121–130 of 138 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple apps can only be developed on Apple computers and if you pay a fee to Apple for the privilege. And they own the app store. There's lock in and then there's complete vertical integration.
So don’t participate in that market. You have that choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm using a ton of apps that have Web and native options and in most cases I prefer the Web version. I'm sure others feel differently and that's fine. But you're forgetting two major advantages of Web apps: They are cross platform und neither users nor publishers need any permissions from some oligopolist middleman.
Cross platform web apps are a myth. You have to test a comparability matrix of all the major browsers on all the major platforms because they are all different in subtle ways that actually matter when making complicated apps. Native cross platform toolkits like Qt are no more work but provide a much better user experience. And I agree that the current state of the mobile platform monopolies is a shame. If you care ab…
You're exaggerating.
>Native cross platform toolkits like Qt are no more work but provide a much better user experience
Not in my experience, but the quality varies a lot between apps. I think it can be done well, but so can Web apps.
The major plus for desktop apps (but not mobile) is access to local data and to different remote data sources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. The web ecosystem has been trying to solve this for almost a decade now and has made relatively little progress. There's no reason to believe Apple could suddenly solve it in a few months if t…
> There's no reason to believe Apple could suddenly solve it in a few months if they just cared a little harder. No, they really could just solve it. Progressive web apps are so close to being useful. Apple just refuses to make them user-friendly to install. Just look at android for what's possible https://web.dev/progressive-web-apps/
PWAs have been pushed since 2015. 5 years of perpetually being "so close to being useful." And that's despite Google's heavy promotion of them, including building an entire OS around them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With Objective-C apps, it used to be even better, in startup and in app size. I think you can still get similar app size if you make a pure Obj-C app today.
On modern versions of iOS, the runtime ships with the system so even your Swift app can be hundreds of kilobytes to a few megabytes.
So, apple don't want web app to be first class citizens and then reinvent web apps?
The web is the biggest threat they face to their App Store. They see the writing on the wall with technologies like wasm blossoming, and with web APIs beginning to open up possibilities for “native”-quality apps. So they’re interested in anything that can reduce the friction necessary to get into native iOS apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On modern versions of iOS, the runtime ships with the system so even your Swift app can be hundreds of kilobytes to a few megabytes.
The nature of swift itself, similar to C++, makes it create bigger binaries compared to equivalent Objective-C code. So even with no runtime included, they will still be bigger on average.
I have an app written in Swift and weights between 8-20Mb(depending on device and iOS version), which is not too far of from a typical website these days and the startup times are phenomenal(between 250-500ms, depending on the devıce). Writing in Swift is a delight and this is the feature I was dreaming about because having the user to install the App is not easy these days(100 impressions on Appstore Search would ge…
I have an app written in Swift and weights between 8-20Mb(depending on device and iOS version), which is not too far of from a typical website these days and the startup times are phenomenal(between 250-500ms, depending on the devıce). Writing in Swift is a delight and this is the feature I was dreaming about because having the user to install the App is not easy these days(100 impressions on Appstore Search would ge…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to imagine, but some DOS apps had I agree that your app is small and fast compared to what others are putting out there, but compared to what software engineering could do if people cared, this is still bloated and slow.
A large part of the bloat is from graphics assets. The icon for most apps is many times larger than these old programs and you can’t do much about that. It’s one thing people don’t realize that happens when you get these hidpi screens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to imagine, but some DOS apps had I agree that your app is small and fast compared to what others are putting out there, but compared to what software engineering could do if people cared, this is still bloated and slow.
And it had 2 squares on the screen with 10 pixel letters inside them saying 'Proceed y/n'? What kind of a comparison is that? People do care, it's just they care about ease of use (not putting strain on your sanity) over some imperceptible startup time difference or space difference on hard drives that get cheaper every day.
I believe Circle K still uses pretty much the same UI, because that mouse-less keyboard interface can be used efficiently with one hand.
Not everything needs to be pretty to work well.