A well implemented (native) app is always better than a well implemented web site.
The problem is poorly implemented apps which are just UI wrappers hitting dumb APIs or embedding entire web stacks which hit dumb APIs. A well implemented web app isn't much better than that. They don't work offline, they use way more resources than anything native and they leak data like a sieve generally.
and there you go, author has a vested interest in you making web apps.
Plus $ 20 $ 10 / month / seat Billed Annually $ 120
Pro $ 50 $ 25 / month / seat Billed Annually $ 300
Enterprise $ 90 $ 45 / month / seat Billed Annually $ 540
Each of those tiers has a different "free if you earn less than $xxx" level that I'm not gonna cut and paste. There's a chart with the differences between what those tiers gets you too.
Also:
Can I publish anything I want to Rogue Play?
You're allowed to publish content that is neither sexual in nature or illegal under either UK law and the laws of your country of residence.
What happens to my files if I cancel my subscription?
When you cancel your subscription your files will be locked and you won’t have access to them until you buy a new license. They will be scheduled for deletion in 30 days.
What happens to my files if I downgrade my subscription?
It's your responsibility to free the necessary space before downgrading. Your files will be deleted after 24hs unless you take action.
----
He just asserts that the underlying technology has come along. It hasn’t.
Dunno, native app doesn't have URLs nor deep links. I can't link you to a page in my native app that you can click on.
In my iOS HN app I'd have to click "Copy website link" to share a submission. If there were no website, I couldn't share it at all. Same with Reddit.
For most apps, that's a lot to give up when you app is basically just a website without a url bar.
It's also widely implemented in practice. For example, Instagram allows copying links to posts, and if you can view an Instragram link in the browser, it opens in the app.
Maybe this doesn't matter because it's already fast enough but the difference in look and feel will be noticeable.
No, because it fails to support the feature of running virtually anywhere.
For many people this is the #1 feature. Everything else is just icing on the cake.
Who cares about an app that is 2x faster but doesn't run?
I hear this sentiment from developers much more than non-developers. I wonder what percentage of developers do all their work within a browser.
And I also hear developers complain more about performance issues than non developers.
It was an interesting process to watch start, because people were like "finally an app!" and "moving on from 'just' a website!" but without any real justification for it. The app itself was the accomplishment.
And I should note the Logseq app is a good piece of work. In absolute terms it's great. It is, however, not what it used to be and not really what I want. I'd like to fork Logseq, deprecate the app, and have a self-hosted browser interface with storage on the server, synced to a git repository for backup.
Given that the entire article argues pretty strongly against this, you need to at minimum argue against the points posed, or present your arguments for why "well-implemented native apps are always better". It's not enough to make a straw man of the worst possible scenario and claim that it holds true for the general case as well.
This isn't true. Offline functionality is the raison d'être for Service Workers. You can run an entire HTTP request router on the client to respond to requests while offline: https://hono.dev/docs/getting-started/service-worker
If I pitched the idea of having SMB shares work online by shipping a driver that could intercept low level SMB calls and reroute them to a mock SMB server that holds the cache they would have assumed I'd lost it.
Surely the browser could help you a bit more to implement offline sites in a more integrated fashion.
You can of course use the CacheStorage API directly as well (you're not obligated to use a mock server): https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/CacheStorag...
I've certainly seen crazier things though. People routinely include entire copies of Ubuntu LTS in their Docker images to ship tiny HTTP servers.
No, not always. I don’t care how well implemented or optimized your “app” if it’s something that could’ve been a static web page.
> They don't work offline, they use way more resources than anything native and they leak data like a sieve generally
False, false and false.