Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 30% cut when selling on the Apple App Store.
There is a 0% cut for free apps.
Developers still have to pay $100 a year, and own something that runs Xcode.
Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
161–170 of 275 posts
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#162First of all, this was announced more than 3 years ago, and it still won't happen for another 2.5 years. Second of all, this should be treated as good news for the HN crowd: Google is transitioning from a proprietary, Chrome-only app model to the open-standard, PWA model. Who doesn't support that? There are a bunch of "typical Google cancelling a product" comments here. But for real, I simply cannot imagine any Chrom…
As a person who uses the Hangouts chrome app daily, I have been expecting a day when I go to launch it and it wont open for the last 3 years. Google doesn't want to support "Classic Hangouts" anymore (and supposedly they killed it in October for GSuite, but not for my domain, I guess). Hangouts is one of the only ways I privately communicate with old friends and past co-workers since EVERYONE has at least one gmail a…
I still have SMS tied to Hangouts. I moved my phone number to Google Voice when I left the US years ago and kept it on there when I moved back. It's been migrated to hangouts, which is pretty much total garbage now.
I want to migrate my phone number to another service, but I also want to get off Android entirely at some point and want to find a service with a public API so I can eventually write Plasma Apps or a Matrix bridge. Are there any good VoIP providers I can pay for monthly that fit that bill?
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://developers.chrome.com/apps/migration Everything except advanced File System APIs are supported by PWAs, including Bluetooth through the Web Bluetooth API. [1] The replacement Native File System API is in origin trial and is pre-standardization, however. [2] [1] https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/07/interact-w... [2] https://web.dev/native-file-system/
Another big gap is the sockets API. Chrome apps have direct access to TCP and UDP sockets. PWAs can't have this for obvious reasons.
What are the obvious reasons? Many game devs would absolutely love to have UDP available on the web in order to do proper networking.
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a person who uses the Hangouts chrome app daily, I have been expecting a day when I go to launch it and it wont open for the last 3 years. Google doesn't want to support "Classic Hangouts" anymore (and supposedly they killed it in October for GSuite, but not for my domain, I guess). Hangouts is one of the only ways I privately communicate with old friends and past co-workers since EVERYONE has at least one gmail a…
Over a year ago the Hangouts app had a notice at the top saying support was going away and to switch to the extension. That is still working fine. We've been moving people over to Chat in our domain but a large (probably majority) still use Hangouts.
In addition to the Chrome app, there is the Chrome extension. They basically do the same thing and the extension has no expiration message. The main reason I wasn't using the extension before is that it didn't provide a desktop icon in Linux. There is a way to fix that by creating a .desktop file[1]. I'm don't remember if there is a similar problem and/or fix on Windows/Mac.
For what it's worth, I've found Hangouts to be the better consumer communications tools. I use other software like Signal and Whatsapp but Hangouts works better between devices. It also makes moving to a voice/video call easy for my less-technically-inclined family members. This is especially true when you want to have a call with multiple users, want to switch for your phone to your computer or want to start a screen share. All of these things can be very useful, even with family members.
Of course, there are trade-offs. There isn't E2E encryption. The video takes a lot of battery on many devices. You never know what's going to happen to the service in the future. What you discuss is being recorded and probably used to target ads.
[1] https://askubuntu.com/questions/771408/separate-icons-for-ch...
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
These should probably be native mobile apps, no?
On a Chromebook ? The Android on ChromeOS stuff isn't as complete and has a hard time seeing e.g. USB peripherals. I've reached out to the people I work with at Google to see what this will mean for my Chrome Application [0], which is a Certificate Provider [1] that talks to a Google provided ChromeOS Application [2]. Technically I can turn it into a Chrome extension now that there's built-in PIN prompting support, b…
Not on a Chromebook, as it appears it is no longer a usable dev or runtime environment for such applications.
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well I think it is more "this feature requires kernel 4.x, but the drivers for this manufacturer's hardware do not support 4.x, so we cannot offer this feature without losing sound/WiFi/touchpad/etc" The chromebooks do update themselves all the time but I gues there is some more fundamental stuff that requires more low-level changes.
For Android, they're proposing GKI module shims that a vendor can code against. So a vendor plugs a binary blob into, say a 5.4 GKI module, which is hopefully forward compatible with the interface to a 6.25 GKI module released sometime in 2026. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/11/google-outlines-plan...
They are, but it is only post Android 10, so it will take years before it matters at all.
As an example, Vulkan was added in Android 7 as optional API, the adoption was so low, with so many buggy drivers that as of Android 10 it became a compulsory API.
On Android everything that Google leaves the OEMs free reign hardly gets done.
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#167First of all, this was announced more than 3 years ago, and it still won't happen for another 2.5 years. Second of all, this should be treated as good news for the HN crowd: Google is transitioning from a proprietary, Chrome-only app model to the open-standard, PWA model. Who doesn't support that? There are a bunch of "typical Google cancelling a product" comments here. But for real, I simply cannot imagine any Chrom…
Wait what? Edge doesn't support ActiveX controls? Why didn't I notice until now?
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about the $10-$20, it's about sending the message.
Costing a many billion dollar multinational corporation $10-20 isn't sending a message at all. It's just a waste of your time.
Not if you expand the $10 into a class action. That however is a lot of work.
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chromebok was originally marketed as a simple, no-nonsense laptop and that's what it is. All iterations since have been useful but did anyone really believe it was going to be a ThinkPad killer?
Once they started selling $2k+ versions, yeh I kind of do think expect that actually.
Yeah, I have no idea who those are for, but the cheaper ones are great for family members who only really need to browse the Web anyway. My tech support burden is way down, and so I love Chromebooks for other people.
Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Costing a many billion dollar multinational corporation $10-20 isn't sending a message at all. It's just a waste of your time.
Not if you expand the $10 into a class action. That however is a lot of work.
It still doesn't add up to a lot of money. The total class of people who were trying to run Linux on the PS3 and then weren't able to just isn't that big.