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

21–30 of 138 posts

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

#21

Post by dheera »

riyadparvez wrote: post #2

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

These shenanigans make me wonder why they don't just focus on making HTML5 apps a better experience. If they provided better widgets (e.g. including swipe gestures, which Angular/Polymer/MDL don't) and access to native hardware we'd be set.

HTML5 is just 100X easier and nicer to program with than that abomination of Android Studio followed by aligning, keysigning, and other steps.

The HTML5 hello world is

   Hello World
The native hello world is no less than 74 files of garbage, Gradle configurations, and other nonsense.

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

#22

Post by diggan »

dheera wrote: post #21
riyadparvez wrote: post #2

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

These shenanigans make me wonder why they don't just focus on making HTML5 apps a better experience. If they provided better widgets (e.g. including swipe gestures, which Angular/Polymer/MDL don't) and access to native hardware we'd be set. HTML5 is just 100X easier and nicer to program with than that abomination of Android Studio followed by aligning, keysigning, and other steps. The HTML5 hello world is Hello World…

It requires three things that are famously hard for Apple (and Google and many others too, not just Apple, to be fair) to achieve:

- Work with others on standards

- Expose things on a open platform that won't allow you to have full control over what's possible for developers and users to do and use

- Admit that sometimes you're wrong and you have to change according to others

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

#23

Post by snarf21 »

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.

Well, it does have a difference. You have full access to all native capabilities on the platform. That isn't true from a webapp. I'm not casting judgment on which is better but it is different. Actually, I wish this feature was a combination of install and run with parameter in a single step, controlled by the OS.

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

#24

Post by dheera »

diggan wrote: post #22
dheera wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These shenanigans make me wonder why they don't just focus on making HTML5 apps a better experience. If they provided better widgets (e.g. including swipe gestures, which Angular/Polymer/MDL don't) and access to native hardware we'd be set. HTML5 is just 100X easier and nicer to program with than that abomination of Android Studio followed by aligning, keysigning, and other steps. The HTML5 hello world is Hello World…

It requires three things that are famously hard for Apple (and Google and many others too, not just Apple, to be fair) to achieve: - Work with others on standards - Expose things on a open platform that won't allow you to have full control over what's possible for developers and users to do and use - Admit that sometimes you're wrong and you have to change according to others

If all you want to do is deviate from standards on purpose, just change
to
and base64 encode the .html file (for no reason) and call the resulting file .iapp. Done. Standards broken. Proprietary status achieved with minimal effort. Change ".css" to ".bss" if you want to go the extra mile.

and leave everything else as-is? Sounds like a win-win for both developers and biz dev.

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

#25

Post by diggan »

snarf21 wrote: post #23
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.

Well, it does have a difference. You have full access to all native capabilities on the platform. That isn't true from a webapp. I'm not casting judgment on which is better but it is different. Actually, I wish this feature was a combination of install and run with parameter in a single step, controlled by the OS.

True, but that's only true because of Apple wants it to be like that, not because there is some physical impossibility to integrate native platform APIs in the browsers.

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

#26

Post by sillyconvalley »

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.

Vendor lock-in and ridiculous pricing sounds like just about every SaaS startup in the world. But it's Apple, so it's not okay.

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

#27

Post by megablast »

dheera wrote: post #21
riyadparvez wrote: post #2

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

These shenanigans make me wonder why they don't just focus on making HTML5 apps a better experience. If they provided better widgets (e.g. including swipe gestures, which Angular/Polymer/MDL don't) and access to native hardware we'd be set. HTML5 is just 100X easier and nicer to program with than that abomination of Android Studio followed by aligning, keysigning, and other steps. The HTML5 hello world is Hello World…

Most apps are not hello world apps. So the next facebook might only be 100 files, mostly useful.

Also, your html5 app needs several icons for different screen sizes.

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

#28

Post by voz_ »

diggan wrote: post #19
voz_ wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 UI…

> That's true. But that's up to the company deciding over the operating system and the browser in the end.

The OS is far more powerful, and allows for deeper integration and writing in far faster languages. The browser abstracts away the machine. Most JS writers today have no idea or understanding of the actual computer they are writing against. It's a sandbox for them, and it's the reason apps today bloat to hundreds of megabytes and burn CPU to do the most mundane thing. Less distance from the metal is better 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.

Feels like a strawman / bad faith argument. As a user, I'd rather use one fast app on my device, I don't care if some guy on another platform can use this product. As an engineer, I want happy users, and if that means writing X clients, so be it.

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

#29

Post by djrogers »

cglong wrote: post #18
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?

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.

Perfectly valid question - I too hope for an option to keep this capability disabled or available on a per-use basis rather than a complete replacement for the existing QR URL launcher.

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

#30

Post by chipperyman573 »

sillyconvalley wrote: post #26
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.

Vendor lock-in and ridiculous pricing sounds like just about every SaaS startup in the world. But it's Apple, so it's not okay.

My monthly subscription is for a mobile plan, not a phone. I paid for that up front. Why would it be like SAAS?
Post reply on HN