Live data from Hacker News

Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

rufatmammadli.medium.com

311–320 of 515 posts

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#311
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t have to do any of that for a native Mac app. Signing it is a good idea but not required and you can distribute it from your own website or even from GitHub/Lab where you can tell people it’s not notarized and they’ll need to command click and open it the first time.

In my opinion, this will become harder and harder to do with every release of Windows and MacOS. I wouldn't count on the average customer of these vendors being willing to shop outside of their plaatform's app stores forever.

Does a sizable portion of people shop for apps in the Microsoft or MacOS App Store? I was under the impression that neither are very popular.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#312
post #301
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons I moved to Javascript web development after many years as C/C++ dev, and after the hell of making iphone apps for Apples appstore - you dont have to get a licence, get approval or make an installer, if you ship a web 'app'.

You don’t have to do any of that for native apps either. What on earth is happening in this comment section?

I think on macOS it's kinda a requirement, even if you ship outside of the AppStore, to be trusted by consumers. Because I think the app needs to be signed by Apple, in order to start the app without a warning and I think in order for Apple to perform the signing, you'd need a developer account.

I might be wrong here as I have been focused pretty much only on mobile, so feel free to correct me.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#313
Reminds me of some of the remarks Joe Armstrong made a while ago [1], and which I came across via another submission a couple of weeks ago (which escapes me). It’s a great talk about the physical limits of computers and computation.

[1] https://youtu.be/lKXe3HUG2l4?si=nMkDTMfvBK1AKCYI

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#314
Web apps are much faster to install and update.

1) Your browser is always open, whereas you need to close your current app and open the app store app

2) Google Search is better at giving you what you want in the fewest number of keystrokes than any search from any other company including app store search boxes

3) installing a "web app" is one click after the google search results or if someone posts a link. As you might know from social media, even one click is a lot and most people won't click links in a comment. In the apple app store i have to tap on the app in the search result, tap install, double click the lock button, scan my face then wait many seconds. Some websites load in many seconds but that's not that common and it's considered a bad website

4) software is reinstalled on each use, meaning it's always updated. Native apps update randomly with a big delay and I have to check if there's an update manually sometimes

5) with native software there's a risk it will not support your device. Risk is commonly expressed as a cost, so the fact that in my life I've searched for an app and found out that it's not supported on iPad or not supported in my country can be counted as every single app store download since then took me .1 seconds longer because I now know there's a risk I will waste my time looking for the app. Web apps also don't work sometimes but it's more predictable since it's usually tied to real limitations like the screen size of your device. Another risk is malware, I feel nervous and powerless when installing native software because I don't know who I'm giving access and to and to what, whereas I understand what web apps can track. and also the fact that it's HTML and JavaScript instead of opaque assembly instructions makes ad blockers possible and cheap

Installation is an integral part of using software, and a big the reason the web won and continues to win.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#315
post #301
post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons I moved to Javascript web development after many years as C/C++ dev, and after the hell of making iphone apps for Apples appstore - you dont have to get a licence, get approval or make an installer, if you ship a web 'app'.

You don’t have to do any of that for native apps either. What on earth is happening in this comment section?

Yeah, the only actual hurdle from Apple is the measly 8 bucks a month for a developer account. I would happily pay ten times that amount just to avoid the node_modules dumpster fire

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#317
post #59
post #6

I want to make native apps but Apple and Microsoft seem to be trying really hard to stop me. I have to buy developer accounts, buy certificates for signing binaries, share 30% of my revenue with them for barely any reason and so on. Not to mention the mess they've introduced in their APIs - especially Microsoft. So of course we choose the much simpler, much cheaper way of the web.

The native world also refuses to create a standard UI API, making everyone use either Qt or Electron because sorry writing it over again for each platform is a hard “no.” Not even big companies do that anymore.

Not only that. There are people who go to great lengths to make sure that native apps don't work properly across desktop environments even on the same OS. They also call out anyone who dares to complain about it.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devil's advocate: you now get a lot of tooling for 'free', which used to cost hundreds or thousands of dollars.

The problem with this argument is that the tools for proprietary platforms are inferior to the cross-platform ones in many cases. VSCode is better than XCode or Android Studio. GCC and Clang are better than MSVC. We don't need platform lock-in to subsidize good tools because the best tools are unencumbered. I'd happily build iOS apps without XCode or any of Apple's frameworks to save the 30% fee. Heck, I'd do it even…

> VSCode is better than XCode or Android Studio

That’s just your opinion though isn’t it

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#319
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Customers refusing to upgrade on-premises software After a certain period of time, that software worked just fine for those customers. Photoshop is a great example. Sure, you won’t get the flashiest features, but CS4 will still work for you on a Win7 machine without any additional fees paid.

Once I commit to buying a version of Software X, I'm happy with it. As a user I expect Software X to work as-installed for decades to come. I don't want new features. I don't want the UX to change on me all of a sudden. I don't want it to get slower. Bugfixes and security fixes are fine, as long as everything else remains the same. I wish more developers understood and respected this.

Developers probably do.

Businesses don't. Gotta find a way to sell the same shit every year.

Re: Did we lose our way in making efficient software?

#320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't sign your binaries on macOS, the friction for the user to run your app is prohibitive, outside of developer-focused communities.

And if you don't sign your binaries on Windows, Windows Defender will assume they're malware and silently delete them.

Nope. Or at least, never happened to me. This comment section is starting to read like a "Bad Times" virus warning

https://web.archive.org/web/20060925013545/http://www.making...

Post reply on HN