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

“It works better in the app”

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 496 posts

Re: “It works better in the app”

#171

Post by barrell »

sroussey wrote: post #132
mapontosevenths wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your app is just a webpage that forces me to use an app just so you can spy on me I just won't use your product. I've switched brokers over it, I swapped banks, I stopped shopping at certain stores. I'm done. The only say I have is in how I spend my money. Those companies won't get any of mine if I can help it. I am the customer, not the product dammit.

Twitter is the worst. You go to a page and scroll down and it banners a beater in the app thing and you can’t dismiss it. You either get the app or close the tab. Close the tab.

Idk Google Maps is pretty bad. Clicking on the search bar force opens the App Store, and trying to load photos does the same and straight up lies to you saying it’s only available in the app. But if you scroll down to the second carousel of images it loads fine in web.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#172

Post by leot »

surajrmal wrote: post #78
gchamonlive wrote: post #43

The author said it perself, "the greatest minds of our generation" working at Google, so those jagged edges are surely by design, and it's the rational most efficient solution in a economy of attention where the line between the product and the user is blurred.

In some cases it's just because the userbase using the web on their phone instead of the app is incredibly small and it's not worth funding feature parity. It can be difficult to distinguish this case from more hostile takes like reddit and Twitter.

Reddit has started putting up a paywall of sorts to block mobile web users, saying that instead, users should install the app. old.reddit.com remains as an ugly workaround.

The whole thing is nuts:

1. All of reddit's content is UGC. They write literally nothing themselves. There's a strong argument that everything there written by unpaid users should be considered a public good.

2. Tech companies are now, ostensibly, aware of value of having users who engage intentionally instead of compulsively. Mobile apps, with their notifications etc., encourage compulsion. Websites less so.

It will be an interesting reckoning when the polity wakes up to the idea that as social media companies don't pay for the content, they should have no right to restrict access to it. LLMs likewise wouldn't work at all without the petabytes of data they either got for free from users or purloined, and so the argument for their weights being public goods is similar.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#173

Post by gandreani »

Gualdrapo wrote: post #56

I sell stuff ocassionaly on a "local" platform called MercadoLibre (like, I could afford a new handlebar for my bicycle so I could sell there the old one). Mercadolibre kind of wants to be the argentinian Amazon, even lobbying in the argentinian government so they will ban similar platforms from other countries. With time, MercadoLibre has become incredibly hostile and greedy for us small sellers, while favoring corp…

I bet they had to change identity verification providers so that's why you have to re-validate again.

It's a shame there's no alternative to Meli. I'm shopping around for a macbook and I would much rather have a marketplace with verified identities and profiles than the shady whatsapp groups and contacts I'm finding.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#174

Post by adfignaioernio »

armadyl wrote: post #151
_fat_santa wrote: post #105

This is a constant argument i have with by business partner. He's always asking me "when are we making an app for our " and I always reply back: "We already have an app! It's just a PWA" PWA's are freaking awesome for both users and developers. Users don't have to install a massive app and me as a developer can focus on making one platform better rather than 3. And they are pretty freaking powerful in what you can do…

Though you’re limiting your growth potential here by letting your ideology get in the way. Mobile platform users when surveyed almost always overwhelmingly prefer native apps and it’s not even close. I anticipate if you start getting public feature requests a native app will be at the top of the list.

[dead]

Re: “It works better in the app”

#175

Post by jknoepfler »

gtufano wrote: post #144
GJim wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just scan the QR Lord no! Scanning a random QR code.... where is the worst it will take you? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crrpknqpgzlo

The actual reality is that it's impossible to have people go to a web site from a physical ad/offer/thing without using a QR (or paying Google). Google (and friends) managed to hide the URL almost totally, people don't even know that you can go somewhere without searching on google. So the options are: paying google to have your name point to you (an expensive choice depending on the actual name) or use a QR. Weirdly…

Did domain names stop functioning all of the sudden? Going to somedipshitsbar.com/menu is about as complicated as entering a wifi password at a coffee shop.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#176

Post by spicyjpeg »

brk wrote: post #9

At this point the barrier for me to install an app is pretty high. If you're going to needlessly gate certain functions behind an app that work on a desktop browser (or could work in-browser), then I just won't use those functions. If by extension that degrades the value I get from your site, then I just won't use the site, and I won't be contributing to ADU stats you promote to advertisers. Every single company has…

A particularly worrying trend that keeps spreading is the one of restricting significant amounts of (often non-financial) functionality to the apps only, gated behind your phone passing device integrity checks, in what seems to be a poorly thought out attempt at blocking all forms of scraping and automation (AI or not). The worst offender right now is probably Twitter, which alongside the recent Nitter cease-and-desist now appears to require client integrity on all logged out access.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#177

Post by mavamaarten »

sroussey wrote: post #132
mapontosevenths wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your app is just a webpage that forces me to use an app just so you can spy on me I just won't use your product. I've switched brokers over it, I swapped banks, I stopped shopping at certain stores. I'm done. The only say I have is in how I spend my money. Those companies won't get any of mine if I can help it. I am the customer, not the product dammit.

Twitter is the worst. You go to a page and scroll down and it banners a beater in the app thing and you can’t dismiss it. You either get the app or close the tab. Close the tab.

LinkedIn too. The first time they show a bottom sheet dialog thing on the website, and if you dismiss it, it scrolls you all the way to the top. The second time it appears, it messes with the page and sometimes automatically closes the tab.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#178

Post by padjo »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #133
stronglikedan wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the bigger issue there is that you're trusting Google with your health data. Surely there's an offline calendar app that could help you track it just as well. Anyway, I hope you benefit from the therapy regardless of how you decide to track it.

everyone is allowed to take their own risks. I don't pay for contents insurance. I'm up around a $1000 on that bet so far.

If the lose isn't going to dramatically impact your financial wellbeing then insurance is always an irrational bet.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#179

Post by llm_nerd »

the_bear wrote: post #61

In Google's defense, they weren't the ones that championed the "everything must be an app" movement. My memory of the 2010s is that Google (and while they were relevant, Palm) pushed cross-platform web apps, but Apple ran a successful marketing campaign to convince everyone that everything on mobile must be a native app for reasons[1]. So we end up with a walled garden of native apps that must be approved by and pay…

[flagged]

Re: “It works better in the app”

#180

Post by Quarrelsome »

padjo wrote: post #178
Quarrelsome wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

everyone is allowed to take their own risks. I don't pay for contents insurance. I'm up around a $1000 on that bet so far.

If the lose isn't going to dramatically impact your financial wellbeing then insurance is always an irrational bet.

ye the sums would be different if I had dependents, but I'm fortunate that I don't.
Post reply on HN