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

81–90 of 222 posts

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

#81

Post by fauigerzigerk »

lnanek2 wrote: post #76
tommorris wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Historically, on Android, there has been very little space in the data area for each individual app. An app that cached to that would have been unusable on my Nexus One for example, where I constantly had to delete apps whenever I wanted to install a new one, and I had very few - something like 10 or 15. The best place for the user has been to cache to the SD card, or the internal storage partition setup to look like…

One issue with these permissions is that I don't have a clue what they mean. Does the list of permissions I posted give that app the right to read all my personal data and upload it to one of their servers? Can it delete all my contacts or pictures? Can it make phone calls on my behalf or record my phone calls and upload the audio file to a server?

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

#82

Post by pedalpete »

tblancpain wrote: post #67
tommorris wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 thi…

I am yet to see an improved "reading" experience in an app. It's words on a screen. The ability to innovate is very limited.

Want swipe page turns ? That can be done in web. Scrolling? Zooming? Etc etc can all be done with a website.

Apps have there place, but I don't think news readers are it.

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

#83

Post by ozgung »

I think this is a valid position in the native/web app debate. Most apps are actually web sites, but they are mistakenly built as computer programs. This is not good engineering. In an ideal world %90 of the apps (anything but utilities, games and graphics applications) would remain as web sites, like they are on PCs. We never install a shopping application to our PCs. Web is the standardized and correct way of presenting interactive content.

Also note that Apple was against Flash mainly because it contradicts with this walled garden approach. Web+Flash (or HTML5 today) was the standard and free way of building almost all of the "apps" in the PC era. Native may have a performance gain in the short term (which becomes irrelevant in the long term as Moore's law dictates) but our loss of time and standardization in the development of an open and accessible (mobile) web lasts longer.

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

#84

Post by ersii »

wmil wrote: post #75
downandout wrote: post #5

I agree for the most part with this article. I think the major problem is that apps are being developed that offer absolutely no advantage over viewing the website in a browser - in fact many offer disadvantages. This is what happens when a market crowded with some shockingly bad app developers is combined with ignorant executive mandates that companies must have apps simply to be able to say that they have them.

They're popular with people who take the subway. Think about it, you're sitting there for half an hour with no service. An app that pre-downloads all of a newspaper's stories is handy and easy to use.

As long as it isn't a single application for each and every source you'd read things from.

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

#85

Post by fpgeek »

hn-miw-i wrote: post #38

I find the default iOS popup advertising an app the worst part, by large the app offers extra functionality over the web. the popup disrupts the experience and I also have the same feelings of rage on random site for some random stupid bullshit app. The compass in the iPhone for example, does device allow a web server query the phones heading through browser? Offline modes and caching are features not really possible…

Yes, compass heading can be queried through the browser: http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/device/orientation/

As of April 2011, the article claims various degrees of support from mobile Chrome, Safari, Opera and Firefox.

There's also plenty of work on application caching and offline support (though, to be fair, that's a very hard problem): http://www.html5rocks.com/en/features/offline

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

#86

Post by TeeWEE »

The biggest point he doesn't handle is speed: Viewing a news article in a fast newsreader app is much faster than downloading the whole website.

I wrote an app which uses rss feeds and smart preloading of data when it is not yet visible. Making it blazingly fast. I don't want to wait for we website to load.

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

#87

Post by [deleted] »

kamkazemoose wrote: post #49
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #41

And most apps require permissions that have very little to do with the purpose of the app. Here's what the BBC news reader for Android wants: THIS APPLICATION HAS ACCESS TO THE FOLLOWING: HARDWARE CONTROLS CHANGE YOUR AUDIO SETTINGS Allows the app to modify global audio settings such as volume and which speaker is used for output. NETWORK COMMUNICATION FULL NETWORK ACCESS Allows the app to create network sockets and…

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?

[deleted]

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

#88

Post by charonn0 »

Not to appear a shill for Amazon, but this is one of the things I like about my Kindle. I subscribe to several newspapers via Amazon, and they're pushed out to my Kindle as e-books each morning.

This doesn't solve the problem of URIs or of different layout/content/etc. for web vs e-book, but it does solve the data-container-as-app problem.

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

#90

Post by andrewaylett »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #81
lnanek2 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically, on Android, there has been very little space in the data area for each individual app. An app that cached to that would have been unusable on my Nexus One for example, where I constantly had to delete apps whenever I wanted to install a new one, and I had very few - something like 10 or 15. The best place for the user has been to cache to the SD card, or the internal storage partition setup to look like…

One issue with these permissions is that I don't have a clue what they mean. Does the list of permissions I posted give that app the right to read all my personal data and upload it to one of their servers? Can it delete all my contacts or pictures? Can it make phone calls on my behalf or record my phone calls and upload the audio file to a server?

I know it's not answering your actual point, but I'll answer your specific questions. No, it can't record audio, or make phone calls on your behalf -- both require specific permissions that aren't listed here. It can't access your contacts at all, either, as that requires a specific permission.

Pictures are stored on the SD card, so the app could read all your pictures, upload them, then delete them. Newer devices have more internal storage, so hopefully applications will gradually move away from using this permission. Apparently, the next version of Android will introduce a new permission for reading the SD card too -- at present, any application may read from the SD card.

"Read[ing] all my personal data" depends on what you count as personal data -- security-sensitive info should not be on the SD card (things like phone number (although the phone state and identity permission gives access to this), contacts, account details), but anything that is on the SD card may be read by any application. That means pictures and music, at least.

I wonder if it might be useful to always list all of the common permissions, to make it easier to see which ones an application doesn't have. I've installed enough Android apps to have a reasonable idea of what's available (and by extension, what any given app can't do) but it's reasonable to assume I'm in a small minority.

Post reply on HN