Your 'App' Could Have Been a Webpage (so I fixed it for you)
132 points
3 days ago
| 20 comments
| danq.me
| HN
billyp-rva
1 hour ago
[-]
> I can’t understand how we got to this place with “app culture”!

The short version: ad blockers work on browsers but not apps[0].

[0] https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/30/go-nuts-meine-kerle

reply
groundzeros2015
32 seconds ago
[-]
I think it’s that your install base represents real customers who could actually buy things.

Web traffic is so diluted and low signal.

reply
CuriouslyC
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't think that's it. Apps took off because people felt comfortable yoloing stuff from the Apple app store, and for a short while before saturation, the app store reach was making small developers rich.
reply
reddalo
1 hour ago
[-]
Apps took off because Apple did everything they could to make PWAs work badly, with no reliable notifications, no access to some data, etc.

Apple did that because they want their sweet 30% from in-app purchases, which they couldn't enforce in PWAs.

reply
imjonse
21 minutes ago
[-]
apps took off before browsers had the capabilities required for native-like behaviour (fast graphics, hw functionality, notifications) and then were used even for apps that could have been web-apps.
reply
al_borland
2 minutes ago
[-]
The original intent of the iPhone was not to have 3rd party apps at all. Web apps were how developers were supposed to deliver to iPhone users. At the time, web apps weren’t as good as they are today and the market demanded local apps. Jailbreaks happened quickly, delivery systems like Cydia were set up. Apple either had to deliver their own official methods or play a cat and mouse game with hackers while trying to gaslight the public that websites were better than local apps.
reply
graemep
24 minutes ago
[-]
Apps also took off on Android and Google likes PWAs.

I am not sure about the history, but a lot of it now is about tracking, and perceived security. Its far harder for users to manage things like location tracking in apps than in browsers.

reply
faangguyindia
21 minutes ago
[-]
yes, i am forced to to make a real app because storage is not reliable in PWA, browser or OS can wipe off data.

i don't want to pay for servers just to have an app.

and updating apps is slow, for flutter you need to pay for shorebird.

In react native land, not sure but there are paid stuff like expo? you can self host but usually you end up payign for some OTA provider?

reply
CuriouslyC
58 minutes ago
[-]
To be fair, apps took off before nice PWAs that masquerade as apps were a thing. The app store was already thriving to the point of oversaturation when the first versions of React were released.
reply
jorisw
55 minutes ago
[-]
PWAs (progressive web apps) surely existed before React though
reply
crabmusket
16 minutes ago
[-]
React was open sourced in 2013. Service workers, which I consider to be essential to what we understand as PWAs, shipped first in Chrome in 2015, Safari in 2018.
reply
jorisw
1 minute ago
[-]
Sure. But Jobs was promoting 'web apps' pre App Store, 2007-2008.
reply
CuriouslyC
52 minutes ago
[-]
IIRC, the cutting edge of PWAs when the app store was taking off was Backbone.js, which I don't recall being pleasant enough to work with to want to make anything large in.
reply
justarobert
18 minutes ago
[-]
I worked on converting an existing knockoutjs SPA into a PWA around that time. I won't claim it was a pleasant experience but it was probably a lot easier and quicker than a small team of webdevs learning mobile dev and cheaper than a new hire. It wasn't a small or basic app, but we did have the advantage of it being a B2B tool that would only be used on android tablets. IIRC it was going to be either extra work or maybe even impossible to get the same functionality on iOS/safari at the time so we just didn't.
reply
jorisw
56 minutes ago
[-]
The App Store took off because of the distribution channel it offers for developers (including being able to charge for the work) and the place of discovery it offers to users.
reply
datakan
1 hour ago
[-]
Apple has actually started allowing this. You can find the functionality in an adblocker called Wipr now and it works really well.
reply
zamadatix
33 minutes ago
[-]
URL filters in iOS 26 just make network level filtering more convenient (can use a real VPN at the same time) but it's nothing new in terms of replacement for real ad blockers, which is why apps like Wipr still include a Safari extension.
reply
hashworks
34 minutes ago
[-]
For most app ads it's enough to set a DoT or DoH in the system that blocks ad domains. Android supports this with a settings menu entry, on Apple one needs a more "technical" solution I think (loading some XML?). Most VPN apps also support DNS enforcement.

Apps like YouTube are an exception, but there are other ways around that on Android.

reply
Grombobulous
44 minutes ago
[-]
I recently decided to publish an app on the App Store just so I could say I accomplished that, and maybe even make a little bit of beer money on the side.

Now, I’ll be the first to admit that my actual app is pretty much garbage. I don’t expect it to be popular. It’s basically a worse version of stuff that is already available.

I expected this to be a learning exercise about the process of getting stuff published.

Long story short, by the end of the ordeal I was somewhat surprised that anyone independent bothers to publish apps at all. The amount of red tape and nitpicking by the initial app review process is astounding. The business/legal side is also annoying. I might be misremembering or misinterpreting, but it seems like you really need an LLC with a mail forwarding service and a cheap second phone line just to avoid the App Store sending the whole internet to your personal phone and address.

On a website you can just not deal with any of that, and not give Apple $99/year just to keep your app on the store.

And we haven’t even gotten into the big royalties you’re paying for App Store purchases.

Still, I understand the appeal at some point, just not for an app like OP was forced to use. I certainly wouldn’t want to use something like Immich or Opencloud without an app: these apps need to deeply integrate with my phone to be truly useful.

reply
criddell
4 minutes ago
[-]
As someone who uses apps, the hoops you have to jump through are one of the reasons I prefer apps. I'm glad Apple knows who you are and have scrutinized (to some degree) your app.

I have no interest in installing a web app that could look innocuous today and be entirely different every time I hit F5.

reply
Steve16384
12 minutes ago
[-]
Couldn't agree more. I've only published on Google Play, but the number of hoops Google makes you jump through (and keeps making you jump through if you want to keep your app in the store) is a full-time job in itself. New permission requirements, needing to self-decalre that your app does/doesn't do this or that, forcing you to reveal your personal details. The list goes on.
reply
smcg
22 minutes ago
[-]
The fundamental problem with the internet is that hosting sucks and no one wants to do it. It's thankless and it's expensive to maintain, both time and money. Apps are a way to not worry about that.

By the way, the link doesn't load for me, so I used the archive to read it. https://archive.ph/ByFBN

reply
anonzzzies
18 minutes ago
[-]
I love hosting and I will never stop doing it. I keep buying servers (second hand; almost no one actually needs the latest) and hosting 1000s of companies.
reply
smcg
12 minutes ago
[-]
For every person like you there are thousands who don't want to host!
reply
datakan
1 hour ago
[-]
We were supposed to be in the age of PWAs. That was the initial plan for iOS before the app store and 30% cuts on subscription apps.

Most web apps suck too though so I guess pick your poison. My strong belief is they want apps because they can spam you with notifications to get your attention.

reply
doginasuit
36 minutes ago
[-]
> My strong belief is they want apps because they can spam you with notifications to get your attention.

That's it, an app installed on a mobile device is a much more effective attentional hook than a website that must be either bookmarked or remembered. It is like inviting a door-to-door salesman to your house, of course they will take the invitation.

reply
z3c0
29 minutes ago
[-]
Also, analytics are not limited by JavaScript and browser APIs. Getting your attention isn't so valuable without knowing how to do it a second time.
reply
brabel
1 hour ago
[-]
> My strong belief is they want apps because they can spam you with notifications to get your attention.

I believe the same about the Youtube App, I just can't see why else it exists and I hate the video links try to open in the app if you're not careful!

reply
smallpipe
1 hour ago
[-]
Casting from the web doesn’t work (on iOS at least) but that’s all I can think of.
reply
craftkiller
1 hour ago
[-]
Chromecast from desktop chromium works, so there's no reason they couldn't make the universal turing machine in my pocket do the same.
reply
reddalo
1 hour ago
[-]
Desktop Chromium is Chrome. iOS Chrome is just Safari with a different interface.

Apple doesn't let other browsers use their own engine on iOS (unless you are located in the EU).

reply
craftkiller
55 minutes ago
[-]
> iOS Chrome is just Safari with a different interface

uhh wow. How did Microsoft face antitrust lawsuits for merely bundling IE when Apple is literally forcing their browser?

reply
Gander5739
49 minutes ago
[-]
Due to EU regulation, you can use a different browser engine in the EU (and I think Japan too), but thus far none have been developed (it's too much work to maintain two versions of the browser).
reply
echoangle
1 hour ago
[-]
AirPlay should work for every native video element, or do you mean something like chromecast?
reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
YouTube obfuscates the native video by removing the controls.

Vinegar is a Safari extension that fixes that on iOS and macOS. May exist for other browsers as well.

reply
jaffa2
50 minutes ago
[-]
uninstall the app. my life is much better since i uninstalled most apps and I just use the web pages these days. To take ONE benefit from not using the youtube app, and instead using a browser: I can open more than one video at once.
reply
ForHackernews
27 minutes ago
[-]
NewPipe mostly works except when Google breaks it.
reply
LoganDark
1 hour ago
[-]
Apps are also more difficult to intercept and modify on most devices. Companies like them because it means you can't use ad blockers or other privacy tools. It's also why they flip out so outrageously when Apple adds privacy tools at the operating system level, because tracking and abuse are most of the reason why apps are useful to them in the first place.
reply
forlorn
1 hour ago
[-]
They want apps so they could fingerprint your device, spy on you and get a lot more information than a web app.
reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
Sure. They. They want. You know who they are, and what they want.
reply
close04
1 hour ago
[-]
No need to play games and intentionally be obtuse all across the thread. "They" are the developers. A website has far less access to a device than an app and ads are easier to block. So they wrap anything into an app to gain that access and make ad money.
reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
What access?

Like the OS native APIs that offer the very utility for these apps to even exist?

Integration with OS features is what made the app ecosystem, because of utility. Project whatever conspiracy on that you want.

reply
NiloCK
25 minutes ago
[-]
> What access?

Push notifications.

> Integration with OS features is what made the app ecosystem, because of utility.

This is true of some apps, like the beer-drinking one that uses the accelerometer / other orientation sensors.

It's not true of a large number of other apps, hence the "your app could have been a webpage" charge. This is distinct from "every app could be a webpage".

reply
jorisw
21 minutes ago
[-]
> Push notifications

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Push_API

> hence the "your app could have been a webpage" charge

No debate there. I was responding to the ever vague and broad "they want" comments.

reply
close04
54 minutes ago
[-]
> Project whatever conspiracy on that you want

You think a developer making money from their app is a conspiracy? Or that apps track you and developers monetize that data is one?

I don't think you're being intentionally obtuse anymore.

reply
mr_mitm
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm currently attempting to write a calendar app for personal use, and I wanted to go the route of a self-host PWA. Notifications are a good point. How can I create notifications as a reminder before an event? Alerts are part of the icalendar standard ("VALARM"), so these are clearly notifications that are wanted by the user. Is that even possible for a PWA?
reply
whstl
54 minutes ago
[-]
You can send notifications with PWAs with Web Push API + Service Worker, same as a regular page.

But, AFAIK, you need the server for push, though. It used to be possible to program entirely from the client with this proposed feature but AFAIK it's abandoned: https://github.com/GoogleChrome/developer.chrome.com//blob/m...

reply
mr_mitm
46 minutes ago
[-]
> You can send notifications with PWAs with Web Push API + Service Worker, same as a regular page.

While the app is awake, sure.

I'd like notifications to work even if the OS backgrounded the app, and even without a network connection, like I'd expect a reminder to work.

> https://github.com/GoogleChrome/developer.chrome.com//blob/m...

Looks like this is what I need and it doesn't exist. So the short answer is "no". Thanks for the link!

reply
whstl
27 minutes ago
[-]
> While the app is awake, sure.

That's not true. The browser's push service wakes the service worker on delivery, even if the PWA is fully closed. That's the entire point of Push API vs polling.

reply
dec0dedab0de
1 hour ago
[-]
sure, but that original idea was 20 years ago.
reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
> they want

Who are 'they' and how do you know what they want

reply
pluralmonad
1 hour ago
[-]
The people deciding between delivering their payload via app or web page. Engagement hacking is not something we have to guess that ad companies want.
reply
Gander5739
47 minutes ago
[-]
The problem is, I tnink, that most people actually prefer apps over websites - even just a wrapper - for whatever reason.
reply
ashu1461
9 minutes ago
[-]
In most of the cases, web apps are also much slower as well and the UX is also sub par.
reply
jorisw
44 minutes ago
[-]
Possible reasons:

- No waiting for a page to load

- Home screen access (most don't know about bookmarking web apps)

- Discovery (where do you go to find PWAs?)

- Features (native apps have access to more platform APIs)

- Absence of browser chrome (more immersive UX), though on iOS the chrome can be removed from PWAs once bookmarked, using meta tags

reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
Ad companies now. Just one sentence earlier you said it's people 'delivering their payload'.
reply
pluralmonad
1 hour ago
[-]
Yes, ad (supported) companies are a large subset of the former. I am not sure what point you are attempting to make.
reply
jorisw
50 minutes ago
[-]
Ad supported apps are not necessarily from ad companies.

The point I'm trying to make that these ever-prevalent 'they just want' remarks are superficial, uninformed, overly broad, and vague, to the point of having no point.

There are many benefits to native apps over web apps on mobile devices, depending on the use case. A conspiracy against the people need not be part of every developer's choice to utilize the native platform and associated app store for distribution.

I know there's lots of horrible companies out there (hi Meta!) who will drive you to their native apps just for performance of ads and 'engagement'. This doesn't justify the conspiracy thinking getting applied to native apps as a whole.

reply
pjc50
44 minutes ago
[-]
Specific example would be Reddit.
reply
jorisw
28 minutes ago
[-]
Reddit, Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram, sure.

All examples of first party social media clients.

A minority of native app developers, I'm willing to bet.

reply
pjc50
27 minutes ago
[-]
Probably a statistical paradox where most developers aren't doing mass surveillance, but most app installs are, because the number of users for apps follows a power law distribution.
reply
datakan
1 hour ago
[-]
The developer of the apps obviously.
reply
snapcaster
1 hour ago
[-]
Why this gaslighting? obviously the massive companies with vested interest in monetizing your attention and data
reply
jorisw
1 hour ago
[-]
Nice and vague. Hard to dispute.

Simple fact is that people love to project evil incentives onto entities they don't even bother defining.

Not every native app developer is a 'massive company' with a 'vested interest' (what does that even mean) in monetizing your attention and data.

reply
Doctor_Fegg
1 hour ago
[-]
> There only seem to be two things that this “app” does, that a webpage might not have, and they’re both anti-features:

> It reports tracking data associated with your Google Account back to the developers.

Fortunately webpages never do any tracking whatsoever, let alone “Gobshite LLC and its 1131 partners need your permission for (contd. p94)”

reply
reddalo
57 minutes ago
[-]
Luckily tools such as uBlock Origin let you block all those nasty scripts, _including_ the cookie banner themselves.
reply
mcdonje
38 minutes ago
[-]
I wish PWAs took off, or a "desktop" environment for phones and tablets that allows me to save a simple website shortcut as an app.

I want my phone to be the portal to the places I want to go to and the things I want to see. I want to have the same experience going to a web app or website I regularly visit as with a normal app.

Like, I want to click on an icon and be there. I don't want to click on the browser and then find the tab.

Also, I want PWAs and website shortcuts to be first class citizens. I want a normal icon, not one that has some sort of visual marker that it's not a normal app.

It's been an ongoing annoyance, but it's getting to be more commonplace of an issue because there are a lot of people building cool things on atproto, and they generally start as a web app before they maybe build a phone app.

reply
rTX5CMRXIfFG
27 minutes ago
[-]
I prefer native apps over web apps, but I’m honestly at the point now where I just want to make voice or chat commands and get an output, instead of learning some self-important UI/UX person’s custom UI controls aka “””design system”””
reply
Hard_Space
1 hour ago
[-]
I understand the anger. But I wish I were better able to resist fixing the world with code in this way, as I really am supposed to be working.
reply
mohammedmsgm
1 hour ago
[-]
I think yeah, most apps can be webpages, but the biggest used apps can also be webpages, (insta, facebook, x) and so on , I think the only real indicator is how much people are using the apps, not if it's simpler just to do a webpage
reply
pdnagilum
1 hour ago
[-]
Wait, the users password is part of the URL? What happens if the password contains a forward slash or a question mark? Wouldn't that break the whole endpoint?
reply
Dan-Q
51 minutes ago
[-]
Original author here. Upon inspection, these passwords are clearly not chosen by the user and, as far as I can tell, consist only of numbers and uppercase letters.
reply
lstodd
58 minutes ago
[-]
RFC 1738 Uniform Resource Locators (URL) December 1994 section 2.2
reply
pjmlp
36 minutes ago
[-]
I keep telling that outside games, most apps could be done as plain mobile Web, emphasis on mobile Web, not the PWA kludge of workers and what not.
reply
wsdn
1 hour ago
[-]
If a 120MB app is required just to display an itinerary PDF, that's an architecture problem, not a UX problem.
reply
catapart
1 hour ago
[-]
Fantastic work! It's always nice to see the method, in case anything is out there making this stuff easier. But the result is the real prize. There's way too much nonsense out there that is an app when it should be a webpage. I'm so tired of all of these apps.

One criticism, though: I wish you would have made a simple form-based alternative to the app's population mechanism, rather than just make the one-off consumer for yourself(/those you shared with). Definitely way more work and not something you should have to do. But that would have been a cherry on top. Not only prevent needing the app for viewing, but also removing future incentive for an organization turning to an app like that in the first place.

reply
Dan-Q
52 minutes ago
[-]
I'm the original author (but not the poster here on HN).

Yeah, I considered that. I even wrote the code in such a way that it supports that. But I'm concerned about the legality of distributing it. Given that it hits API endpoints that were expected to be private to the developers' app, giving away a "tool" that bypasses the app (which hosts ads, albeit for their other products, and so serves as a money-maker for the app's owner) could be illegal.

At the very least, it could be a violation of the terms of service or just an annoyance to the app developer, either of which could lead them to trying to stop me from doing it, which would be an inconvenience. So maybe I'll wait until after the trip, when the page becomes useless to me, and THEN open-source it!

reply
ed_mercer
1 hour ago
[-]
This is awesome. I think the much bigger use case here is building web equivalents of apps that are only available on iOS/Android.
reply
deadbabe
10 minutes ago
[-]
The reason people want an 'App' instead of a website is purely marketing related. Apps are sexy and native, and have better distribution. Websites are old, crappy things where you can't always control exactly what the user is going to see very well, and sharing a slick URL isn't always easy.
reply
me_vinayakakv
30 minutes ago
[-]
Why they would have password in the URL?!
reply
mrcrm9494
24 minutes ago
[-]
does not load for me
reply
Eleg007
36 minutes ago
[-]
Love this
reply
cainxinth
1 hour ago
[-]
Preach!
reply
viaredux
1 hour ago
[-]
Amazing. Love the dedication to fix this minor annoyance, which I also share. Would be great if there was a kind of universal tool for this, as I am sure many of those shitty apps share the same internals.
reply