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

Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

danq.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 571 posts

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#261

Post by carlosjobim »

max-privatevoid wrote: post #231
carlosjobim wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I invite down voters to make a reply explaining why users would prefer web apps to native apps, given the choice.

I encourage you to actually read the OP if you haven't, because I think it gives the most obvious example for that. That kind of app makes much more sense (for the user) to be a web app, especially when you don't intend to become a repeat customer.

Yes, for the article example I completely agree that a travel itinerary should never be an app. But it shouldn't be a web page either. It should be a document saved on your device. So that you always have offline access to it when traveling.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#262

Post by drdexebtjl »

Telaneo wrote: post #139
Grombobulous wrote: post #53

I recently decided to publish an app on the App Store just so I could say I accomplished that, and maybe even make a little bit of beer money on the side. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that my actual app is pretty much garbage. I don’t expect it to be popular. It’s basically a worse version of stuff that is already available. I expected this to be a learning exercise about the process of getting stuff published. Lo…

> I might be misremembering or misinterpreting, but it seems like you really need an LLC with a mail forwarding service and a cheap second phone line just to avoid the App Store sending the whole internet to your personal phone and address. For something free I can get why this would seem unreasonable (modulo scams, for which this is a hoop I would rather have than not), but if money's involved, a consumer should be…

I would want that hoop for free apps too. If the developer is, for example, found to be mishandling private data, or maybe sharing my intellectual property, someone needs to answer for it.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#263

Post by cyral »

berkes wrote: post #210
wahnfrieden wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do App Store customers have any need to contact the underlying developers in this scenario? The EU decided so, and Apple didn't require this before EU did

I find this hard to believe, since Google Play store requires much less info, and doesn't disclose it to consumers (AFAIK). Did the EU specifically demand this from Apple? Did they specifically require that consumers must be able to contact developers? Or is this another "spin" by Apple to make the EU look bad when it imposes consumer protection that is bad for Apples revenue? Like they did with "chargers", "cables"…

I'm pretty sure the Google Play Store does require this. I remember a few years ago (no longer at the company) having to verify a phone number and maybe address that is posted publicly.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#265

Post by warkdarrior »

socalgal2 wrote: post #229
Schiendelman wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I've published apps. When GP says their actual app is "pretty much garbage" and that there was red tape and nitpicking - Apple is trying to stop garbage !

It's hard to go look in the app store and see what a dumpster fire it actually is and then claim Apple is trying . They aren't. They're just claiming that as marketing to keep their money making machine.

> It's hard to go look in the app store and see what a dumpster fire it actually is and then claim Apple is trying. They aren't.

You cannot make that claim unless you know how many apps Apple has rejected for being garbage. On one hand, developers complain Apple runs all kinds of checks on their apps before publishing on the App Store. On the other hand, users complain that App Store has too many low-quality apps. Both can be true at the same time if the stream of apps is high volume and low quality.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#266

Post by Telaneo »

berkes wrote: post #226
Telaneo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How far down does this go? Should I be able to contact the individual person who picked the specific strawberries in my carton of strawberries? Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In the case of your strawberries that would probably be the farmer. > In the Walmart t-shirt example, should I have the contact info for not only the factory but the other suppliers who made the dyes, threads, cot…

> Down to the manufacturer of the whole product you're buying. In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying? Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first. But…

> In case of an app, what is the "product" you are buying?

The app.

> Because according to Apple, they add a lot of "value" by ensuring the software is safe, performant, etc etc. Am I not buying "a safe, checked app"? Or am I buying an app and then separately pay Apple for an added service of "checking the app for safety" etc etc. I'd very much presume the first.

If you want to, you can imagine the 30% cut being that separate service, but most analyses I've seen of this assume the first is the case, and I can't really see why it wouldn't be.

> But many apps are really a service or even more that happen to have "an app" as one of the ways to interact with the service: Netflix, Uber, protonmail, Vinted (or ebay), etc etc: the app isn't the thing I buy.

In those cases the app on the App Store is free, so there's nothing a consumer can really complain about, since they haven't bought anything. You can complain about the service rendered when you pay, but that purchase is handled completely separately from the app (non-)purchase.

> Point being: It's not simple, so your answers don't fit the analogy of "wallmart".

It does for apps bought as products. If you want an analogy for apps bought as services, then I'll use a different analogy, since they behave differently, and are treated differently in law.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#267

Post by paulddraper »

Grombobulous wrote: post #53

I recently decided to publish an app on the App Store just so I could say I accomplished that, and maybe even make a little bit of beer money on the side. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that my actual app is pretty much garbage. I don’t expect it to be popular. It’s basically a worse version of stuff that is already available. I expected this to be a learning exercise about the process of getting stuff published. Lo…

> my actual app is pretty much garbage

The app review process is explicitly meant to keep out garbage apps.

Sounds like it worked as designed?

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#268

Post by turtlebits »

da02 wrote: post #255
jcmontx wrote: post #241

Something the author doesn't mention as a pro for the web is my favorite type of tech: browser extensions. I love web because I can basically customize pretty much everything to my needs. I have published a few of them in the last few years, and I have tens of them which I haven't published. I use them for tons of different things: * allowing only text tweets on X * blocking photos and videos on all Meta products * b…

Are these Chrome extensions? How did you learn to write them?

I use the tampermonkey extension (formerly greasemonkey). AI is fairly good for writing scripts.

Re: Your 'app' could have been a webpage (so I fixed it for you)

#269

Post by Telaneo »

cyral wrote: post #260
Telaneo wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I might be misremembering or misinterpreting, but it seems like you really need an LLC with a mail forwarding service and a cheap second phone line just to avoid the App Store sending the whole internet to your personal phone and address. For something free I can get why this would seem unreasonable (modulo scams, for which this is a hoop I would rather have than not), but if money's involved, a consumer should be…

> a consumer should be able to contact a human and be made whole Apple does not provide any mechanism for developers to issue a refund, or even look up or view your purchase or subscription - so there is nothing a developer can do here besides refer you to apple support. (Although as a developer I would like to be able to do this, because customers are very confused by it)

Sounds like something Apples needs to be fix then.
Post reply on HN