Why haven't local-first apps become popular? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#401

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 8:57 AM UTC

jonahx wrote: post #360

Eisenstein wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying that because people are being screwed in the current market that is undeniable proof that people are OK with being screwed by the market? If I misunderstand you please correct me. If that is what you contend, then you have no addressed whether or not the market allows them to do otherwise. You take for granted that the market is free and that people are willingly choosing this outcome with perfect k…

You are making all these theoretical points... do you doubt that people are demonstrably lazy and willing to give up their privacy and control for free or cheap or convenient stuff? I don't see how this is even a contentious point to make. You're bringing up all these theoretical counterpoints that either obviously don't apply, or only apply very partially. There are many local only, FOSS options available for every…

The root of the cause is that we allow companies to run mass psychological manipulation campaigns to get people to act against their bests interests. It's not a people problem, it's a corporate propaganda problem.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#402

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:09 AM UTC

Arch-TK wrote: post #392

Eisenstein wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, I guess am focusing more on your using the 'economics' as proof that it is a people problem, because I see it used that way all the time without regard to structures and human elements. Basically people use 'but the market is obviously working so it must just be the way it is'. They see it as the result of a theoretical market structure in which people make purely rational decisions in their best interest on a…

Either people are broadly ok with being screwed (my personal experience suggests this) or there is a grand conspiracy to prevent anyone who is not screwing their customers from competing in the market. Maybe it is the latter, who knows. But what I do know is that the non-screwing options exist, but are often less popular and more expensive (either in price, time, or effort). And this annoys me to no end. Because _I_…

It's not that people are OK with being screwed over but rather that they have been conditioned into being helpless about it. Big corporations hire psychological experts that know exactly how to manipulate you into thinking you need their products or otherwise act against your own best interests, whether that's through advertisement, peer pressure or whatever else they can come up with.

You yourself admit that while you don't want to be screwed you only have the option of not being screwed if those around you also choose not being screwed yet somehow you conclusion that others are different and must be OK with being screwed. Presumably you also often choose being screwed over being socially ostracized? Do you really make sure that all those around you have options to still interact without without being screwed?

Yes people often technically have options of not getting screwed but those options almost exist in a different world and in order to choose them you have to abandon the one you are living in now. That people cannot afford to do that does not mean that they are OK with being screwed.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#403

Post by perlgeek » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:10 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #273

> The Solution: CRDTs. The right approach is CRDTs (Conflict-Free Replicated Data Types)... This means you can apply messages in any order, even multiple times, and every device will still converge to the same state. This is very much "draw the rest of the owl". Creating a CRDT model for your data that matches intuitive user expectations and obeys consistent business logic is... not for the faint of heart. Also remem…

Also, when you get a new requirement that needs a modification of the data model, you have to both remodel your CRDTs and make sure you have a migration strategy.

After doing this a few times, your stakeholders are probably fed up with the crawling pace of development, and the whole local-first app is scrapped again and replaced by a more traditional app. Maybe the architect is fired.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#404

Post by kirici » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:14 AM UTC

account42 wrote: post #391

rogerrogerr wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never really thought about this - how does Outlook handle this? Has anyone received a “sorry, that room you reserved actually wasn’t available; talk to this other dude who reserved it too” message after reserving a meeting room? Or does it just double book the room? Or is there a global lock on any transaction affecting a meeting room, so only one goes through? (Feels like it doesn’t scale)

> Or is there a global lock on any transaction affecting a meeting room, so only one goes through? (Feels like it doesn’t scale) Why wouldn't it scale? How many meetings are booked per second in your organization???

Clearly you fell for the premature measuring fallacy, everyone knows to optimize for web-scale first.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#405

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:16 AM UTC

godshatter wrote: post #97

xorvoid wrote: post #23

I believe the lack of popularity is more of an economics problem. There are established business models for SaaS apps or freemium with ads. But, the business model for local-first apps is not as lucrative. Those who like the local-first model value features like: data-sovereignty, end-to-end encryption, offline usage, etc. These properties make existing business models hard-to-impossible to apply. My current thinking…

It's crazy that we live in a time when "pay with money and your data" or "pay with your eyeballs" are the only viable options and "pay with your money without your data" can't even be considered.

That's because we allow corporations to into misleading that products are free even though you are still paying for them by letting yourself be manipulated into giving third parties your money who then give some of it back to the original service provider. This really needs to be considered a kind of fraud unless the full cost is displayed upfront, not unlike when a vendor charges your card more than the agreed price.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#406

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:20 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #203

godshatter wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy that we live in a time when "pay with money and your data" or "pay with your eyeballs" are the only viable options and "pay with your money without your data" can't even be considered.

The problem with local apps is actually a problem with closed-source software. I refuse to rely on closed-source software to access my data because then I am beholden to the vendor of that software to access my data. It’s only slightly better than putting my data in the cloud. What I really want is the source code to that local app so I can guarantee the ability to continue accessing my data forever. This can be done…

In theory, open formats would be enough. In practice you still end up depending on peculiarities of the software handling those formats more often than not so I agree that having access to the source code and permission to modify it when the original vendor's interests no longer align with yours is the only solution.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#407

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:23 AM UTC

walterlw wrote: post #257

mulmen wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with local apps is actually a problem with closed-source software. I refuse to rely on closed-source software to access my data because then I am beholden to the vendor of that software to access my data. It’s only slightly better than putting my data in the cloud. What I really want is the source code to that local app so I can guarantee the ability to continue accessing my data forever. This can be done…

wouldn't it be enough for the underlying user data to be stored in a well-documented and widely supported format? I don't care if Obsidian, Logseq or similar are open or closed source if my data is just a folder of markdown and jpeg/pngs.

In simple cases maybe but in general how the format is actually interpreted matters more than what some spec says. Markdown is a great example because in practice almost every markdown renderer does things a bit differently.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#408

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:25 AM UTC

nenenejej wrote: post #202

chaostheory wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone has to prove that there’s a demand for paid local first subscriptions. Open source and tailscale can’t shoulder it all if you want more adoption.

Or split into 2 things: Most people have a Dropbox, Apple Storage, Google Storage or similar. A lot of people used to happily pay for desktop software. It is sort of a combo of those 2 things economically. Dropbox could sweep up here by being the provider of choice for offline apps. Defining the open protocol and supporting it. adding notifications and some compute. You then use Dropbox free for 1, 5, 10 offline apps…

Making people dependent on a cloud subscription isn't exactly in the spirit of spreading offline programs...

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#409

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:28 AM UTC

RicoElectrico wrote: post #200

godshatter wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy that we live in a time when "pay with money and your data" or "pay with your eyeballs" are the only viable options and "pay with your money without your data" can't even be considered.

We're living in the world of Dubai chocolate and labubu so this tells you everything you need to know about consumer behavior.

You mean influencer behavior. Tiktok/instagram/etc. personalities are very different from how most people behave in the real world. I don't know anyone who has bought into either of these products.

Re: Why haven't local-first apps become popular?

#410

Post by account42 » Tue, Sep 23, 2025, 9:30 AM UTC

zelphirkalt wrote: post #386

Loughla wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fads and trends have always existed. Literally as long as we've had culture. What point are you trying to make?

If I had to guess, I would say the GP wants to express that the mass of consumers acts in uninformed silly ways, and with such people local-first has a very low adoption rate, because they usually don't spend a thought about their digital foot/fingerprint or who really owns their data or how they do their personal computing and whether they are independent of anyone else in their personal computing. That there is thi…

Is it really a huge part of our society or is it just one that megacorporations amplify as loud as they can because that's how they want people to behave.