Live data from Hacker News

Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

subconscious.substack.com

121–130 of 315 posts

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#121
post #59

When 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 un…

> The real question is how did the web remain relevant while being so far behind this tectonic platform shift? We didn't all shift to to smartphones the instant they became available. It took a while for people to transition to smartphones. Likewise getting an app up and running (in addition to their websites) took time for most businesses, and many probably waited before jumping on the band wagon I am sure everyone…

I feel you have this completely backwards. I think for the vast majority of non-tech users, the smartphone was their first everyday computer.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#122
This is an example of an imaginary web browser to surf the imaginary internet, using OpenAI's Codex. It's built into Pen.el and is completely free as in freedom.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28489942

I made a post on HN but didn't get enough hits, so crossposting to relevant HN posts such as this.

https://semiosis.github.io/posts/the-imaginary-web-with-code...

- Visit any website you can imagine, even the ones that are not real!

- Edit and re-imagine as you go see alternative website realities – change the sentiment of the author!

- Peer into the future – read about GPT-5!

- Generate relevant URLs (often real, sometimes imaginary) from any text selection

- Read an article on anything from your favourite blogger.

- … This is the future of the web.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#124
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> content addressibility I'd say the app ecosystem promotes closed content whereas WWW promotes open content.

What open content? Wikipedia? That's If we're judging whether the Web promotes open content by the actual results after three decades, the exact opposite is the case: the Web promotes closed content. Netflix, ESPN, Google/Gmail/Maps/News/etc, Microsoft/Bing/Office/mail/etc, NYTimes, Washington Post, USA Today, MSNBC, CNBC, Reuters, AP, CNN, Bloomberg, FoxNews, ABC, CBS, NBC, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, Link…

Open in this context means open to access without platform preference. If you can access it with Firefox on Linux then in this context it's open.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#125
"The sandbox made software safe. Installing software on a PC is a risk. When you install an app, it can do anything to your computer, no restrictions. This design choice was enormously generative, and enabled the open-ended evolution of whole new product categories. It also enabled the evolution of viruses. The web was globally networked, and could not assume every link was safe. Code on the web was sandboxed—trapped in a bubble—and it could only interact with your computer through carefully controlled APIs."

I don't agree with this paragraph. There are many ways to constrain what a native application can do on a PC and conversely there are many ways a malicious website could harm you using Javascript.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#126

The answer is simple. Mobile devices lag behind desktop devices by about 10 years in terms of memory and processing power. When did web applications really start to dominate on the desktop? Think Electron apps and things like that - less than 10 years ago. My prediction? Within 5 years web apps will have taken over in the mobile space.

There's more going on here. The orginal iphone had no sdk. So the only way to run stuff on it that wasn't built by Apple was via Safari. It ran ajax applications just fine. I actually worked at Nokia Research at the time and a few of my colleagues were responsible for porting webkit to Symbian, that was around 2005; around the time Ajax applications were becoming a thing before the iphone was more than a rumor.

For a while, there were many iphone optimized mobile websites. E.g. Google reader had an iphone version. Typically these worked well on the S60 webkit browser as well and looked and functioned much nicer than the typical mobile websites optimized for the much crappier browsers that were common before that. Opera mini became a thing around the same time, which was an actual browser implemented in j2me that you could run on feature phones.

Performance was not really an issue with this. That was the problem: it worked a bit too well and you didn't need an iphone to use these websites.

Apple fixed it with a native SDK, an appstore, and a by now well established practice of systematically crippling the browser experience on IOS in subtle ways. For a long time you had weird memory restrictions, they never bothered with progressive web apps, and they have very strict policies in the app store that further ensure users and developers focus on building "native" experiences. It would be fairly easy to fix it. But of course there's a rule against third parties doing that too. Safari is the one and only browser that is allowed on the platform. Officially that's because it benefits the user but the obvious actual reason is that Apple does not want people removing obstacles that would allow for a better application experience inside browsers. Flash was banned for the same reasons before the iphone even launched. So were applets and the whole j2me ecosystem that existed at the time.

Google on the other hand shipped chrome on a far more open platform. But they make money from ads rather than hardware sales. Which is why the playstore exists and why anyone earning money with apps and ads prefers using native apps as well. The status quo is these two fairly locked down platforms and a few niche platforms that don't seem to move the needle much when it comes to what people build.

That might change in the next few years as the Apple/Google duopoly slowly heads for inevitable court cases which might introduce more application stores and platforms. When that happens, web first becomes a cheap strategy to target mobile because testing and building apps for each platform is already getting quite expensive with just two of them. Add wasm to the mix and what's native and browser based becomes kind of blurry in any case. Five years is about right in terms of timeline. But you can bet that Apple will drag their heels with all of this.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#128
Because of brainwashing and manipulation by big corporations which made people believe that native mobile apps are superior to web/browser based ones. The reason for this is that big companies didn't want to be sandboxed in a browser, they wanted full access of users devices, sensors and data.

It's the same reason why software developers use paid enterprise subscription services instead of open source software. They were successfully brainwashed to believe that the open source software is difficult to operate or doesn't work as well as the enterprise software. Meanwhile enterprise service companies are collecting and monetizing data from all their apps... In addition to recurring revenue.

People are suggestible and easy to manipulate, that's why. If you flash some big stacks of cash in front of their faces, they'll believe anything you tell them. You don't even need to give them any cash, just show them you have it. People follow the money like sheep to a slaughterhouse.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#129
post #59

When 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 un…

> The real question is how did the web remain relevant while being so far behind this tectonic platform shift? We didn't all shift to to smartphones the instant they became available. It took a while for people to transition to smartphones. Likewise getting an app up and running (in addition to their websites) took time for most businesses, and many probably waited before jumping on the band wagon I am sure everyone…

>We didn't all shift to to smartphones the instant they became available.

Oh, yes we did. Within 3 years (say 2007-2010) it was game over for feature-phones for the mass population, whereas the state of web APIs was still bad.

Re: Why did the web take over desktop and not mobile?

#130
post #125

"The sandbox made software safe. Installing software on a PC is a risk. When you install an app, it can do anything to your computer, no restrictions. This design choice was enormously generative, and enabled the open-ended evolution of whole new product categories. It also enabled the evolution of viruses. The web was globally networked, and could not assume every link was safe. Code on the web was sandboxed—trapped…

Aside from running a native application in a VM, most other sandboxing solutions are escapable, mostly because no mainstream desktop OS was architected with sandboxing in mind. Jails are as good as we got, and even then the kernel is far too insecure IMO. Its very hard to support a POSIX api and then retrofit sandboxing. And with VMs, there are numerous escapes, its just another frontier of security issues, not unlike browsers. But browsers were built with sandboxing as a core part of the design, and if you were to not use the newer, far buggier APIs, like Bluetooth and WebGPU, I'd argue that the browser would be relatively safe for a layperson. And much more practical than a VM.
Post reply on HN