimal no matter how you try to sell it. I have nothing specifically against hybrid or web apps (they have their place), but speaking from personal experience I've had most luck with apps that were (1) native (2) cost a few pennies. I say this wearing the consumer or end-user hat. As a developer, I also prefer writing nat…

>For one, you have a chance of actually finding quality native apps. Really? I can't recall ever finding a useful app through the app store. It's so littered with junk apps and deceptive copycats that discovery is a miserable experience.

Seriously?!

Check out Things 3, Overcast, or Timepage (and Actions) by Moleskine. You don’t recall EVER finding a useful app?

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#329

Post by forgotmypw2 »

airstrike wrote: post #250
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 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'm going out on a limb but I'd wager you're not exactly representative of the general userbase for which apps are developed.

I think it's representative of the average user a couple years down the road, as is often the case.

Re: Start with a Website, Not a Mobile App

#330

Post by sosborn »

syrrim wrote: post #323
sosborn wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you post a photo on instagram in a web browser? I thought that was reserved for the app.

Add a file input -> the users taps it -> ios asks if they want to use an existing photo or take a new one -> take a new photo. Result on android may differ.

Interesting, they don’t seem to allow this on the desktop browser. Changing the user-agent yo a mobile browser exposes it. What a strange decision.
Post reply on HN