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

Web by Google (TM)

landshark.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–496 of 496 posts

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#491

Post by Zanneth »

NorwegianDude wrote: post #482
Spivak wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(as a web developer) As a user Safari is fantastic and basically the whole reason I even own an iPhone. It’s just stupidly faster than Chrome on any Android flagship. A world where there’s “choice” of browsers on every platform in practice just cements Chrome as the web because if you didn’t have to develop for Safari nobody would. On every other platform it’s “have bug-for-bug compatibility with Chrome or die.”

Safari on iOS is seriously the most buggy browser ever. You can mostly write something and it will work on Firefox and Chrome without issues. Not only is safari full of bugs, the bugs won't be fixed, and if they do, it will take years. Current serious bugs: 1. Add a site to the home screen, go to another app for 20 seconds and then switch back: congratulations, it's frozen. 2. You can't even stop scrolling on the bod…

“Lack of features” is a huge plus for me as a Safari user.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#492

Post by Miraste »

bsanr2 wrote: post #488
Miraste wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>devs could do all of this stuff on Android, they just refuse to. That's not fair. There are good reasons Android doesn't have art production apps. The biggest is that Android users don't pay for apps like that and devs like eating, but iOS has several other advantages like the Pencil, the better graphics APIs, the better graphics performance, etc.

It is wholly fair. Developers have treated Android users like second-class citizens from Day 1. Android apps come out months after their iOS counterparts, with hobbled features that never reach parity. Customers have responded with second-class compensation (favoring advertising). Additionally, what you rationalize as "better" is better thought of as a result of expertise lock-in, as developers with more (exclusive?)…

> Customers have responded with second-class compensation (favoring advertising).

This is more the result of Android being the budget option.

You make it sound as though developers have some grand scheme against Android. Devs do prioritize iOS, but if you want it to change you (and Google) should understand the reasons for it. ARKit vs ARCore is a great example.

Tango launched on a single phone that no one bought, it required specialized hardware, and it had serious performance issues. Google forged ahead with the hardware requirements for years, in which the market for Tango apps was zero. They gave it limited support and it was clearly not a priority. It was only after Apple launched ARKit all at once for every modern iDevice, in a big presentation to make it clear this would be a major iOS going forward, that Google killed off Tango and screwed over all the devs who had bought in (with a tweet, for the extra insult to injury). They launched ARCore instead, which still didn't run on the majority of Android phones and still didn't track as well as ARKit.

ARCore isn't the only time Google has behaved this way, it happens with nearly all of their efforts. Do you see why developers don't engage with these kinds of practices?

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#493

Post by nashadelic »

simias wrote: post #84

The problem is that, IMO, centralization of the internet is simply the natural course. Especially when people seem to care so little. Centralization is cheaper, easier to monetize, easier to control, easier to update and upgrade. That's why people prefer Discord to IRC, that's why people prefer Slack to SMTP or Jabber, that's why for many people these days the distinction between git and GitHub is blurry. I suspect t…

> The problem is that, IMO, centralization of the internet is simply the natural course

Yes, central structures allow capturing of monetary value, which provide economic incentive to people and that is a powerful motivator for attracting good UX/UI/Designers to make the product improve mass appeal

For whatever reason, good UI/UX hasn't been the FOSS's strong suite. Until that changes (and there's also no reason why it can't change) it will continue to lose ground on anything that is user-facing. Anything that requires expertise however, FOSS will continue to shine.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#494

Post by andrewkdinh »

mehdix wrote: post #177

IMHO if Firefox could support publishers and creators with a kind of micro-payment, that would solve a fundamental problem that is basically killing the open web.

You may be interested in Firefox Better Web, in which Firefox partnered with Scroll to support publishers

https://firstlook.firefox.com/betterweb/

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#495

Post by texasbigdata »

ehsankia wrote: post #468
texasbigdata wrote: post #4

AMP still makes no sense. On iOS, Android and Windows it’s completely broken and friction increasing to grab a link to send to a friend in another medium. Not only that but it seems the page slightly degrades sometimes. For what? A theoretical page load time improvement? Maybe that’s naive but we already have “request desktop mode” to allow for bifurcated experiences. Why do we need a third thats seemingly even worse…

> and Windows "Accelerated Mobile Pages" should not be showing up on desktop at all. If they do, that's poor coding by the website itself. Just like how you often get stuck on website's mobile version when browsing on desktop. > it’s completely broken That's a pretty big statement, could you specify in which way it is "completely broken"? > friction increasing to grab a link This has been mostly fixed, I haven't had…

These are all unbelievably resoanable and fair comments. Particularly #2.

Since it’s been a few days, just to respond to only the easiest point, copying a link to the non-AMP website so socially share takes 3 to 4 incremental clicks on mobile, so that’s what I meant by that.

But reflecting you’re spot on, since I can’t quantify the benefit AMP has had on the internet it’s hard to claim the negatives are so eggregious. Thx for that perspective.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#496

Post by bsanr2 »

Miraste wrote: post #492
bsanr2 wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is wholly fair. Developers have treated Android users like second-class citizens from Day 1. Android apps come out months after their iOS counterparts, with hobbled features that never reach parity. Customers have responded with second-class compensation (favoring advertising). Additionally, what you rationalize as "better" is better thought of as a result of expertise lock-in, as developers with more (exclusive?)…

> Customers have responded with second-class compensation (favoring advertising). This is more the result of Android being the budget option. You make it sound as though developers have some grand scheme against Android. Devs do prioritize iOS, but if you want it to change you (and Google) should understand the reasons for it. ARKit vs ARCore is a great example. Tango launched on a single phone that no one bought, it…

>You make it sound as though developers have some grand scheme against Android.

No, it's simply the same sort of tribalism that drives so much of American culture. The black-and-white, good-vs-evil format warring is nothing new; as always, it's driven by a kernel of legitimate difference and a whole lot of snowballing bias. What needs to happen is for developers to pull their heads out of their asses, realize just how enormous the Android market is, and supply experiences that justify paying for software (especially in a climate where most users don't see anywhere near the value they give in personal data returned in software utility).

>Tango launched on a single phone that no one bought

That doesn't matter. Tango was the cutting edge of mobile XR, which is a space that still won't be mature and profitable for years from now. The point would have been to get a jumpstart on developing port-able technologies and UX norms. Can you imagine how much more solid app development would have been if someone had showed up in 2003 and said, "In 10 years, multi-touch display smartphones will become the norm. Here's a dev kit that approximates what will be possible."? That's Tango. I don't know how you can argue that opportunities weren't missed or pushed back years because of this platform bias. Now the space is even contracting somewhat because Apple marketed ARKit (and forced Google to market ARCore) as a consumer-ready platform, and companies are realizing that it isn't (control isn't figured out, UX isn't figured out, applications aren't figured out; we're JUST getting the basic technology layer above ARKit/Core figured out). If we'd taken Tango seriously, we'd be so much farther ahead.

This goes for so much in the iOS/Android dynamic. It's dumb.

Post reply on HN