Hacker News Reader

Comment by jasonlotito | Hacker News Reader

> Ugh. Really, you guys think this is the future?

Yes. So do you, apparently. Here...

> There is a place for web apps and a place for real apps.

And shoehorning web apps into real apps is bad. While I don't suggest every app should be made into a web app, I also think a lot of "real" apps make no sense outside of being a web app.

> Still hacking choppy javascript animations on a document markup language!

And yet, these "fake" apps are the most popular apps in the world, preferred by geeks, professionals, and non-technical people alike.

I don't see native apps going away, I just less natives apps merely doing something that can already be accomplished online, and usually better.

View on HN

> And yet, these "fake" apps are the most popular apps in the world

I would dispute that, in every case where there is exists a native app with equal functionality, the app is used every time. Customers prefer the native apps. Yes, we all know the dev costs are high right now, but that will change just like it did for web development.

Also significant, there is finally again opportunities for developers to be paid for their work by real customers. The quality of native apps plus the AppStore model is resulting in end customers seeing value in software again.

The only reason so many web apps are popular now is because it's the only choice available to consumers. Tech companies have been distracted the last 10 years chasing the perpetual myth of write-once run-everywhere, this time instead of Java or Flash or XML (for data), it is HTML5+javscript. I guess we haven't learned yet.

There is a return to client coding happening, and it's going to produce a new renaissance in really great software.

> I would dispute that, in every case where there is exists a native app with equal functionality, the app is used every time.

Not true at all.

And, misses the point: so-called "fake" apps are the most popular over their "real" counter parts. Not in all areas, sure. But in many. It depends on the domain.

To assume that native is always better is dismissing the massive value provided by web-based.

> To assume that native is always better is dismissing the massive value provided by web-based.

Massive value to whom?

We all know the value to the developer. I'm not disputing the current cost savings of webapps, though it will quickly become irrelevant as native app dev/distribution costs plummet.

But is there any value to the customer? There used to be a lot more. Sure was convenient to be able to log in to your email from any computer. That was until you started to read all your email on your phone that you carry with you all the time.

The web interface isn't going to disappear, but it will become the secondary way to interact with apps. Right now it is still the primary for many apps like Facebook and Flickr. That is changing.

> But is there any value to the customer?

Yes.

> That was until you started to read all your email on your phone that you carry with you all the time.

What does that have to do with web apps and native apps? Maybe your assuming that these web apps being discussed are merely that: on the web. The real fact is, you can load these apps locally, and use them without an internet connection, with local storage.

> Right now it is still the primary for many apps like Facebook and Flickr. That is changing.

You assume this is because native apps are better. This is not true. All your mobile apps aren't native because it's better to be native. They are native because they can get into the app store to be sold. And how do you get into the app store? Well, I guess you gotta learn Objective-C. And even then, the quality of the apps is questionable compared to the mobile versions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com