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

Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 275 posts

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#171

Post by Andrex »

plopz wrote: post #163
magila wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Extremely good information and background context is available in this article: https://gafferongames.com/post/why_cant_i_send_udp_packets_f...

The big issue is trying to make UDP "safe" enough security-wise for the web platform, and such considerations are generally taken extremely seriously. If a vulnerability were discovered, the Google Chrome userbase could become a botnet capable of DDOS pummeling any website.

Workarounds apparently exist for UDP over WebRTC, but it's a very "bulky" solution.

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#172

Post by wyldfire »

Ididntdothis wrote: post #149
dessant wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have a Chromebook. It was listed on the models that would support Android app, this support never came (it's still "planned", 2 years later...) You should be eligible for a refund, file a complaint with consumer protection. In most places it is illegal to mislead customers and market products with planned features that you do not deliver on in a reasonable timeframe.

“file a complaint with consumer protection” Can you clarify what you mean with this? What consumer protection?

In the United States:

For interstate commerce: FTC [1] or state/county AGs/consumer affairs bureaus, e.g. NYS [2], CA [3], WA[4]

[1] https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consume...

[2] https://www.usa.gov/state-consumer/new-york

[3] https://www.usa.gov/state-consumer/california

[4] https://www.usa.gov/state-consumer/washington

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#173

Post by ronsor »

Andrex wrote: post #147
magila wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Good catch, and the migration page kinda glosses over that. They are asking for input and use cases, though. "Q: My app uses the chrome sockets API to do networking. Can this be done with the open web? You might be able to do what you need with WebSockets. However, to use this, you will likely need to change the remote end of your connection. If that isn't possible, we'd like to hear more about your use case—please l…

This is bad. Simple TCP and UDP sockets are the foundation of the internet.

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#175

Post by sdenton4 »

lostmsu wrote: post #139
untog wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't really make sense, though. Go is entirely open source. If Google dropped it tomorrow there are more than enough non-Google people invested in it to continue development.

Maybe, but how many of them are compiler engineers? Go does not strike me as a language, that a compiler engineer would love.

Eh, if google cancelled go, there's a good chance a bunch of go compiler engineers would move to other companies using go...

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#176

Post by Andrex »

ronsor wrote: post #173
Andrex wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good catch, and the migration page kinda glosses over that. They are asking for input and use cases, though. "Q: My app uses the chrome sockets API to do networking. Can this be done with the open web? You might be able to do what you need with WebSockets. However, to use this, you will likely need to change the remote end of your connection. If that isn't possible, we'd like to hear more about your use case—please l…

This is bad. Simple TCP and UDP sockets are the foundation of the internet.

Correct, but they are not the foundation of the Web -- HTTP is, and web specification writers are only concerned with creating APIs for the web platform (hence why Web Sockets is an upgraded HTTP connection, not lower level like raw TCP or UDP.)

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#177

Post by maxhille »

jcastro wrote: post #133
crazygringo wrote: post #92

First 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…

Anyone know the status of being able to install PWAs on the desktop? The reason I use chrome apps is to have "Gmail" as an application on my desktop so I can alt-tab to it, put it on my dock, etc and treat it as a normal app instead of a tab.

"add to desktop" option has been available for a couple of years now I think.

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#178

Post by Stratoscope »

jcastro wrote: post #133
crazygringo wrote: post #92

First 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…

Anyone know the status of being able to install PWAs on the desktop? The reason I use chrome apps is to have "Gmail" as an application on my desktop so I can alt-tab to it, put it on my dock, etc and treat it as a normal app instead of a tab.

In Chrome, open the page you want, then on the Chrome menu select More Tools / Create Shortcut...

Give it a name and check "Open as window". Now you have a shortcut you can use like any other application shortcut.

(I've only tried this on Windows and Linux, but it should work on macOS too.)

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#179

Post by olex »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #154
falcolas wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A chrome app that people use? There’s a lot of hobby flight controllers which are/were programmed using a Chrome app. There was no alternative. And since most web apps can’t get access to the host USB (webUSB seems to exist, but still seems pretty nascent), that whole system is probably going to have to find a new app deployment method.

These should probably be native mobile apps, no?

Flight controllers in question don't feature wireless connectivity - they are typically used in FPV racer drones, and only offer a USB connector for firmware flashing and configuration. There are Android apps that use USB OTG for the job, but the primary option is the desktop app built by the same authors/community as the flight firmware, which originated as a Chrome app and was eventually migrated to Electron.

Re: Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used

#180

Post by olex »

falcolas wrote: post #119
crazygringo wrote: post #92

First 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…

A chrome app that people use? There’s a lot of hobby flight controllers which are/were programmed using a Chrome app. There was no alternative. And since most web apps can’t get access to the host USB (webUSB seems to exist, but still seems pretty nascent), that whole system is probably going to have to find a new app deployment method.

Hasn't Betaflight (and iNav, and other relatives/clones) migrated to standalone Electron by now?
Post reply on HN