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

No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

tommorris.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 222 posts

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#61

Post by berkut »

tommorris wrote: post #59
kamkazemoose wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an expert on Android permissions, but those seem reasonable to me. What permissions do you have a problem with, and what should they replace it with, or do you think is totally unnecessary?

It would be interesting to know why a news reading application needs full access to my file system.

The BBC news app caches pics and content - that's how when you open it a second time (even if it was shut down) it can show the tiles really quickly without downloading them.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#62

Post by tblancpain »

What this article ignores is that the computer is always a multi-purpose-multi-tasking tool, while phones for the most part and by most people are used for one thing at a time. There are notifications, but otherwise as long as you're happy doing what you're in an app you'll stay there. That's a big advantage for an organization like a newspaper, and an obvious reason to go for an app.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#63

Post by tommorris »

berkut wrote: post #61
tommorris wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be interesting to know why a news reading application needs full access to my file system.

The BBC news app caches pics and content - that's how when you open it a second time (even if it was shut down) it can show the tiles really quickly without downloading them.

Okay, and why does that mean it needs access to my complete filesystem rather than just a little namespaced, security-controlled chunk of filesystem allocated by the OS to it?

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#65

Post by tommorris »

tblancpain wrote: post #62

What this article ignores is that the computer is always a multi-purpose-multi-tasking tool, while phones for the most part and by most people are used for one thing at a time. There are notifications, but otherwise as long as you're happy doing what you're in an app you'll stay there. That's a big advantage for an organization like a newspaper, and an obvious reason to go for an app.

I don't see why that makes the case for native apps more compelling.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#66

Post by krichman »

rimantas wrote: post #34
krichman wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing preventing the implementation of sharing via a website (or posting to a URL) instead of an app. There's nothing preventing standard interactions with your phone to be delivered by checking an API instead of requiring an app. You can still use many websites in offline mode. They are right, pushing for apps can a way to silo data and prevent you from using your phone as a general purpose device. How can…

> prevent you from using your phone as a general purpose > device So some time ago you were able to use your phone as a general purpose device? Interesting, for me iPhone was the first phone that made web bearable on mobile.

Me too.

But there's Apple's continued refusal to let us use the hardware in any way they don't like, and this push for apps instead of websites. It looks to me like one step forward, two steps back.

We finally have these tiny computers in our pockets. We should push hard to stop anything restricting it. For me that includes refusing to use an app that offers nothing over the website other than push notice advertising.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#67

Post by tblancpain »

tommorris wrote: post #65
tblancpain wrote: post #62

What this article ignores is that the computer is always a multi-purpose-multi-tasking tool, while phones for the most part and by most people are used for one thing at a time. There are notifications, but otherwise as long as you're happy doing what you're in an app you'll stay there. That's a big advantage for an organization like a newspaper, and an obvious reason to go for an app.

I don't see why that makes the case for native apps more compelling.

It helps the consumer because if it's a good app, it allows you to better focus on that one task you're after. Reading the news, for example. I haven't had any of the problems he discusses with the NYTimes app, for example.

For the organization, the benefits of longer engagement are pretty obvious as well.

He's right about a lot of bad developers (and clueless execs) producing really crappy apps. He's wrong if he thinks that a lot of the bigger brands are still at that stage.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#68

Post by koralatov »

phatbyte wrote: post #64

While I completely agree with the OP, I must say that if this happens it's because we users allow it. Let's just stop downloading these apps. Maybe then, the app will be an extra and not a requirement to access web content.

I'm very much in the `take a stand' crowd, but the problem with using that approach is that most people just want to RTFA, so a lot of them will grudgingly download the app in question to do so. And once it's on there, there's no frustrating first step, so they continue to use it. It builds, slowly but surely, a user-base for the app, which means that those refusing to use it become easier to ignore.

Re: No, I'm not going to download your bullshit app

#69

Post by Nursie »

retrogradeorbit wrote: post #48
twoodfin wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? As far as I can tell, cell phone service is getting better at a good clip. Were you routinely getting 10-20 Mbps of bandwidth three years ago? I wasn't.

My experience (in Australia) is not this. Sure, the number they write on the advertisement keeps getting bigger. But my mobile phone on Telstra CDMA circa 2001 was orders of magnitude better at making voice calls than my 3G Android phone today. It was a gradual decline. As the years went by, and I "upgraded", the quality of the phone call aspect of the device just went down and down and down. The computing and data a…

"Who makes calls anymore? I do."

I think you might rapidly be becoming a minority. The data service to my phone (ok 'phablet') is far more important to me than the voice aspect. I make a call a week on average, but use data constantly. This is not 'bells and whistles' and more, it's primary function.

I have a pocket-sized networked tablet that, as a bonus, can handle voice service pretty OK.

Post reply on HN