361–370 of 384 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the time a PWA isn't needed at all, a mobile Web friendly website suffices.
For offline use?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first quote is very misleading because it followed this: > apps had unique features like notifications and offline access. Browsers can do those things. If you're going to offer "Browsers can't access all the APIs in iOS" then, at the very list, provide one or two examples of what you're referring to.
Contacts API; Not all sensors are supported
Hardware APIs: There is of course a good reason why websites don't get unlimited access to those APIs (and why they can't access them in the background). But Bluetooth and USB are both available on Chromium browsers on every platform except iOS (because Chrome on iOS is Safari).
Example: When Google closed down Stadia, they offered a way to unlock the Stadia controller so you could connect it via BT to any computer and use it as a regular controller. You just went to their website, hooked up the controller via USB, and the site would update the firmware on the USB device.
But sure, there are many use-cases for native apps. Also, there are many native apps that should just be a website (you shouldn't even need to install it if you only need to use it once or twice).
> But fast-forward to today, and browsers can do all that. Browsers can't access all the APIs in iOS. > Developers pay hefty app store fees You pay 99$ per year and 15% for each sale. Apple handles VAT, refunds, distribution and so on. > They’re faster, more flexible, and work seamlessly across devices. Native apps? Not so much. Enabling iCloud sync for your app is just a single click on Xcode. > Why Web Apps Are the…
> Developers pay hefty app store fees So, hosting doesn't cost? Too many app-but-websites should be local, but because are web requires hosting and likely a database (that must be 'web-scale' so it survives bots). My web app cost far more than my older native one. And is far harder to maintain...
One thing I haven't seen addressed in the post or comments (sorry if it's there and I just missed it) is for apps and websites that sell non-digital goods to customers. For returning customers, a customer with an app installed is simply going to have a lot less friction to open the installed app and place an order than a customer who has to open their browser, log in again, and then place the order. That alone is wor…
And the upside is that you only have to develop one website (instead of a website and 2 separate native apps for iOS and Android).
I currently have 4 parking apps, and 2 ev charging apps on my phone. None of those have a Web version when you can clearly see that most of their ui is webview based. They could have been bookmarks indeed.
https://webventures.rejh.nl/blog/2023/ios-web-push-requires-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> works on every device Assuming that the device has an up-to-date browser available for it. And today, that usually requires having a multi-MHz multi-core processor and GiBs of memory. No matter how lean your actual application/website is. I have a stack of E-Ink readers, all in terrific condition. My favorite is the B&N Nook Glowlight 3. When it was new just about five years ago, I could install a web browser on it…
> Assuming that the device has an up-to-date browser available for it. Not necessarily. You can target older devices with old browsers if you want, by carefully choosing JS/CSS versions and features, or just by making sure your code degrades gracefully.
The problems begin accruing before the user even types in your URL.
> Yet businesses still push native apps as if it’s 2010, and we’re left downloading apps for things that should just work on the web. The app icon acts as free marketing. If it were just a website, you wouldn't have a little picture of their logo on your phone to be reminded that they exist every now and then. They know that it could just be a website (usually it IS just a website, packed inside an "app"), but they d…
You can install web apps on the home screen since iOS 1.0. The fact that you (and many, many others) don't seem to know this is a thing, says a lot about how effective Apple is at hiding that feature... :(
(Chromium browsers support an API where a website can show an install button if certain conditions are met, making it a one-click experience. But alas, for some reason Apple doesn't allow browser engines except the one they control :thinking: )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. And it gets worse. Websites are at least supposedly sandboxed so they are not as much of a risk as running native binaries. But this is getting worse and worse as browsers expose more and more of their host operating system's functionality. The benefits of using a website instead of a native app are quickly disappearing while the drawbacks have only been somewhat mitigated. We're getting to the point where brows…
Mobile operating systems have really good security models, and native apps are even more isolated compared to the websites. I really wish that we would have similar isolation options on desktop/laptop OSes.
For example, Chromium was able to mitigate Meltdown/Spectre within days, even if the OS was still vulnerable. (Chrome already had site isolation ready to ship, a feature that completely isolates websites into their own process). Even better, Chromium browsers tend to update themselves (or via Google Play) automatically.
Meanwhile, OS vendors were scrambling to ship an OS update.
(Also, worth mentioning that iOS users were vulnerable until Apple shipped an OS update, because every browser on iOS has to use Apple's WebKit)
I'm also curious about apps vs native. Here on HN it seems people often hate on the web "you're the product, not the customer" vs native. But, half the websites I visit say "download the app!!!!". If all the spying on the web is so great for them but they're pushing you to an app, that to me suggests they get more spying on the app. Even if the app is just a webview, they get to set the policy so no blocking the 950+…
The modern web sucks, with all the tracking, etc. But it's still a lot better than apps, which give the developer more control without (in most cases) any tangible UX benefit. Just as an example, Reddit doesn't need to have an app, all they do is display text and images, along with some interaction, and they especially don't need to lock some content behind the app (I recently got a popup when trying to view a post s…
On top of that, platforms like Reddit and Facebook tend to prefer native apps because it's easier to keep you within the app. Even if you click a link to an external website, for example, Facebook will open that link in an in-app browser (unless you find the opt-out). A few years ago, a researcher found out that these apps often inject their own javascript into that in-app browser. In theory, that means FB can track you even on external sites, even if you do not accept cookies for that website. You just brought your own tracker. Facebook then decided they should ship their own entire browser engine, giving them even more control.
https://webventures.rejh.nl/blog/2022/in-app-browsers-are-tr...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What data can apps access without your explicit permission?
install tiktok (if you do not have it) and disable everything, no mic/camera/photos/contacts/… nothing. then ask you partner/friend/… to send you some text messages about purchasing an ebike for instance. open safari and do some searches for ebikes ( https://blue.bike perhaps and others)… the head on over to tiktok and scroll a bit and see if any ebikes start showing up…