221–230 of 315 posts
Whereas home internet connections tend to be fairly reliable.
Anecdotally, I don't rely on web apps because the terrible network reliability that I have means that they are frustratingly slow and frequently outright break. Native mobile apps work just fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 am sure everyone on HN moved [from computers to smartphones] quickly" I may be wrong, but I suspect you have that backwards. My guess is that at least older HNers were slower to shift from powerful but complex creation tools (computers) to easy consumption toys (smartphones) designed for consumers who found computers with files and folders just too darned complicated to use. Until good, portable mapping and good-e…
Native phone apps are more invasive and can therefore be used for more extensive tracking and spying, which is good for ad revenue. Remember how all the largest spying products like Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, Twitter, etc aggressively push you to install their phone apps even though they are (or were) perfectly usable through their mobile websites.
People say this a lot, but really, what can a native app track that a web app can't? To track location, you need to give the app permission, just like the web. To receive push notifications, you need to give the app permission, just like the web. I think this claim is unfounded.
Native phone apps are more invasive and can therefore be used for more extensive tracking and spying, which is good for ad revenue. Remember how all the largest spying products like Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, Twitter, etc aggressively push you to install their phone apps even though they are (or were) perfectly usable through their mobile websites.
People say this a lot, but really, what can a native app track that a web app can't? To track location, you need to give the app permission, just like the web. To receive push notifications, you need to give the app permission, just like the web. I think this claim is unfounded.
On iOS though you can't do that stuff, and I would tend to think apps are more sandboxed than websites (no cookies, for one). I don't know for sure though; I'd love to hear more from someone who has more firsthand experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
For many people wireless connectivity is spotty at best; particularly rural USA, most of Canada, and much of the non-western world. Whereas home internet connections tend to be fairly reliable. Anecdotally, I don't rely on web apps because the terrible network reliability that I have means that they are frustratingly slow and frequently outright break. Native mobile apps work just fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
> Even now, I still think "I'll wait and do this on a proper computer". I'm routinely in the same boat, though it's less about the computer and more about not fighting with a tiny monitor. Most things built for mobile are "light" versions, as easily exposing all the bells and whistles on a 6" monitor would be a UI nightmare.
- Memory management means that whatever application you're using at any given moment can vanish, with all its user state.
- Applications are crippled versions of full-desktop variants, where they exist at all. E.g., FennecFox vs. the Firefox browser. Support for user-empowering extensions is limited.
- You. Will. Not. Have. Root. Some devices are rootable. Many are not. This means that whole sections of the OS are not available to you.
- Information is siloed into applicationd databases (inaccessable on the device, since You. Will. Not. Have. Root. --- or worse, maintained on some distant cloud server.)
- The OS itself is not upgradable by you. Android device vendors often provide absolutely no post-purchase OS updates.
- Even power kits are very third-class citizens. Termux, The Only Android App That Does Not Precisely Suck[TM], is useful and powerful but its 1,400 packages are only a minuscule fraction of those available on a full Linux system (Debian contains over 60,000 packages), and are limited in functionality as You. Will. Not. Have. Root.
Numerous affordances and capabilities are simply missing or buggy as all hell.
Using an ebook reader, as an example, with an external keyboard, I cannot enter a space character into a search field as that scrolls the screen rather than editing the search dialogue. Just one of many, many, many cuts in a death by thousands.
Source: Have used Android for over a decade, tablets for over five years.