Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

58% Positive

Analyzed from 3361 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#app#apps#web#apple#store#more#website#notifications#pwas#don

Discussion (113 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

Grombobulous•about 2 hours 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.

criddell•about 1 hour 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.

ftchd•10 minutes ago
Well...

Search right now in the App Store for "Morpho" and you'll find a "Morpho: Network" app. That app says it's some sort of TODO/Note taking app. It uses very broad language in the screenshots and assets from morpho.org (a decentralized protocol).

Once you open the app, it immediately downloads another bundle using OTA updates and shows an entirely different app where you "connect your wallet". You can imagine what happens next.

benoau•10 minutes ago
If they were actually doing a good job this would make sense.

Just weeks ago they published a sanctioned Russian bank's app masquerading as a pomedoro timer lmao.

hbn•16 minutes ago
> 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

That's an EU thing. If you don't publish in the EU you don't need to dox yourself.

Izkata•6 minutes ago
It's also in the US. A consumer protection law in California started it around a decade ago and Google applied it to everyone instead of letting us opt out of the state (it's why I let my Android app die), and since then they've also disallowed PO boxes.
al_borland•40 minutes ago
I periodically try to put something together. I don’t even care about publishing to the app store really, I mostly want to make stuff for myself for macOS.

My last attempt, it felt like Apple was no longer interested in the idea of hobbyist developers. The setup just to get the Xcode project setup felt like I needed to have a company and a website. When I selected something about iCloud, because I thought it would be nice if what I made synced to iCloud, I couldn’t even get started without paying $99, so I had to start again and choose a different option without it. And here I thought the $99 was just to publish to the store.

Considering how Apple started, this trend feels wrong. When I wanted to make a simple little app a few weeks ago, I ended up using python with webview. It seemed to be one of the few ways to make a little GUI app without boiling the ocean.

inigyou•19 minutes ago
It's like a lot of tech trajectories. At first it was fairly easy and people did it, and then both the producer, consumer, and platform evolved off in some direction in an endless feedback cycle, and now a newcomer sees the whole ecosystem is all the way over there in some weird place and doesn't join it because why would you want to be over there, but the existing actors don't see it as strange because they acclimatized to each step along the way.

Recently I tried out tiktok for a day and couldn't fathom why I would possibly want to ever use this app. Same with Instagram. But people who followed their trajectory since their earlier days find them normal.

Same with Facebook, actually. And Google.

On the other side of that equation, my very old YouTube account (which has a subscription to "YouTube Red" that costs half of what a new subscription to YouTube Premium costs nowadays) has been trained to show me certain content, and if I joined with a new account or told someone else to join, I know the homepage would be filled with dumb slop.

groundzeros2015•43 minutes ago
> I’ll be the first to admit that my actual app is pretty much garbage

It’s working. Your low quality project you weren’t really committed to got filtered.

r2_pilot•19 minutes ago
Aside from the low-effort snark and lack of empathy towards someone's project, this is also how you filter people out of caring about software development at at a young age, and then who's going to keep the computer systems running?
inigyou•17 minutes ago
Nobody cares about the future, only the present. America forgot how to manufacture things, too, because it was momentarily uneconomical and there was no concern about how to keep the living knowledge going.
kibwen•19 minutes ago
Both Google's and Apple's app stores are 99% slop by volume, so no, it's not working.
inigyou•16 minutes ago
It's professionally made slop, engineered precisely for maximum value extraction. This guy's app presumably didn't extract value successfully so they don't want it.
Steve16384•about 1 hour 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.
billyp-rva•about 2 hours 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

xtracto•29 minutes ago
> I can’t understand how we got to this place with “app culture"

Thie assertion is extremely funny to me. Historically we come from an "app culture". Back in the day, around 2000 or so, if you wanted some functionality, you ran an application. You ran software in your computer.

Then on the early 2000s people started migrating their software web" , inventing "SaaS" (software as a service" .

I remember my young self being strongly opposed to that, because I saw little sense in constraining what you could do with a scripting language, when you could easily get the "networking" capabilities adding tcp/ip to your software .

But the web and Javascript won, mostly due to control (there was advertising in software since the 90s, for example Opera or GetRight had ad banners) .

The feature and mobile phones came and people started to migrate to "apps" again. So we came full circle.

master-lincoln•3 minutes ago
It's because apple pushed towards apps and didn't want web apps on their phone. Likely due to the profits they can gain from appstore sales

Native apps would be the better platform in my eyes if the Operating Systems would be better in terms of letting a user manage what a native app have access to and can do.

But currently they are preferred by companies despite more dev effort because they can get more user data without the user having easy ways to prevent that. And of course showing ads without the user being easily able to block them

CuriouslyC•about 2 hours 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.
reddalo•about 2 hours 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.

imjonse•about 1 hour 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.
jghn•42 minutes ago
The problem is that for nearly all apps I want them to have neither notifications nor access to data. For instance, with few exceptions, the only apps I allow to give me notifications are the default apple apps, like iMessage.

The only reasons I'll use an app over a website is if I have no choice in the matter, or if the app provides an easier UI/UX than the website.

graemep•about 1 hour 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.

faangguyindia•about 1 hour 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?

CuriouslyC•about 2 hours 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.
al_borland•about 1 hour 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.
jorisw•about 2 hours 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.
1970-01-01•32 minutes ago
There was and is more than one App Store. You mention other good reasons to develop, but the money from ads was the biggest reason for an app to exist. Otherwise, it could and should just be a website.
inigyou•16 minutes ago
There's also more data you can access from an app than from a browser. E.g. surrounding WiFi networks, battery level, persistent device identifier.
groundzeros2015•about 1 hour 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.

datakan•about 2 hours ago
Apple has actually started allowing this. You can find the functionality in an adblocker called Wipr now and it works really well.
zamadatix•about 1 hour 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.
xingped•43 minutes ago
It's too bad not enough people know about using adguard dns on their phones. Dunno about iPhones but it works wonders on Android. Only downside is it sometimes interferes with signing into public wifi networks.
1970-01-01•30 minutes ago
Does not have to be branded adguard to work. https://github.com/hagezi/dns-blocklists
hashworks•about 1 hour 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.

datakan•about 2 hours 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.

doginasuit•about 1 hour 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.

z3c0•about 1 hour 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.
brabel•about 2 hours 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!

smallpipe•about 2 hours ago
Casting from the web doesn’t work (on iOS at least) but that’s all I can think of.
craftkiller•about 2 hours 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.
echoangle•about 2 hours ago
AirPlay should work for every native video element, or do you mean something like chromecast?
jaffa2•about 2 hours 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.
LoganDark•about 2 hours 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.
ForHackernews•about 1 hour ago
NewPipe mostly works except when Google breaks it.
dizhn•34 minutes ago
There's nothing sinister there. Google is merely trying to break their own app in new user hostile ways and everything else breaking is collateral damage. :)
mr_mitm•about 2 hours 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?
whstl•about 2 hours 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...

mr_mitm•about 2 hours 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!

forlorn•about 2 hours ago
They want apps so they could fingerprint your device, spy on you and get a lot more information than a web app.
jorisw•about 2 hours ago
Sure. They. They want. You know who they are, and what they want.
close04•about 2 hours 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.
harryf•43 minutes ago
We are in the age of PWAs. I've created a few where I just host them on Github pages (no backend needed, no hosting costs).

And the P in PWA has become "Personal" ... vibe coding apps with no backend for non-developers for their _personal_ needs e.g. a create a job hunting app for my son specific to the types of jobs he's looking for. If I update it, it updates on his phone plus he can sync to his laptop via WebRTC.

dec0dedab0de•about 2 hours ago
sure, but that original idea was 20 years ago.
jorisw•about 2 hours ago
> they want

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

pluralmonad•about 2 hours 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.
Gander5739•about 2 hours ago
The problem is, I tnink, that most people actually prefer apps over websites - even just a wrapper - for whatever reason.
jorisw•about 2 hours ago
Ad companies now. Just one sentence earlier you said it's people 'delivering their payload'.
pjc50•about 2 hours ago
Specific example would be Reddit.
jorisw•about 1 hour 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.

datakan•about 2 hours ago
The developer of the apps obviously.
snapcaster•about 2 hours ago
Why this gaslighting? obviously the massive companies with vested interest in monetizing your attention and data
jorisw•about 2 hours 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.

smcg•about 1 hour 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

inbx0•42 minutes ago
Simply hosting a front-end only app is almost free on several platforms (e.g. Cloudflare). Certainly less than the $99 Apple developer membership fee. It starts getting more expensive once you add back-end servers and databases and whatnot, but you’d be needing those with the App-approach too if your featureset requires that.
al_borland•32 minutes ago
Not to mention dealing with authentication, securing user data, and opening yourself to being a target for hackers.

Shipping a local app eliminates a lot of those headaches.

anonzzzies•about 1 hour 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.
smcg•about 1 hour ago
For every person like you there are thousands who don't want to host!
Doctor_Fegg•about 2 hours 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)”

reddalo•about 2 hours ago
Luckily tools such as uBlock Origin let you block all those nasty scripts, _including_ the cookie banner themselves.
mcdonje•about 1 hour 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.

maelito•21 minutes ago
Of course it should have been a Webpage. You can even code a whole modern map application on the Web, that's under 3 Mo gzipped, instead of the 600 Mo Java applications that we're served.
Hard_Space•about 2 hours 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.
ed_mercer•about 2 hours 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.
pdnagilum•about 2 hours 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?
Dan-Q•about 2 hours 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.
lstodd•about 2 hours ago
RFC 1738 Uniform Resource Locators (URL) December 1994 section 2.2
rTX5CMRXIfFG•about 1 hour 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”””
Advertisement
ChrisMarshallNY•44 minutes ago
If that's the case, then I agree. Lots of crapplets should be Web pages (for example, almost every corporate app).

However, there's a lot of stuff that does, indeed, require a native app.

That's the stuff I like to do. Doesn't really scale to Web pages.

mohammedmsgm•about 2 hours 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
pjmlp•about 1 hour 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.
wsdn•about 2 hours ago
If a 120MB app is required just to display an itinerary PDF, that's an architecture problem, not a UX problem.
catapart•about 2 hours 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.

Dan-Q•about 2 hours 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!

me_vinayakakv•about 1 hour ago
Why they would have password in the URL?!
mrcrm9494•about 1 hour ago
does not load for me
creaturemachine•30 minutes ago
Maybe it should've been an app after all.
deadbabe•about 1 hour 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.
llm_nerd•14 minutes ago
By "marketing" do you mean "experience"? Because absolutely no one is marketing apps as being superior, but instead this is just the experience of users.

There's a weird conspiratorial thing that people do about this whole topic that is so easily debunked. For instance "Apple wanted apps more than PWAs!". Android powers about 73% of the world's smartphones, yet PWAs are irrelevant on the platform.

Web apps can be incredibly powerful, but there's just a massively lower bar in the web app domain, historically. Like people are used to the website being dogshit, a mishmash of broken functionality, terrible layout quirks, slow responsiveness, and so on. Because that is generally acceptable to the web community, where it is deadly to an app.

Like I think it's hilariously ironic that the website telling us that the app could have been a website is currently completely broken, unable to handle a relatively tiny amount of traffic.

cainxinth•about 2 hours ago
Preach!
Eleg007•about 1 hour ago
Love this
Advertisement
viaredux•about 2 hours 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.