Managing apps on the desktop is a pain. They get their dirty fingers everywhere and they're a pain to uninstall. For lightweight tasks, the web solved this, though local apps still ran smoother than webapps. App stores solved package management (so did Linux distros), and getting a true webapp to perform as well as a local app is more trouble than it's worth, and that's when you have a good network connection.
Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
51–60 of 315 posts
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#52The article appears to see "the web" as "browsers". This is apparent in the "OS within OS" language. The web isn't the browser although that is its facade. If you consider search on the desktop as "where do find X?" And on mobile as "how do I get X done?", Sans the real web the mobile device will be far less useful. From that view, it almost looks like the web already ate mobile .. just that we don't see it .. as mad…
And for true blue native apps, the web hasn't quite eaten desktop just yet. Try to get a professional video editor to use a website for production work like movies, or get an audio engineer to use a web based DAE (the latter is getting a little more feasible). You'll find it similarly hard to pry Maya or 3d studio Max from the hands of 3d professionals.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#53Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#54Early smartphones had poor connectivity and the web at the time had very poor offline support.
While Apple initially said that apps would be web apps they never really walked the walk. No html-css frameworks for optimizing sites for the iPhone. No frameworks for offline support.
And this was at a time when Apple and Google were good friends and Google were developing their Google Gears for offline support (you could use gmail offline with google gears back then)
Apps offered 4 things: a development environment, offline support, a monetization strategy and a cool factor.
Make it 5: they also supported things that are more than a glorified webpage.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just like C# is one of the native ways to make Windows applications. Please do everyone a favor and, at least for the sake of desktop development, don't misuse the terminology like that if you want people to understand what you're saying. The entire reason ".NET Native" was developed was that C# did not produce "native" applications. Saying C# produces native Windows applications is going to confuse the heck out of…
Someone is wrong on the Internet. .NET has always supported AOT via NGEN, although it only supports dynamic linking and was optimized for fast startup of applications. Windows 8 introduced the Bartok compiler used by Singularity, where applications would be pre-AOT compiled in the Windows store minus linking, with on-device linking happening on installation. Windows 10, improved the later scenario with the introducti…
> .NET has always supported AOT via NGEN
I didn't claim otherwise. But AOT != "native".
What makes something "native" is not merely the fact that you compile to machine code. It's one of the main features of native code but far from the only one. Again: there's a reason they came up with ".NET Native" and called it that despite the fact that NGen always did AOT. And there's a reason the Android NDK has an N, unlike its SDK. It actually means something beyond AOT.
You can go against the grain if you want and call them all native apps, telling people they're Wrong On The Internet, but you're just confusing people.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java compiles to machine code on Android, via JIT and AOT compilers.
I'm aware. Windows has NGen too. But that's not what makes people call Java or C# a native language, or apps based on those native apps.
Native is overloaded, however Java is the "native" language of the Android SDK, and on Windows unless one has a morbid pleasure to still use MFC, ATL, bare bones Win32, or use C++/WinRT like ATL is fashionable again, .NET UI toolkits will be the way to go.
Or are you going to argue that Visual Studio, SQL Server Management Studio, Microsoft Store, Microsoft Blend, Office AddIns, Power Automate Desktop aren't native?
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone is wrong on the Internet. .NET has always supported AOT via NGEN, although it only supports dynamic linking and was optimized for fast startup of applications. Windows 8 introduced the Bartok compiler used by Singularity, where applications would be pre-AOT compiled in the Windows store minus linking, with on-device linking happening on installation. Windows 10, improved the later scenario with the introducti…
> .NET has always supported AOT via NGEN I didn't claim otherwise. But AOT != "native". What makes something "native" is not merely the fact that you compile to machine code. It's one of the main features of native code but far from the only one. Again: there's a reason they came up with ".NET Native" and called it that despite the fact that NGen always did AOT. And there's a reason the Android NDK has an N, unlike i…
What makes an NGEN compiled WinForms .NET application not native on Windows?
Curious to find out, how those people distinguish it from an MFC/ATL or an Win32 one.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
> .NET has always supported AOT via NGEN I didn't claim otherwise. But AOT != "native". What makes something "native" is not merely the fact that you compile to machine code. It's one of the main features of native code but far from the only one. Again: there's a reason they came up with ".NET Native" and called it that despite the fact that NGen always did AOT. And there's a reason the Android NDK has an N, unlike i…
What makes an NGEN compiled WinForms .NET application not native on Windows? Curious to find out, how those people distinguish it from an MFC/ATL or an Win32 one.
It's not just one thing. Just like what distinguishes a human from a chimpanzee isn't just 1 thing.
But see for example https://stackoverflow.com/a/855774
If you still don't like the terminology though, I'm not going to keep arguing. I didn't coin the term. You should go ask Microsoft why they didn't call C# native when NGen was already there. I'm just saying that terminology is already established and you're confusing people by using it differently.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#59When iPhone and Android hit the scene the 'rich' web experience was primarily flash, silverlight, and some java applets (taking their last breathe).
Input APIs for touch, multitouch and gesture were a mess for many years in the browser.
Media queries didn't become a w3c recommendation until 2012 so building a ux that looked pleasant really wasn't possible.
The memory, cpu, GPU, storage and battery constraints were unbelievably tight.
In short mobile hardware and the iOS and Android SDK environments were consumer + developer ready for practically 10 years before the web was ready for mobile.
The real question is how did the web remain relevant while being so far behind this tectonic platform shift?
I think major points that kept the web alive: content addressibility (via urls), ease of connectivity between content (via links), vast amounts of information already in the platform, smoother learning curve for developer technology, and the vast amounts of money/influence Google was willing to put in to keep it's search ads property relevant.
Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm aware. Windows has NGen too. But that's not what makes people call Java or C# a native language, or apps based on those native apps.
Native is overloaded, however Java is the "native" language of the Android SDK, and on Windows unless one has a morbid pleasure to still use MFC, ATL, bare bones Win32, or use C++/WinRT like ATL is fashionable again, .NET UI toolkits will be the way to go. Or are you going to argue that Visual Studio, SQL Server Management Studio, Microsoft Store, Microsoft Blend, Office AddIns, Power Automate Desktop aren't native?
> unless one has a morbid pleasure to still use MFC, ATL, bare bones Win32, or use C++/WinRT like ATL is fashionable again, .NET UI toolkits will be the way to go.
I'm not sure how the discussion turned from "native" to "the way to go".
I get the feeling like you're jumping all over HN trying to reply to me at every comment you find because... you took "not native" as some kind of insult to tools you like/consider superior?