"IT WoRKs BeTter in the App "

(shkspr.mobi)

115 points | by blenderob 1 hour ago

16 comments

  • brk 20 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 9 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 3 minutes ago
        Who are the hall of shame brokers?
    • noir_lord 12 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.

    • goosejuice 12 minutes ago
      I wish everyone thought like this. Unfortunately the average user demands an app and thinks they have nothing to hide.
    • deaton 4 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.
  • gwbas1c 2 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 23 minutes ago
    It's almost impossible to use social networks on mobile without installing their apps
    • ethagnawl 9 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.
    • afavour 10 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.

    • unglaublich 21 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.
    • wilkystyle 15 minutes ago
      It's impossible for me to use YouTube with the app. Safari + uBlock origin lite and I never see an ad.
    • onion2k 20 minutes ago
      If you don't install it they keep you from spending time on them. It's a feature, not a bug.
    • iso1631 14 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 10 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"
    • brk 20 minutes ago
      Bug or feature?
    • kelvinjps10 19 minutes ago
      you can with liberedirect or ublock origin and firefox for android.
  • Thanemate 18 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 2 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.
  • ebtebt 20 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.
  • confusedbucket 19 minutes ago
    If only Google had a UI framework that would let them build apps and target all platforms.
  • cooggog 8 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.
  • tisdadd 26 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.
  • alansaber 7 minutes ago
    So what's the solution again? Everything as a web app?
    • ryanmcbride 4 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.

  • afavour 15 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 7 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 4 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 3 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 1 minute 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?
    • johnxianren 1 minute ago
      The feature shipped in the app. That's the only reason i have it.
    • goosejuice 9 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.
  • unglaublich 22 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.
  • mrweasel 17 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 19 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.

  • lmm 26 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.
  • pier25 11 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • 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 20 minutes ago
      Then let the app die on the vine for a while and ultimately abandon it a couple years later.
    • pjc50 21 minutes ago
      Google is notorious for prioritizing new features and new apps for promotion, so yes.