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

241–250 of 275 posts

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

#241

Post by tyingq »

geofft wrote: post #219
mmebane wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any way to bypass CORS in a PWA? Because Chrome Apps were a really handy way of writing GUI utilities without having to go full Electron.

Unsure, but I think if you have an extension, you can make the request in an extension page, which isn't CORS-restricted. (I don't totally understand the difference between a Chrome app and an extension that turns itself into a PWA, both are browser-specific and both are distributed through the Chrome web store, right?)

A chrome app has access to normal sockets, local filesystem, etc.

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

#242

Post by kevingadd »

ambrop7 wrote: post #211
Jyaif wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 I'm still using JSTorrent ( https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/jstorrent/anhdpjpo... ). It's impossible to implement the BitTorrent protocol using a webapp, which means that once Chrome Apps are gone I'll have to revert to using a native client, which I don't trust one bit.

It could be done with a local TCP / UDP WebSocket gateway, especially if it's written in a safe language like Rust.

Why use a webapp AND a local native gateway instead of just a native app? If your goal is to just not open any native win32/cocoa/etc UIs for some reason, there are existing native torrent clients with web interfaces served over http and those have been available for like a decade plus.

Webapp + native gateway also means that the torrent traffic ends up being suspended/throttled if the tab isn't foregrounded or if you close it, something you wouldn't have to deal with if the native gateway was just a native torrent client. Chrome Apps had a background privileged context that could keep running even if no tabs were open (though Google naturally discouraged this unless the app needed it), something you can't really get with a PWA currently (though Service Workers come close if you keep the tab open, I think? Maybe?)

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

#245

Post by lmedinas »

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…

besides Chrome Remote Desktop i cannot think about any other useful Chrome app.

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

#246

Post by jessriedel »

jmull wrote: post #158
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…

I agree that this was a terrible idea from day one and am glad it has been killed and will soon be buried. But this: "typical Google cancelling a product" is still an important message. Google routinely floats out APIs, services, and platforms and encourages their use despite fatal flaws that mean they are doomed from day one. And some developers fall for it and later have to pay the price. Hopefully, the repeated wa…

That something is an important message is not a sufficient reason for it to appear on the comment page. Being important and tangentially related to the topic is also not sufficient. Otherwise, all comment pages degenerate into discussion of the closest available hot-button issue.

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

#248

Post by ambrop7 »

kevingadd wrote: post #242
ambrop7 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be done with a local TCP / UDP WebSocket gateway, especially if it's written in a safe language like Rust.

Why use a webapp AND a local native gateway instead of just a native app? If your goal is to just not open any native win32/cocoa/etc UIs for some reason, there are existing native torrent clients with web interfaces served over http and those have been available for like a decade plus. Webapp + native gateway also means that the torrent traffic ends up being suspended/throttled if the tab isn't foregrounded or if yo…

One benefit would be to protect yourself from security issues in the main torrent code. Anyway it was just an idea, not a serious proposal.

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

#249

Post by somehnguy »

spondyl wrote: post #226

> You probably aren't using Chrome apps anyway My coworker sitting to the left of me still uses the Chrome App version of Postman because it works, and hasn't stopped working. It has had an orange banner for the last year saying to upgrade but I'm pretty sure he never will, until it actually stops working. I think in his mind, the Chrome version is fine and ultimately, he'd be going through the install process then p…

I still use the Chrome app of Postman too.

Reason is that I'm just used to it and it works perfectly fine for every use case I've had. I did install the new version but they changed the UI around a bunch and it kinda ticked me off because I was just trying to do some work, not relearn an app because they wanted it to be shinier looking.

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

#250

Post by criddell »

techntoke wrote: post #206
tyingq wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some chrome apps that you can't do as a PWA or Chrome extension. For example, there's a local webserver that serves up a folder over http. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/web-server-for-chr...

A local web server is something that can easily be setup on desktop and mobile outside of Chrome.

Didn't Microsoft block connections to servers running on localhost through http?
Post reply on HN