24 ms·

There are many reasons to prefer an app, most of which are ways OS makers have crippled web apps for reasons that TOTALLY HAVE NOTHING TO DO with the fact that

There are many reasons to prefer an app, most of which are ways OS makers have crippled web apps for reasons that TOTALLY HAVE NOTHING TO DO with the fact that they get a 30% cut if the user chooses the native app.

esaym 2mo ago
Yes, this
tcfhgj 2mo ago
One important which is not included: web apps are resource hogs
- stackghost 2mo ago
  Electron and React apps, perhaps. It's completely feasible to build a webapp that is lightweight. I have done it several times.
  - gxs 2mo ago
    Or just shitty developers that never give things a second - just sayin
  - tcfhgj 2mo ago
    put the same optimization effort into a native app
    - johnecheck 2mo ago
      Why?
      - tcfhgj 2mo ago
        to avoid comparing apples with oranges
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- pjmlp 2mo ago
  Webviews are not much better since Window 98 Active Desktop, yet here we are.
palata 2mo ago
This is wrong. The most important reasons why I prefer mobile apps are the same as why I prefer desktop programs. - I can download it once and then use it. - I can see when it gets updated (versus a website that gets updated every time I load it). For security reasons it's better, I can even verify my app with other people online and make sure we run the same thing. - End-to-end encryption doesn't make much sense in a webpage, because I fundamentally have to trust the server (which serves me the whole app I run every time). If you care about end-to-end encryption, you want an app. - For open source apps, I can audit the code, possibly edit it, and use it. I cannot do that with a webpage. - I exclusively use free apps, so 30% of zero is... zero.
- 63stack 2mo ago
  This is only true if you are using apps that require no communication with a server. Otherwise it's constant forced updates, and basing security on the version number of the installed app is a moot point since you can't guarantee the server will send the same replies to 2 different users. I can't parse the part about e2e not making sense for webpages.
  - palata 2mo ago
    > This is only true if you are using apps that require no communication with a server End-to-end encryption is all about going through an untrusted server. You don't need end-to-end encryption otherwise. > Otherwise it's constant forced updates There are apps that allow you to verify that you are running the same signed binary as others. Think key transparency but for apps. It's trivial to do. > basing security on the version number of the installed app Obviously you don't base your security on the version number of the installed app?! > since you can't guarantee the server will send the same replies to 2 different users With a website, you cannot. When you open protonmail.com in your browser, you don't know if you are running the same code as I am when I do the same. With a mobile app, you can. You get a signed binary, it's trivial to compare. Also even if you don't check that, if you get the Signal app through the Google Play Store, it means that the app is signed by Signal but distributed by Google. They have to collude in order to have you get a different binary. > I can't parse the part about e2e not making sense for webpages. It's what I'm saying above: - If you audit the Signal sources, compile them and run them, then you don't have to trust the server. - If you use the Signal app distributed by Google, you can trust that you got the same app as everybody else who downloaded it through the Play Store, unless Signal and Google collude. - If you open protonmail.com in your browser, you have to blindly trust that the Proton server is sending you the code you expect. But if you have to blindly trust the server, then it's not exactly end-to-end encryption anymore, is it?

esaym 2mo ago

Yes, this

tcfhgj 2mo ago

One important which is not included: web apps are resource hogs

stackghost 2mo ago
Electron and React apps, perhaps. It's completely feasible to build a webapp that is lightweight. I have done it several times.
- gxs 2mo ago
  Or just shitty developers that never give things a second - just sayin
- tcfhgj 2mo ago
  put the same optimization effort into a native app
  - johnecheck 2mo ago
    Why?
    - tcfhgj 2mo ago
      to avoid comparing apples with oranges
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
pjmlp 2mo ago
Webviews are not much better since Window 98 Active Desktop, yet here we are.

palata 2mo ago

This is wrong. The most important reasons why I prefer mobile apps are the same as why I prefer desktop programs. - I can download it once and then use it. - I can see when it gets updated (versus a website that gets updated every time I load it). For security reasons it's better, I can even verify my app with other people online and make sure we run the same thing. - End-to-end encryption doesn't make much sense in a webpage, because I fundamentally have to trust the server (which serves me the whole app I run every time). If you care about end-to-end encryption, you want an app. - For open source apps, I can audit the code, possibly edit it, and use it. I cannot do that with a webpage. - I exclusively use free apps, so 30% of zero is... zero.

63stack 2mo ago
This is only true if you are using apps that require no communication with a server. Otherwise it's constant forced updates, and basing security on the version number of the installed app is a moot point since you can't guarantee the server will send the same replies to 2 different users. I can't parse the part about e2e not making sense for webpages.
- palata 2mo ago
  > This is only true if you are using apps that require no communication with a server End-to-end encryption is all about going through an untrusted server. You don't need end-to-end encryption otherwise. > Otherwise it's constant forced updates There are apps that allow you to verify that you are running the same signed binary as others. Think key transparency but for apps. It's trivial to do. > basing security on the version number of the installed app Obviously you don't base your security on the version number of the installed app?! > since you can't guarantee the server will send the same replies to 2 different users With a website, you cannot. When you open protonmail.com in your browser, you don't know if you are running the same code as I am when I do the same. With a mobile app, you can. You get a signed binary, it's trivial to compare. Also even if you don't check that, if you get the Signal app through the Google Play Store, it means that the app is signed by Signal but distributed by Google. They have to collude in order to have you get a different binary. > I can't parse the part about e2e not making sense for webpages. It's what I'm saying above: - If you audit the Signal sources, compile them and run them, then you don't have to trust the server. - If you use the Signal app distributed by Google, you can trust that you got the same app as everybody else who downloaded it through the Play Store, unless Signal and Google collude. - If you open protonmail.com in your browser, you have to blindly trust that the Proton server is sending you the code you expect. But if you have to blindly trust the server, then it's not exactly end-to-end encryption anymore, is it?