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

I Don't Want Your Fucking App

idontwantyourfuckingapp.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 270 posts

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#231

Post by dreamfactory »

brudgers wrote: post #209
dreamfactory wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking more device orientation/velocity/camera etc Geo is available on web, and SSO via fb etc allow virality through contact lists in much the same way as an app (I think). I guess the biggest reason why a business should get you to install an app is push messaging (though I guess that could be approximated with email).

An app with access to your camera can shoot fucking video or pictures and run them through analysis. For example, an internet radio station can adjust its playlist based on who it sees. Well, that and its ads.

Of course there are things you can do with apps that you can't do with sites (though I guess HTML5 is looking to challenge this) - but the OP is talking about sites pushing app versions of themselves through modal blockers to the content she/he is trying to reach, not separate apps which couldn't be remotely realised as sites.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#232

Post by loudandskittish »

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #133

Delicious irony: http://i.imgur.com/1NS9s7L.png

This one, along with other blog hosts, bug me the most. I'm toying around with various blogging sites, looking to get back into the practice seriously and when I go to see how a theme looks on mobile and get the "INSTALL OUR APP!!!" pop-up, it's a great reminder that it's not MY blog.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#233

Post by leephillips »

PnuklOEvolu wrote: post #19
leephillips wrote: post #3

It takes a certain special skill to use high-frequency profanity and make it funny. I doubt I possess it, and now I know that these guys definitely do not.

Can't you tell the difference between attempted humor and frothing-at-the-mouth frustration? I for one FUCKING agree with this guy.

"Can't you tell the difference"

Apparently not.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#234

Post by leephillips »

edent wrote: post #13
leephillips wrote: post #3

It takes a certain special skill to use high-frequency profanity and make it funny. I doubt I possess it, and now I know that these guys definitely do not.

The fucking point is that it's fucking annoying when dealing with repetitious annoyances. I wrote it because I'm fucking annoyed and if, perchance, I've annoyed you - then my fucking work is done. You ossified wank rag. :-) [Obligatory smiley face so you don't think I actually hate you. I do, obviously, but the emoticon might sooth your fucking soul.]

Point taken - and I agree with your frustration, etc. All satirists and devoted ranters must remember the chief hazard of their occupation, however, which is becoming that which they parody, or rail against.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#235

Post by gyardley »

mtts wrote: post #159
michaelfeathers wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Americans, by contrast, seem a lot more upset about the swearing. I wonder why that is? There's a prudish streak in the US that I really believe comes from the fact that the country was originally settled by people too religious and too concerned with overtly moral social interaction to be tolerated in 17th century England. That may seem like too easy an explanation but I really do think there is some truth to it…

Oh, it's definitely true. When Brits riot, they throw "stones". Americans think the word reminds them of testicles and so throw "rocks" instead. Which to Brits is ridiculous as to them "rocks" are rather larger bits of stone that are pretty hard to pick up, let alone throw. I'm told. Not being a native speaker of either British or American English I wouldn't know if this is true or not, but I thought the story was am…

This is an amusing story, but it's not accurate. America just lacks the British size distinction between rocks and stones, and someone (likely a Brit) made up this explanation as a way to poke fun at Americans.

After all, when it's time for a proper riot no one really cares about the subtext of the name of the thing they're chucking. "Hey, share some of those stones with me, I bet I can smash that cop's windshield." "They're rocks, Jake - we're anarchists, not perverts."

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#236

Post by yareally »

d23 wrote: post #222
tomjen3 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think marketroids care about reality based things like data -- the good ones does, but not the kind that is employed by the daily mail. The daily mail is actually better because they _explicitly_ wrote "you wont see this again for 7 days", which is insane, since if I didn't want it the first time I don't want it the second time. As for quora, well they are run by people who wants to make the world a worse pla…

> As for quora, well they are run by people who wants to make the world a worse place to be, so no surprise there. I actually quite like Quora. Any particular reason for the hate?

Forced registration to read it would be my guess. Nothing else against it really personally. Some people just don't like having to create an account to (passively) participate in a community. I read hacker news for well over a year before I decided to create an actual account for posting.

If I feel I reach a point I can contribute something useful to a community, that is when I create an account. However, I think forcing people to create an account either detours some or nudges others to participate more (whether they have anything useful to contribute or not).

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#237

Post by yareally »

Dewie wrote: post #221
reinhardt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with all points. What I'm wondering is, what percentage of mobile users are like me, you and almost everyone that commented here? Does the proverbial "average user" share the sentiment? My guess is no, or else the marketroids that push the app agenda would have gotten the message by now.

There are a lot of web designs that the average user finds annoying, which is in the same category as this - 'I don't want a splash page, I don't want your artsy and convention-breaking layout, I don't want your app - I just want to find what I need without anything getting in my way.' It can be hard to find web pages that don't violate some useability principles that seem pretty obvious. Maybe it's just cargo-cult p…

Fixed elements on a web page are my biggest pet-peeve. Just eats away at the precious vertical space on my monitor.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#238

Post by ryanmerket »

Joeri wrote: post #136
reinhardt wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with all points. What I'm wondering is, what percentage of mobile users are like me, you and almost everyone that commented here? Does the proverbial "average user" share the sentiment? My guess is no, or else the marketroids that push the app agenda would have gotten the message by now.

The mobile market has been exploding. Even if you did a lot of stuff wrong it's almost impossible to not have had a growth curve. My feeling is that most content-driven apps would have been more successful as mobile sites, but that it's impossible to derive this from statistics due to the unstable pattern of the market as a whole.

It's actually much harder to monetize mobile web than to monetize in-app.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#239

Post by yareally »

brudgers wrote: post #128
michaelfeathers wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Americans, by contrast, seem a lot more upset about the swearing. I wonder why that is? There's a prudish streak in the US that I really believe comes from the fact that the country was originally settled by people too religious and too concerned with overtly moral social interaction to be tolerated in 17th century England. That may seem like too easy an explanation but I really do think there is some truth to it…

The oldest city in the US was established by Roman Catholics - who spoke Spanish. The first English Speaking settlements were commercial. But more to your argument, Roger Williams was a Puritan, but anything but a prude. He figured that going to Hell was punishment enough to justify practical acceptance of non-believers in this world. Our National myths don't necessarily conform with the facts, amigo .

Roger Williams was also exiled from the other Puritans in Massachusetts (5 years after arriving in Boston). Not implying that was related to his colorful usage of the English Language, but marginalizing the influence he had on the Puritan culture of the New England region. Can't really say he represents all Puritans and is just one example of those that ended up settling in Rhode Island. He also became a Calvanist/Baptist following his exile to Rhode Island after disagreements with the Puritans in Massachusetts, so he was not exactly a Puritan for long after settling in the New World. I know I'm reaching with this statement, but I would say he probably had a slight contempt for what was considered "normal" or "acceptable" by others at the time as well so cursing would fit his personality.

Re: I Don't Want Your Fucking App

#240

Post by ryanmerket »

wes-exp wrote: post #86

FYI to developers: Apple tried to fix the obtrusiveness of these popups with "smart app banners" in iOS 6: http://www.macgasm.net/2012/09/19/ios-6-smart-app-banners/ Please use them!

There's an upside to using them too: You can send tracking data back to your app through the Apple App Store 'black box' allowing you to track where your users come from. Use the 'app-argument' meta tag variable and put your tracking info within the URL.
Post reply on HN