"IT WoRKs BeTter in the App "

(shkspr.mobi)

175 points | by blenderob 1 hour ago

30 comments

  • brk 34 minutes ago
    At this point the barrier for me to install an app is pretty high. If you're going to needlessly gate certain functions behind an app that work on a desktop browser (or could work in-browser), then I just won't use those functions. If by extension that degrades the value I get from your site, then I just won't use the site, and I won't be contributing to ADU stats you promote to advertisers.

    Every single company has turned this into a situation where I cannot trust your apps with privacy or security, and the risk and hassle isn't worth the install.

    • mapontosevenths 22 minutes ago
      If your app is just a webpage that forces me to use an app just so you can spy on me I just won't use your product. I've switched brokers over it, I swapped banks, I stopped shopping at certain stores.

      I'm done. The only say I have is in how I spend my money. Those companies won't get any of mine if I can help it.

      I am the customer, not the product dammit.

      • ethersteeds 16 minutes ago
        Who are the hall of shame brokers?
    • pj_mukh 4 minutes ago
      The flip side is: I have an Audioguide app with reams of fancy of AI features. Even a basic non-AI one is we use GPS in the background to auto-trigger when you approach certain checkpoints on your tour, and we don't want you staring or constantly manually fiddling with the phone when you're on a tour at a museum. This is all stuff just not possible with the web app

      I get it, "I'm just traveling, why do I need to download an app which will be useless when I'm done traveling". Just delete it then, takes two steps!

      Our reviews between our Web App and iOS app are like 2 sigma apart. Un-intuitively, our web app users are out fiddling with the app 2-3x more than our iOS app.

    • goosejuice 26 minutes ago
      I wish everyone thought like this. Unfortunately the average user demands an app and thinks they have nothing to hide.
      • pbhjpbhj 4 minutes ago
        I think the average user doesn't know the app is there to circumvent tracking protections in browsers and doesn't realise the app is most likely just a web page in a wrapper.

        I was at a car park in UK and you didn't have to install an app, just scan the QR to go to the web page, simple payment. Sadly they then messed it all up by not offering payment through normal services.

    • noir_lord 26 minutes ago
      Indeed, I've no interest in native apps to do something that can be done in a web app and if you don't let me do it in a web app I'll bounce and either find someone who can or do without unless there is a seriously compelling use case (I'm not that dogmatic).

      As a result the only native apps I use on my phone are Kindle, Authy and Firefox because I trust Firefox to prevent apps doing a lot of the sketchy shit locally a lot more than I trust an app/the host OS to do so.

      • em3rgent0rdr 9 minutes ago
        > "do something that can be done in a web app"

        I'll bite. What important features can only be done in an "app" but not a web app nowadays?

        • edent 5 minutes ago
          NFC reading is one. That's why lots of Governments publish apps - it's a reliable way to check your passport if you need a visa etc.

          It might be coming to the web - https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_NFC_API

        • earthnail 5 minutes ago
          Realtime stuff. Audio, video etc, games. Apps with a large user library (like the Photos app) that should work offline.
    • deaton 18 minutes ago
      Theres a gym I work out at, and that I have been going to for nearly a year now, and they have an app you can use to check in, schedule classes, whatever. I don't actually know because I never downloaded the app, I just use my phone number to check in every time I go. I don't want more apps on my phone, not for the gym, not for fast food, maybe my bank and the apps I need to communicate with friends and family, but the majority of it is pointless bloat they push on you for no good reason.
      • bluedino 5 minutes ago
        I took a picture of my keychain tag, set the date of it to my membership expiration date, and then scan that picture my phone when I go in
  • ninjahawk1 1 minute ago
    What’s even worse is intentionally degrading performance for sign-in’s. This is still circumstantial but I’ve been looking into that over the past few weeks.

    When switching between google accounts on a random app or game, no issue. Quick code, you’re in. When I switch between accounts on Claude on mobile, I have to sign in, enter the code, screen freezes, I sign in again, can’t verify it’s me, I sign again, wait 30 seconds, I’m in.

    I have to sign in three separate times when signing into a single google account in Claude. For every single other app it’s very quick.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that Anthropic and google are working together to degrade sign-in performance for multi-account users. I can’t fully prove it yet but I plan to be able to in the week or two.

  • the_bear 3 minutes ago
    In Google's defense, they weren't the ones that championed the "everything must be an app" movement. My memory of the 2010s is that Google (and while they were relevant, Palm) pushed cross-platform web apps, but Apple ran a successful marketing campaign to convince everyone that everything on mobile must be a native app for reasons. So we end up with a walled garden of native apps that must be approved by and pay a tax too the company that makes the OS.

    The result is that instead of building one app that works on all platforms, software companies need to build three apps: Web, iOS, and Android. I'm sympathetic to why most software companies (including my own) choose to just build a web app wrapped in a native wrapper. If a company does decide to build a totally separate iOS app, I dunno, it seems reasonable not to build support for every single niche feature that the web app can has. I'm not sure I get the outrage here, especially since Google has a long track record of preferring web apps to native.

    The "reasons" primarily are that Apple refused to support PWAs, hamstrung mobile Safari, and refused to allow third-party browsers. So while it's true that native apps can offer a better experience than mobile web apps, that's mostly just because Apple artificially restricts web apps.

  • pyjarrett 2 minutes ago
    When I was job hunting earlier this year, LinkedIn on my phone told me to install the app. Sure, why not? So I did. It refused to authenticate and never worked. One good point is that at least the mobile web version didn't lock me out with an impassable overlay like some websites are starting to do.
  • RichardChu 0 minutes ago
    The problem is that at big companies such as Google, it can take months to plan out features and put them on the roadmap. That is, if they even get prioritized above other things to begin with.
  • Gualdrapo 5 minutes ago
    I sell stuff ocassionaly on a "local" platform called MercadoLibre (like, I could afford a new handlebar for my bicycle so I could sell there the old one). Mercadolibre kind of wants to be the argentinian Amazon, even lobbying in the argentinian government so they will ban similar platforms from other countries. With time, MercadoLibre has become incredibly hostile and greedy for us small sellers, while favoring corpos.

    They charge you 25% for each sale you do via their platform, but the latest thing they did was to force you to "identify" you are you via a website where they track your face features and scan your ID "because of security". Yeah, that sounds good, so I did that in 2021.

    They asked this again last year because of reasons. But this time they won't let you use a regular web browser: they forced you to do this via their app. No matter how much you try, it will always fail citing "compatibility issues" or "errors". I tried to complain but their customer support is incredibly shitty, if you even manage how to find to contact them.

    But oh surprise, their "app" is just a web wrapper.

  • nazgulsenpai 7 minutes ago
    I use LineageOS with MicroG and decided probably 5 years ago to just use PWAs instead of apps for any online service and grab whatever other utilities I might need from Obtanium or F-Droid. Also the experience on my Thinkphone is the exact same as it was on my Pixel XL 2.

    I know not everyone can do this, and some PWAs are downright terrible if they work at all, but for my usecase it has been great.

  • Thanemate 32 minutes ago
    I recently decided to use my google calendar to track my mood, as part of my CBT therapy.

    What baffles me is that, there's no way in the web app to assign a default calendar for new events. When I create a new event on the web, I have to scroll through all the calendars that I have and choose the one that I want every time. Meanwhile, in the mobile app, I can simply tap on a new block, the event window appears, and the selected calendar defaults to what I used for my last added event.

    • stronglikedan 16 minutes ago
      I think the bigger issue there is that you're trusting Google with your health data. Surely there's an offline calendar app that could help you track it just as well. Anyway, I hope you benefit from the therapy regardless of how you decide to track it.
  • gwbas1c 16 minutes ago
    I've had an issue where, when clicking a "locations" link on a web site, Google Maps "permanently" added a bunch of locations to my map. This was quite unexpected on my part.

    (I think it was for a chain or churches or a similar civic organization)

    IE, I think someone made a group of locations in Google Maps, and then for the "Locations" link on their website, just linked to the group of locations in Google Maps. In the browser, this works fine, but on mobile, Google Maps just imports the link to my account without asking.

  • arthurezende 37 minutes ago
    It's almost impossible to use social networks on mobile without installing their apps
    • ethagnawl 23 minutes ago
      When I got a new phone about a year ago, I decided that I wouldn't be installing any traditional social media apps (Tusky doesn't count) and that I'd use the web when "necessary". This has been a very successful experiment and resulted in me looking at Instagram _maybe_ once per week.
    • wilkystyle 29 minutes ago
      It's impossible for me to use YouTube with the app. Safari + uBlock origin lite and I never see an ad.
    • unglaublich 35 minutes ago
      They artificially lock it down, because the app will give them more data to collect than the web app plus a larger surface to annoy the user with notifications, widgets, and other advertisement.
    • afavour 24 minutes ago
      I found that installing facebook dot com to my Home Screen on iOS works acceptably. Lets me check in on things every now and then and still be confident they’re very limited in what they can track.

      Messenger doesn’t work but luckily I rarely if ever use it.

    • onion2k 34 minutes ago
      If you don't install it they keep you from spending time on them. It's a feature, not a bug.
      • nottorp 1 minute ago
        Not to mention the battery savings when nothing pulls those "engagement" posts in the background...
    • brk 34 minutes ago
      Bug or feature?
    • iso1631 28 minutes ago
      Didn't use to be. I stopped using facebook shortly after they blocked messenger on their webpage, so jokes on them I guess.
      • brk 24 minutes ago
        I wish Messenger had an auto-reply feature: "I probably won't see your message for a while because I don't install Meta apps on my phone"
    • kelvinjps10 33 minutes ago
      you can with liberedirect or ublock origin and firefox for android.
  • rbreve 6 minutes ago
    Google has a lot of these inconveniences, super easy to fix but for some reason the don't.
  • gchamonlive 13 minutes ago
    The author said it perself, "the greatest minds of our generation" working at Google, so those jagged edges are surely by design, and it's the rational most efficient solution in a economy of attention where the line between the product and the user is blurred.
  • pelotron 1 minute ago
    This past weekend I was flying on Delta and my first flight was delayed such that I was going to miss my connecting flight, so I rebooked onto a later one. During my layover I visited the gate agent to get a boarding pass with a seat assignment.

    "Do you have the Delta app?"

    "Nope."

    Then he pressed a few keys on his keyboard and printed out a new boarding pass for me within five seconds.

  • ebtebt 34 minutes ago
    Then you have other sites/companies that go the opposite way: having functionality that is App-only. As an extreme example: my health insurance provider in Spain (Alan) is app-only. They don’t even have a website one can use. It is maddening for those of us who always prefer desktop over mobile.
    • utopiah 14 minutes ago
      What's even more maddening is that I bet their "app" is actually a WebView and provides no native functionality.
  • confusedbucket 32 minutes ago
    If only Google had a UI framework that would let them build apps and target all platforms.
  • afavour 28 minutes ago
    It’s a shame the web was so slow to adapt to this new mobile world. When it all started things like offline capabilities were very difficult to do on the web and native development felt necessary. These days the web can actually do a lot… but it’s too late. People expect to find something in the App Store, pinning a web site to their Home Screen is just not something they know they can do. So a lot of people waste an enormous amount of money on three different implementations for, often, simple CRUD operations.
    • davidmurdoch 21 minutes ago
      That's not it. It's Apple. They are crippling the web on purpose.

      We can't even have haptic vibration on Safari. And when we did for a little while earlier this year, it was because of a "bug" that that they promptly fixed.

      Apple is not interested in making with apps as seamless and integrated as native because: money.

      • afavour 18 minutes ago
        I agree that Apple has been awful here. But there are countries deeply dominated by Android that still heavily use apps when they could be using PWAs. I don’t mean to let Apple off the hook but I also don’t think they’re the only ones to blame.
      • jen20 17 minutes ago
        As an iPhone user: good. There is no good that can come from some dipshit website product manager being able to make my phone vibrate on a website. None at all.
        • afavour 15 minutes ago
          Is there any good that can come from a dipshit mobile product manager being able to make your phone vibrate on an app? Is there actually a meaningful difference?
          • jen20 12 minutes ago
            Games are the usual reason in an app. Being able to do it as a “drive by” on a website though: absolutely hell no.
            • afavour 7 minutes ago
              Sounds like it would be ideal to add it to Home Screen webapps only, just like web notifications. And yet…
    • thecloud 10 minutes ago
      I believe it is more nefarious than that. The web strived for mobile native parity but web standards committees are mostly headed by delegates of companies like google and apple; the same companies that have an interest in crippling native web features to push users to their app stores, where they can extract money via fees. PWAs on iOS are a good example of how this kind of gate-keeping looks like
    • goosejuice 22 minutes ago
      I think the web did fine. People can't pin a web app because Apple made it difficult for them to do exactly that.
      • tpmoney 6 minutes ago
        Burger menu -> share -> add to home screen is difficult? How do you pin a web app in Android then?
    • johnxianren 15 minutes ago
      The feature shipped in the app. That's the only reason i have it.
  • tisdadd 40 minutes ago
    And this is why I usually say, I will look at it when I am in front of my computer again for most things, side from a free does where I mainly am reading.
  • cooggog 22 minutes ago
    Hah. I was trying to buy something on the BestBuy website. I’m not sure what kinda of bitcoin miner they’re running on that site, but it repeatedly manages to crash the tab as I was trying to browse. I had to eventually just download the app.
  • unglaublich 36 minutes ago
    Most companies mostly want app access because you get a bunch of APIs with which to annoy users with marketing notifications, tracking, and url handling.
  • Larrikin 4 minutes ago
    If your app can be implemented in React Native with no developer pain, it should just be a website.

    Native is a much better experience than mobile websites when you actually use the features and power of these fairly advanced computers we carry around in our pockets.

  • OroPla 8 minutes ago
    I don't want yet another app on my phone.

    My rule for apps these days is that if it is not available through F-Droid, I won't be using it.

  • alansaber 21 minutes ago
    So what's the solution again? Everything as a web app?
    • ryanmcbride 18 minutes ago
      The solution is for companies to stop half-assing multiple things, and instead whole ass one thing.

      It's impossible though. There actually isn't a single company alive that's capable of doing something like that, because it would require a decision maker to say "instead of these two things I want just one thing" and the second that happens it will be the end of the world.

  • mrweasel 31 minutes ago
    It made even sadder by the fact that often the "app" is more or less just webview.

    More and more I'm giving up on apps, and online self-servicing as the structures and scope of what either one can do is increasing narrowing. It's much much easier to just call these days (fortunately AI answering the phone is still not prevalent). Customer service will obviously inform you that "You can just our self-service solutions in the future", even if you literately just called in because you can't due to inflexibility and options you don't understand.

    Also "you can manage it from your phone" is not the sales pitch it once was, because it's no longer the entire truth. You can in fact ONLY manage it from your phone. If whatever you're selling requires an app, chances are that I'm not buying and if it's a service, I will seek out your store or staff and make them do it for me.

  • nonethewiser 32 minutes ago
    Definitely annoying to have random features not work in app. This "subscribe to event" feature for example.

    More implicit in this post seems to be an argument against apps entirely, which I cannot agree with. He doesn't exactly say this but it points there.

      - never establishes a need or true advantage to an app. does briefly acknowledge apps can do something unique things but then immediately undercuts it. positions Google etc. motivation as wanting to occupy your home screen, dont trust you to use bookmarks, etc.
    
      - says he has experience building phone apps and knows the pain of updating across so many devices and says solutions converge on basically re-implementing web browsers (which I think is a large leap)
    
    So when he says

      >If you want an app, fine. Do it. Just finish the job please!
    
    I dont really believe him. From his perspective, why is an app ever necessary? To me it's obvious because I absolutely do not want to use Google Calendar in a phone browser. Primarily because the UI on an app is optimized for the phone. And at that point it feels like imperfect feature parity is just the normal problem of releasing the "same" thing many times.

    The title also seems to be pointing to a sort of equivocation where you say a group of People say X, and then blame a Person 1for contradicting X by saying Y. Except We've never established that Person 1 was in the group of People saying X. You see this a lot on reddit, hackernews as well. "Oh, many people in the comment section said said Y before now user123 is saying X thats a contradiction."

    Having said all that, the blog is labeled "rant" and I can respect that a lot of the purpose is to blow off steam.

  • LoganDark 3 minutes ago
    There's another class of problem, websites that pretend to work in the browser but refuse to support any reasonable type of login session.

    Like, sure, there are login sessions that expire after five seconds of inactivity. Sometimes it even turns out that they don't support passkeys or TOTP, and you have to add a phone number for SMS authentication, which reduces account security by letting attackers prove your identity.

    I want a browser extension that automatically clicks those "I'm still here" pop-ups on scummy websites like this...

    But they have an app. And they don't even shove it in your face that the experience is better with the app or whatever. But it is for one and literally only ever one singular reason: it doesn't log you out every five seconds

  • lmm 40 minutes ago
    This isn't about the app being unfinished, it's about Google deliberately half-assing support for open standards. They want you to be stuck in their calendar ecosystem so they make sure there's more friction adding a calendar from outside than adding someone else's Google calendar.
  • imnotr0b0t 5 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • arc_light 13 minutes ago
    [flagged]
  • blenderob 1 hour ago
    Feels like this field has become a lot about doing the easy, visible parts, getting a month of attention, maybe a promotion, then moving on to the next "new project".

    Meanwhile, the people who stay behind and actually make these half-finished apps work properly, maintain them and deal with all the boring problems rarely get the same credit or benefits.

    • baggachipz 34 minutes ago
      Then let the app die on the vine for a while and ultimately abandon it a couple years later.
    • pjc50 35 minutes ago
      Google is notorious for prioritizing new features and new apps for promotion, so yes.
  • pier25 25 minutes ago
    [dead]