Hacker News Reader

Comment by ravenstine | Hacker News Reader

> Open in App

To all sites that do this(I'm looking at you, Reddit), no, I do not want to install yet another app just to continue reading. The web is already designed for reading. You hear that?

View on HN

One of the most crucial parts of my reading workflow is opening things in new tabs. (It allows one to explore a topic by BFS rather than DFS.) Asking me "Don't you want to use our app?" is like asking, "Don't you want your browser to only support a single tab?" The answer is no...for all the reasons browser makers discovered in the 1990s.

For the same reason hijacking links to other pages via JS is an abomination that should be cursed and banned. Each time I click a link to open the link a new tab and see about:blank instead the designer should receive a slap on the wrist.

I agree, I'm a BFS guy, too (I like that word, very good description). This behavior is a major PITA. With the introduction of JS frameworks in all kinds of cases (e.g. static blog generators that use react), there's the possibility that the developer messed up the routing or deep linking or even forgot the whole feature because he never opens links in new tabs. I have the presentiment that this will happen a lot in the future.

Even m.facebook.com has this problem in the event overview. There's no way to open nearby events in a new tab because the link only works due to JS hooks.

If you're implementing links with a JS onclick event of some flavor, instead of an <a href="...">, you should be hung up in the street by the toes. There's no excuse for making things more difficult on yourself, in a way that breaks the way things are supposed to work.

To be fair, there are a few single-tab browsers out there, where you then defer tab management e.g. to your window manager on linux: * https://www.uzbl.org/ * https://surf.suckless.org/

Recently reddit has also started making its official app generate links to posts via the domain "reddit.app.link", instead of normal reddit.com urls. These new links automatically send everyone on mobile to the app store to download the official app, even if they clicked from inside a third-party app.

As far as I can tell, the only way to make the links work on mobile is to install the official app (once you do, they'll open the linked post inside it).

I could never work for a company that wanted me to implement anything like that.

That and linking rile me to no end. It’s so needlessly user hostile that I might want to share a link to something I find interesting, which is a well-supported and ubiquitously accomplished task in browsers, that completely falls by the wayside in these degeneate apps.

I honestly don't understand why sites do this. Can someone explain it to me?

They (e.g. reddit the company) want you to do more than read. They want you to subscribe and follow and user-generate content (and not block ads.)

They build an app because apps.

Then they compare behavior between app and website.

And there's a stupid, stupid analytics datapoint that shows "Users of the app browse/subscribe/follow/post 2x more!"

That only happens because the only people willing to download and use the app are the power users. But they just worked hard creating an app, and nobody questions analytics data that tells them their hard work was worthwhile.

So now, armed with their supporting data, they begin pushing people to the app because they think it will lead to more pageviews/subscribes/follows/posts and eyeballs on ads.

In addition to this they can get solid data on engagement times, app usage, where uses spend time on the page

They can do that with the website, though. Not too hard to read a scroll position in JS, or to warehouse page view records.

Exactly this

2 things -- Tracking and Ads.

Using the web version of the product is disadvantageous from the developer's POV as it gives a lot of control to the user over what personal data of his can be shared. Web browser extensions also allow the users to block ads and other annoying content -- this is sub-optimal for the company as it trims their ad revenue, and as a result, potential future advertisers.

It's all about controlling what the user sees based on data collected from tracking, imo.

This. Data collected from apps is far more reliable than that collected from web visits. There is lots of extensions that block/spoof data collection. Moreover, fraud on ads placed on websites is much higher than that placed within apps.

I’d think a user that has browser extensions is the type of user that is very unlikely to get the app.

Websites are sandboxed and make it much harder to gather data about your users (To sell them ads).

Apps have much wider permissions off the bat and can request more as necessary.

I'd assume (though I have no data to back it up) that your service would get used more if the user has an app downloaded as the barrier to access your service is much lower

Apps are like TV channels. They are a broadcast medium whose content is entirely controlled by the broadcaster.

Unblockable Ads, In-App microtransactions, Push Notification-based variable reward schedule reengagement dark patterns are the result.

An app is sort of like a physical object, like a flyer. It reminds you of them. The place on iOS or Android's home screen has this effect. It's kind of similar to how Windows apps added themselves to the Start Menu, the desktop, and the taskbar.

To gather more details about you from your phone. It's about data and eye balls. You will get more and notifications to increase user engagement.

Because if they can get an app on your device, they can push messages at you easier. Track your usage of the app, assign it a unique ID etc.

The app will auto-update, so as new features/tracking/things are desired, they can push these out to devices.

Basically, they get more control of the end user.

You can push updates out to a web app even easier: deploy them. Boom, suddenly your user sees changes next time they visit.

your "boom, suddenly your user sees changes" is dependant on "next time they visit". A push notification will alert the user to new content quicker.

Aside from the reasons andre provided, i think the biggest driver is ads. I block ads for most sites, but without a lot of work i can't block ads using the site-specific app.

Although i wonder how many app users only real benefit from the app is a button to launch the site from the home screen, and how many of those users would switch if they were aware of how to add a browser bookmark to their home screen. Anecdotal data, but I have had several friends with this problem, two specifically complaining about the reddit app being less readable than a browser but wanting a single button to press to launch the site.

Besides everything else, Push Notifications is usually the top reason.

You can do push notifications on the web too.

I'm not sure why, but I always instinctively deny notifications and location-tracking on websites, but always seem to allow them on mobile apps. I don't know if others are the same.

i deny flat across the board. i don't allow location anything unless there's a damn good reason for it. an RSS reader that wants to send me feeds based on my location, nope. an app that needs to accurately show my location on a map, okay, but only while i'm using it. find the location to something closest to me, nope, i'll do that manually. i don't trust anybody is only doing the one thing you think they are when permission is granted. i may be painting with a very broad brush, but too many bad actors have already made me a grouchy old guy

I share the absolutely same behavior. Just because I added your app to my phone doesn’t mean you’ve earned the right to steal my attention any time you want. Increasingly, notifications are becoming more opaque about what action, if any, triggered the notification. “New message from Ann: How’s work?” Becomes “You have messages”. Nothing happening to you directly, let’s notify you anyway: “Bob and Jill added to their stories”, “Sammy logged a run, give her kudos!”. Not using yelp enough? “Check our this new brunch place [that’s paying us to advertise to you]”.

This isn’t adding value to my life. Notifications are an infestation of advertising into every untouched aspect of our personal lives. If I turn them off, I get fewer ads. If I get fewer ads, I’m less inclined to consume and waste money on things I never needed, and save that money for the stuff I care about.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you cannot (yet) do so on the iOS without a native app. This is why developers ask you to install their native apps.

Not (really) on iOS web.

Better information on the users, you can harvest their actual location, phone number, contacts, email etc...

Instead of being restricted to a browser, you are on their device, with whatever access you want.

If they get you using an app that evades in-browser ad, tracking blockers etc... so $$ is the primary reason, basically

Ads and tracking as others have said, but also push notifications. People accept push notifications without thinking.

Stickyness, as well as tracking & ads.

Analytics. They can get a boatload of data from the app that can't be obtained through the browser.

Surveillance capitalism. https://plus.google.com/+GregLinden/posts/TWiGesiztbj

(I'm not sure exactly if this is the present motivation. But it's the motivation for a lot of apps. Data can be sold / used for ads when collected in very large numbers, and apps collect more data than websites. So there are strong business incentives to move to an app, for many sites.)

Ten replies in ten minutes. Looks like everybody wants to explain this.

> The web is already designed for reading.

Not only that, these apps just have an embedded browser inside!

https://i.reddit.com

Banner text for me reads "TRY REDDIT'S MOBILE WEBSITE". There. is. no. escape.

commenting is horribly broken on mobile.

There must be a Firefox extension to block these, if not, ive got my weekend project!

Medium is especially cruel as they offer no way to make it go away.

Came here to say this. It’s so annoying that I would probably pay for the plugin to get rid of those pop-ups on reddit mobile sites.

To what extent do plugins exist for mobile? My understanding is that on iOS there are Share Extensions and Action Extensions for Safari, but these have to me manually triggered on every page where you want them to run.

On Android, Firefox supports addons (but practically no one knows they exist) and Chrome doesn't have extensions.

Are there other options? I hope I'm wrong here since it would be great to have browser plugins on mobile!

On Android Firefox, I always install Ublock Origin. It makes web browsable on mobile without killing the machine.

I have varying level of success installing other addons. For example, Tab Count addon works. I can install LastPass on mobile but there is no way to use it as it goes blank on login screen. I assume that, mostly the developers are not aware that the addon may be used on mobile too.

For those who are wondering why I would need a Tab Count extension on Android Firefox, when the tab count exceeds 99, the ui shows an infinity symbol. Yes, I have that many tabs, I had more than 200 tabs open at one point and android firefox kept chugging along like it was nothing. I am trying to reduce the count for my own sanity. Currently, tamed it to a more docile 44.

Plugin is probably not the best word. But since iOS supports content blockers, I was imagining it’s possible to have dedicated apps block reddit pop-ups.

Gotcha. Yeah it would seem pretty easy for content blockers to add these banners to their blocking list.

It would be most useful to do this in a dynamic way though. I might actually want to know that examplewebsite.com has an app that I could download. But once I've gone to that site 5 times, then the banner should be hidden. Either I don't want the app, or I've already downloaded it. Unfortunately, I don't think content blockers can include any logic like this.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com