Most active commenters
  • baxtr(4)

←back to thread

Everyone knows all the apps on your phone

(peabee.substack.com)
1192 points gniting | 11 comments | 29 Mar 25 21:26 UTC | HN request time: 1.332s | source | bottom
Show context
turblety ◴[30 Mar 25 05:53 UTC] No.43521702[source]▶
I still, will never understand the need for native "Apps". To this day, I have never seen an "App" that couldn't simply have been a website/webapp. Most of them would likely be improved by being a webapp.

The only benefits I can see of "Apps", are the developer get's access to private information they really don't need.

Yeah, they get to be on the "App Store". But the "App Store" is a totally unnecessary concept introduced by Apple/Google so they could scrape a huge percentage in sales.

Web browsers have good (not perfect) sandboxing, costs no fees to "submit" and are accessible to everyone on every phone.

replies(44): >>43521722 #>>43521779 #>>43521783 #>>43521802 #>>43521900 #>>43521921 #>>43522003 #>>43522027 #>>43522043 #>>43522070 #>>43522073 #>>43522076 #>>43522148 #>>43522176 #>>43522181 #>>43522194 #>>43522290 #>>43522337 #>>43522341 #>>43522613 #>>43522683 #>>43522825 #>>43522873 #>>43522885 #>>43522925 #>>43522935 #>>43522989 #>>43523037 #>>43523210 #>>43523300 #>>43523681 #>>43524483 #>>43524766 #>>43524876 #>>43524878 #>>43525133 #>>43525355 #>>43525416 #>>43525604 #>>43525642 #>>43526098 #>>43526688 #>>43537641 #>>43550064 #
1. baxtr ◴[30 Mar 25 06:41 UTC] No.43521900[source]▶
How would you make a video app in a browser? ie taking videos and then editing them afterwards
replies(3): >>43521963 #>>43521978 #>>43521996 #
2. psychoslave ◴[30 Mar 25 06:54 UTC] No.43521963[source]▶
Do you mean something like https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:VideoCutTool ?
replies(1): >>43521991 #
3. sph ◴[30 Mar 25 06:57 UTC] No.43521978[source]▶
GP used hyperbole but was not all wrong. The issue is that most native apps could very well have been web apps. I appreciate that on iOS adding a web app to homescreen is possible, albeit obscure and not many use that feature. I hate that Firefox never really supported PWA for some unfathomable reason.
replies(1): >>43522009 #
4. baxtr ◴[30 Mar 25 07:01 UTC] No.43521991[source]▶
I mean something like CapCut that has access to the phone camera for capturing video.
replies(1): >>43522545 #
5. scbzzzzz ◴[30 Mar 25 07:02 UTC] No.43521996[source]▶
The commenter says about most apps. The use case you mentioned requires computing resources. You can do the whole thing on browser too but it is not efficient way . But in the case of delivery apps, finance apps, you don't need much compute as can work exclusively with APIs .
replies(2): >>43522014 #>>43522023 #
6. baxtr ◴[30 Mar 25 07:05 UTC] No.43522009[source]▶
Exactly. But GP deliberately said all, not most or many.

GPs comment is something that people in politics would called sensational. Extreme rhetoric is great for upvotes because it stirs emotions but it’s not rational.

replies(1): >>43522085 #
7. baxtr ◴[30 Mar 25 07:06 UTC] No.43522014[source]▶
No GPs says there are no apps, which is not most.
8. tossandthrow ◴[30 Mar 25 07:07 UTC] No.43522023[source]▶
Performance is likely not a reason anymore - and if it is, then it is the platform that imposes it (rust was runs fairly fast in a browser).
9. josfredo ◴[30 Mar 25 07:21 UTC] No.43522085{3}[source]▶
I think it’s completely justifiable, since it illustrates the core of the idea. Also, HN users, unlike voters, can see through the framing. If anything, it’s a great way to spark a debate.
10. worksonmine ◴[30 Mar 25 08:48 UTC] No.43522545{3}[source]▶
Browsers have camera and local file access if the user grants permissions, what do you mean isn't possible with the browser?
replies(1): >>43523935 #
11. psychoslave ◴[30 Mar 25 13:16 UTC] No.43523935{4}[source]▶
I think that the name browser is basically just what is putting people in the wrong track of interpretation. They have been fully fledged VM sandboxes, which incidentally happen to also embed html and pdf interpreter natively.