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

I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

kalzumeus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 211 posts

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#161

Post by traderj0e »

yen223 wrote: post #160
traderj0e wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, they were like "Flash is too slow" then the replacement was 5x slower

No one argued Flash was too slow, they argued (correctly) that Flash was closed source, proprietary, and had a lot of security issues

The most famous criticism of Flash was "Thoughts on Flash" by Steve Jobs, which said among other things that it's too inefficient. He did cite inconsistent hardware acceleration for H.264 that was a real performance drawback of Flash for video in particular, and was also complaining about the power usage for interactive Flash content in general. Jobs was right at the time from what I can tell, but somehow the end result was even slower stuff. People did keep repeating the line that Flash is slow.

I also remember people citing performance as a reason YouTube switched from Flash to HTML5. Searching those blogs now is giving a lot of 404s. Like I said this should've helped since it's video, but somehow YouTube immediately got slower anyway back then. Back then I installed an extension to force it to use QuickTime Player for that reason.

The proprietary and insecure parts were real problems too. I'm fine with the decisions that were made, but this was a drawback.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#162

Post by Gigachad »

ryandrake wrote: post #66
theK wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. We did, it is the browser.

"The Browser" has turned out to be a pretty terrible application API, IMO. First, which browser? They are all (and have been) slightly different in infuriating ways going all the way back to IE6 and prior. Also, a lot of compromises were made while organically evolving what was supposed to be "a system for displaying and linking between text pages" into a cross-platform application and system API. The web's HTML/CSS…

Look at caniuse, if you see green boxes on all the current version browsers. Than you are good to go. If not, wait until the feature is more widely supported.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#163

Post by skydhash »

mpyne wrote: post #141
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. But it consumes at least 10x-100x more resources to run a web app than to run a comparable desktop app (written in a sufficiently low level language). The impact on people's time, money and on the environment are proportional.

> But it consumes at least 10x-100x more resources to run a web app than to run a comparable desktop app (written in a sufficiently low level language) Does it? Have you compared a web app written in a sufficiently low level language with a desktop app?

I believe Firefox use separate processes per tab and most of them are over 100MB per page. And that's understandable when you know that each page is the equivalent of a game engine with it's own attached editor.

A desktop app may consume more, but it's heavily focused on one thing, so a photo editor don't need to bring in a whole sound subsystem and a live programming system.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#164

Post by Gigachad »

jcelerier wrote: post #101
jimbokun wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have failed to design a universal app engine…except for the one that dwarfs every other kind of software development for every kind of device in the world.

Can a single webpage address & use more than 4gb of ram nowadays? I was filling 16gb of ram with a single Ableton live session in 2011.

Via electron I’m sure it could. In the main browser it’s probably best to cap usage to avoid having buggy pages consume everything. Anything heavy like a video editor you’d rather install as an electron app for deeper system access and such.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#165

Post by jasomill »

d3Xt3r wrote: post #153
hn_acc1 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, I prefer desktop apps because I KNOW when I've upgraded - it either said "upgrade now?" and did it, or, in the olden days, I had to track it down, or I installed an updated version of a distro, which included updated apps, so I expected some updates. There are some things that NATURALLY lend themselves to a website - like doctor's appointments, bank balance, etc - but it's still a pain when, on logging in to "…

> For something like Audacity (the audio program), how the heck does it make sense to put that on a website (I'm just giving a random example, I don't think they've actually done this), where you first have to upload your source file (privacy issues), manipulate it in a graphically/widget-limited browser I understand it was just an example, but you'd be surprised how far browsers have come along with technologies lik…

Sure, but taking your video editor example, what advantages does an in-browser app provide over a native application like DaVinci Resolve, other than portability and not needing to install the application, in exchange for reduced performance, a clunkier interface, and reduced integration with the rest of the desktop platform?

And if this is such a compelling value proposition for full-featured desktop productivity applications, why didn't Java Web Start set the world on fire?

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#166

Post by 2ndorderthought »

mohamedkoubaa wrote: post #56
nonethewiser wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its just waaaaaay easier to distribute a web app For some things a desktop app is required (more system access) or offers some competitive UX advantage (although this reason is shrinking all the time). Short of that user's are going to choose web 95% of the time.

This points to our failure as an industry to design a universal app engine that isn't a browser.

Steam is pretty close.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#167

Post by mohamedkoubaa »

rustcleaner wrote: post #134
fbrchps wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: is the web browser not already fulfilling the "universal app engine" need? It can already run on most end user devices where people do most other things. IoT/Edge devices don't count here, but this day most of their data is just being sent back to a server which is accessible via some web interface. Ignoring the fragmentation of course; although that seems to be getting less and less each year (so long…

>Counterpoint: is the web browser not already fulfilling the "universal app engine" need? Counter-counterpoint: Maybe it's time to require professional engineer certification before a software product can be shipped in a way that can be monetized. It's to filter devs from the industry who look at browsers today and go "Yeah, this is a good universal app engine."

This was cathartic to read thank you

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#168

Post by 2ndorderthought »

irishcoffee wrote: post #92
jstanley wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not that different, and it's a pretty good platform and pretty easy to program for. That's why it won.

It didn't win. It just survived long enough. The web is a terrible platform. I haven't ever shipped a line of "web code" for money and I plan to keep it that way until I retire. What a miserable way to make a living.

I envy your pure soul. I am one of many who has had, at times, been coerced through financial strain to write some front end code. All I ask for is, when the time comes, you try to remember me for who I was and not the thing I became.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#169

Post by 2ndorderthought »

foresto wrote: post #115
nonethewiser wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its just waaaaaay easier to distribute a web app For some things a desktop app is required (more system access) or offers some competitive UX advantage (although this reason is shrinking all the time). Short of that user's are going to choose web 95% of the time.

> its just waaaaaay easier to distribute a web app Let's also remember that it's infinitely easier to keep a native app operational, since there's no web server to set up or maintain.

No DNS, no DDOS, no network plane, no kubernetes, no required data egress, no cryptographic vulnerabilities, no surveillance of activity... It's almost like the push for everything to go through the web was like a psyop so everything we did and when was logged somewhere. No, no, that's not right.

Re: I'm done making desktop applications (2009)

#170

Post by 2ndorderthought »

miki123211 wrote: post #81
ryandrake wrote: post #17

Almost all of Patrick's points are great if your software development goal is to make a buck . They don't seem to matter if you're writing open source, and I'd argue that desktop apps are still relevant and wonderful in the open source world. I just started a new hobby project, and am doing it as a cross-platform, non-Electron, desktop app because that's what I like to develop. The onboarding funnel: Only a concern i…

Attitudes like these is why non-developers don't want to use open source software. These concerns may not matter to you, the developer, but they absolutely matter to end-users. If your prospective user can't find the setup.exe they just downloaded, they won't be able to use your software. If your conversion and onboarding sucks, they'll get confused and try the commercial offering instead. If you don't gather analyti…

If my user cannot install software in their own computer then I do not want their money. They have issues they need to work out on their own and they might be better off saving their money.
Post reply on HN