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

321–330 of 496 posts

Re: “It works better in the app”

#321

Post by mikepurvis »

inigyou wrote: post #298
mikepurvis wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh maybe. I mean, it was a three hour show and I don't carry coins any more. So that would have been ATM -> go to a store and break a twenty -> put in a few bucks -> remember to go out at intermission and put in more money. Paying by phone is a step up from that old world; I just want it to be one tap, not a whole sequence that tries to upsell me on a monthly pass or establishing an in-app "parking wallet" or whatev…

Not carrying coins is your own fault, not the system's. You can't refuse the analog solutions and then complain the digital ones are too digital.

I guess, but no one carries coins, and the machine doesn't accept them. Me not having coins changed nothing about this situation.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#322

Post by ethin »

mrweasel wrote: post #281
ethin wrote: post #244

Hot take but I think the entire concept of a "web app" needs to die. My web browser does not need access to my GPU, OpenGL/Vulkan, USB, MIDI, HID, . All of those are things a native app needs, not a website. IMO if you need that kind of access and your instinct is to do it as a "web app" your doing it wrong. Same thing, I would argue, for things even like WebAudio or WebSpeech. At this point my web browser is so comp…

For many of these things we're not talking about a web app though. It's frequently just a form, disguised as something more. I agree that the browser should be stripped back, but none of those things prevent my banks website from allowing me to do a payment. E.g. your fitness tracking app or your parking app, they don't need any of those features. They can work perfectly fine as simply forms, they aren't "apps".

I know, but my point was that this should just not be a thing. Our web browsers have become way too complicated and then you get outcomes like what tfa talks about.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#323

Post by vel0city »

GJim wrote: post #266
vel0city wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its like two taps on my phone to scan a QR code where as typing that is probably going to take me 26+ taps. And I usually prefer to just scan a QR code to get the wifi details. Once again, its far fewer taps. If you could do something with just two clicks or do something with 26 clicks, which path would you normally take?

You scan and trust random QR codes? To paraphrase George Bush: Goatse me once, shame on...shame on you. Goatse me — you can't get Goatse'd again

You type in and trust random URLs? You just click on random URLs?

No, I don't just go around and scan every random QR code sticker on every single lamp post without any kind of context. But a QR code on the back of a business card with their contact information already nicely digitally formatted? Sure. A friend's QR code of their WiFi credentials on a little plaque in the den? Sure. A QR code at the bar showing the live tap list menu? Sure. A presenter giving the presentation slides by QR code? Sure.

And I pay attention to the URL that QR code is sending me to before I actually decide to go there. The QR code is just so I don't have to type in reallylongannoyingurl.ninja/some-horrific%20path/and?with=junkinit. It shows me the URL and asks "Do you want to go to obviousgoatse.com?" after it scans the code. That's the tap 2 of the two taps.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#324

Post by flerchin »

chrisjj wrote: post #214
thewebguyd wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Apple, before caving in, didn't want apps. On the original iPhone there was no SDK, Jobs' "sweet solution" to expanding functionality was web apps pinned to the home screen. Everyone complained, loudly, and they caved in and launched the app store.

What complaint?

Well I wanted a way to write native software for the iPhone at the time.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#326

Post by mikepurvis »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #257
inigyou wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should have been put coins in a slot.

Or use your card on the machine. We had that for a while, but then these stupid parking companies started to get traction.

Yes, just a plain tap-to-pay on the meter itself (or a nearby kiosk) is the obvious solution. I think doing it on the meter is awkward because then they all need to be online, so you're either dealing with individual M2M cards or some kind of local mesh network, not to mention powering them all. The kiosk is another thing to have to install and maintain and power. And doing a plain tap would have no way of inputting how long you wanted to pay for.

All that to say, I can fully understand how we ended up with "here's a sticker with a number on it, pay on your phone"; it's just, the pay on your phone option should be a one step apple/google pay webpage where you at most have to enter your license plate, and it certainly should not be collecting credit card details within the app.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#327

Post by flerchin »

munificent wrote: post #311

The anecdote in the article is at odds with the title. * In the anecdote, the problem is that the web version works better and the app is missing functionality. * The title pays reference to an annoying observation about many products where the web version lacks functionality the app has. Both are frustrating. If a company is going to bother to have both an app and a website, users deserve an experience where both ar…

The post is pointing out the irony. Corpos will tell you that "it works better in the app", and that is dubious at best.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#328

Post by stackghost »

inigyou wrote: post #298
mikepurvis wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh maybe. I mean, it was a three hour show and I don't carry coins any more. So that would have been ATM -> go to a store and break a twenty -> put in a few bucks -> remember to go out at intermission and put in more money. Paying by phone is a step up from that old world; I just want it to be one tap, not a whole sequence that tries to upsell me on a monthly pass or establishing an in-app "parking wallet" or whatev…

Not carrying coins is your own fault, not the system's. You can't refuse the analog solutions and then complain the digital ones are too digital.

Digital solutions don't have to be abusive.

Where I live the city commissioned its own mobile app for parking, and all numbered parking spots in the city use that app.

There are private lots that use Honk or Robbins or whatever, but the municipal lots and all parallel parking spaces downtown all use the same single app and the revenue goes to the city.

The city parking app works reasonably well, no ads, it just does one thing. If you leave early you open the app and hit "stop parking" and it only charges you the 37 cents or whatever that you actually consumed. It sends you a push notification when your parking is about to expire. And if you don't like the app for whatever reason, you can still pay with a card at the pay machines on every block. It's unglamorous, but it's fantastic technology.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#329

Post by willtemperley »

reaperducer wrote: post #192
dmayle wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A ton of features work only or better on app: - anything privacy sensitive - anything processing intense (using optimized binaries) - widgets - camera and audio based features *can* work, but are more finicky (or outright broken on ios) - local storage (exists in web app, short lifetimes on web site) - performance/latency sensitive work - (I'm less familiar, but probably local sensors, like gps and acceleration)

anything privacy sensitive You've got that backwards. Web is more private than an app. Every regulated healthcare company has a web site. None require an "app."

It depends. Truly working offline, which is as private as it gets in many scenarios, isn’t really feasible with web apps.

Re: “It works better in the app”

#330

Post by princevegeta89 »

saratogacx wrote: post #315
princevegeta89 wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that people often forget to uninstall these apps almost all the time. Apps like Delta, Southwest etc. are the perfect candidate for this. We require something similar to ephemeral apps that exist only for a limited period and automatically get deleted later. If the OS could provide such a feature by default, it would be a blessing. However, this again contradicts the commercial interests of many companie…

My android phone will put apps into "deep sleep" and remove all their permissions if I haven't opened it in a month or so. I just toss travel apps into a folder in my launcher and they are there if I need them but become just a consumer of drive space on their own.

Deep sleep is a great option. Archive is a couple steps beyond that, it essentially makes it equal to the app being uninstalled, at the cost of a bit of a disk space.
Post reply on HN