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

Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 138 posts

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#11

Post by enos_feedler »

diggan wrote: post #6

> this new API, we can say that it allows developers to offer interactive and dynamic content from their apps even if you haven’t installed them Also formerly known as Web Applications but now made by Apple with the added features of less control from the developers, a 30% mandatory fee if you accept any payments of any kind and locked to just one platform.

Pretty sure this would be enabled by an app's universal link. URLs already work with the QR code scanner today and invoke Safari. This would be under developer control. As usual, any attempt by Apple to live as an alternative to the open web is seen as an attack on it.

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#12

Post by cglong »

adwww wrote: post #3
riyadparvez wrote: post #2

It seems very similar to Android feature called Google Play instant: https://developer.android.com/topic/google-play-instant .

This (or something like it?) has been available for ages, but the only time I've ever actually encountered it in the wild is with links to a JIRA project.

I have two: CBC News and Yahoo Finance.

(You should be able to find them in the list of apps in Settings)

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#13

Post by voz_ »

diggan wrote: post #6

> this new API, we can say that it allows developers to offer interactive and dynamic content from their apps even if you haven’t installed them Also formerly known as Web Applications but now made by Apple with the added features of less control from the developers, a 30% mandatory fee if you accept any payments of any kind and locked to just one platform.

I disagree with your assessment. Web Applications involve running JS downloaded from a remote source. If this is closer to slices, as the article says (did you read it? assuming yes, as this is HN and not reddit), then it is very different. Web applications are not native UI, and often have far worse experience and clunky usage of things like cameras, peripherals, system audio, etc. Slices would ostensibly be native code bundles, verified and tested by Apple. Moving away from web-ish experiences to native ones is a huge win in my book.

PS/opinion/fluff: There is also the implementation detail of language. Swift/ObjC is significantly superior to JS.

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#14

Post by lowtolerance »

lainga wrote: post #9
djrogers wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice snark, however web apps are still possible, and Android has a very similar feature (Instant - enabled by slices). Did you provide similar feedback when that was announced?

Please, have curious conversation; don't cross-examine.

I think it’s perfectly reasonable to question the degree to which bias plays a factor in one’s reception to just about anything.

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#16

Post by bnj »

rgovostes wrote: post #4

I guess not to be confused with Apple's Clips app which is for making short selfie videos. https://www.apple.com/clips/

For anyone with an iPhone who has never given this app a try, I recommend it-- it's surprisingly powerful and fun to use

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#17

Post by diggan »

djrogers wrote: post #8
diggan wrote: post #6

> this new API, we can say that it allows developers to offer interactive and dynamic content from their apps even if you haven’t installed them Also formerly known as Web Applications but now made by Apple with the added features of less control from the developers, a 30% mandatory fee if you accept any payments of any kind and locked to just one platform.

Nice snark, however web apps are still possible, and Android has a very similar feature (Instant - enabled by slices). Did you provide similar feedback when that was announced?

> Did you provide similar feedback when that was announced?

I did not, as I'm a lot more bored at this point in time and also have a lot of more free time.

But I do feel the same about both of the platforms movement towards "instant apps" that could have been equally solved by making web apps work better on respective platforms, instead of trying to solve the same problem again.

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#18

Post by cglong »

djrogers wrote: post #8
diggan wrote: post #6

> this new API, we can say that it allows developers to offer interactive and dynamic content from their apps even if you haven’t installed them Also formerly known as Web Applications but now made by Apple with the added features of less control from the developers, a 30% mandatory fee if you accept any payments of any kind and locked to just one platform.

Nice snark, however web apps are still possible, and Android has a very similar feature (Instant - enabled by slices). Did you provide similar feedback when that was announced?

Instant Apps on Android are opt-in (provided by a popup the first time you open an enabled link), so I can choose to use web apps if I prefer. I think the important open question is whether Apple will take a similar approach or if a Clips-enabled app will always take priority over a web one.

Re: Apple is developing a feature for using apps without requiring full downloads

#19

Post by diggan »

voz_ wrote: post #13
diggan wrote: post #6

> this new API, we can say that it allows developers to offer interactive and dynamic content from their apps even if you haven’t installed them Also formerly known as Web Applications but now made by Apple with the added features of less control from the developers, a 30% mandatory fee if you accept any payments of any kind and locked to just one platform.

I disagree with your assessment. Web Applications involve running JS downloaded from a remote source. If this is closer to slices, as the article says (did you read it? assuming yes, as this is HN and not reddit), then it is very different. Web applications are not native UI, and often have far worse experience and clunky usage of things like cameras, peripherals, system audio, etc. Slices would ostensibly be native…

> Web Applications involve running JS downloaded from a remote source

Any "instant apps" like this is gonna involve running code from remote sources. Then if the code is JS or Swift doesn't really matter.

> Web applications are not native UI

That's true. But that's up to the company deciding over the operating system and the browser in the end. Apple could have easily expose ways for web developers to write native UIs in HTML, CSS and JS. In fact, browsers used to be "user agents" where the user (and effectively the operating system, but user had final say) decided the styling of the content, but then website CSS became a thing and websites starting getting more control and wanted unique looks instead. Judging by the usage of the web, it seemed to have worked out pretty fine.

> Moving away from web-ish experiences to native ones is a huge win in my book.

Native in this case means running on one platform. I would much rather focus on making something that works for a bigger part of the world, meaning it doesn't exclusively run on Apple hardware but Windows and Linux as well. The browsers are one way of achieving this. Would be great if everyone (mainly Apple, Microsoft and Google) could align themselves behind one platform and work together. But I guess I've been in isolation long enough to start dreaming impossible dreams.

But considering your PS/opinion/fluff, I'm wasting my time discussing with you...

Hope you're having a good time anyways and take care!

Post reply on HN