
Google is finally killing off Chrome apps, which nobody really used - doener
https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/15/21067907/google-chrome-apps-end-support-lune-windows-macos-linux
======
crazygringo
First of all, this was announced more than 3 years ago, and it _still_ won't
happen for another 2.5 years.

Second of all, this should be treated as _good_ news for the HN crowd: Google
is transitioning from a proprietary, Chrome-only app model to the open-
standard, PWA model. Who doesn't support that?

There are a bunch of "typical Google cancelling a product" comments here. But
for real, I simply cannot imagine any Chrome app which people actually use,
whose developer is not going to transition to PWA and gain a bigger market.

Seriously, this is like complaining that Microsoft Edge doesn't support
ActiveX controls. (And I certainly don't recall any complaints about _that_
here.)

This is _good news_ , people. _Less fragmentation and more open standards._

~~~
jmull
I agree that this was a terrible idea from day one and am glad it has been
killed and will soon be buried.

But this: "typical Google cancelling a product" is still an important message.

Google routinely floats out APIs, services, and platforms and encourages their
use despite fatal flaws that mean they are doomed from day one. And some
developers fall for it and later have to pay the price. Hopefully, the
repeated warning will minimize this. Think of the devs right now that are
mistaking Flutter for a platform that will last.

~~~
andybak
> But this: "typical Google cancelling a product" is still an important
> message.

But it's one that appears with such regularity in HN comments that it drowns
out all other discussion.

I've frequently seen otherwise interesting posts related to Google derailed
into yet another pile on - or even worse full of people that think they are
being witty by posting "how soon before it's cancelled?"

~~~
callalex
You’re interpereting it as someone being witty, but consider that people have
legitimate concerns and are supplying mountains of concrete evidence for their
position.

~~~
andybak
I wasn't disputing the validity of their complaint. That's orthogonal to being
unfunny through repetition.

~~~
ghusbands
Claiming that them saying it is them thinking they are being witty is
disputing the validity of their complaint.

~~~
andybak
For example:

I could constantly remark on the current bad weather using an unfunny joke.

Somebody could complain about my terrible sense of humour without implying it
was actually lovely outside.

~~~
ghusbands
You're still claiming that people are saying it just to be witty/funny. They
aren't. It is a legitimate concern that people should be informed of, if they
aren't aware.

~~~
andybak
> You're still claiming that people are saying it just to be witty/funny.

You see that word "just" in there? That's the bit I disagree with.

It is possible to both agree with someone and dislike how they express
themselves.

~~~
callalex
Hacker News is not a person, and you will only drive yourself insane if you
treat a conversation with a collective like it is a person.

------
jefftk
Chrome Apps were a Chrome-only proprietary solution, and they're being
replaced by Progressive Web Apps which work in other browsers as well. This is
the sort of change we should be supporting!

(Disclosure: I work at Google, not on Chrome)

~~~
pier25
So PWAs will have support for Bluetooth and all the other features of Chrome
apps?

~~~
Andrex
[https://developers.chrome.com/apps/migration](https://developers.chrome.com/apps/migration)

Everything except advanced File System APIs are supported by PWAs, including
Bluetooth through the Web Bluetooth API. [1]

The replacement Native File System API is in origin trial and is pre-
standardization, however. [2]

[1]
[https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/07/interact-w...](https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/07/interact-
with-ble-devices-on-the-web)

[2] [https://web.dev/native-file-system/](https://web.dev/native-file-system/)

~~~
magila
Another big gap is the sockets API. Chrome apps have direct access to TCP and
UDP sockets. PWAs can't have this for obvious reasons.

~~~
Andrex
Good catch, and the migration page kinda glosses over that.

They are asking for input and use cases, though.

 _" Q: My app uses the chrome sockets API to do networking. Can this be done
with the open web?_

 _You might be able to do what you need with WebSockets. However, to use this,
you will likely need to change the remote end of your connection._

 _If that isn 't possible, we'd like to hear more about your use case—please
let us know about what you're trying to accomplish via the Chromium issue
tracker.[1]"_

1\. [https://bit.ly/new-fugu-request](https://bit.ly/new-fugu-request)

~~~
ronsor
This is bad. Simple TCP and UDP sockets are the foundation of the internet.

~~~
Andrex
Correct, but they are not the foundation of the Web -- HTTP is, and web
specification writers are only concerned with creating APIs for the web
platform (hence why Web Sockets is an upgraded HTTP connection, not lower
level like raw TCP or UDP.)

------
Eikon
I feel like chrome apps were actually ahead of their time and very much better
than embedding a full browser per app with electron.

Of course, they were not perfect but IHMO made much more sense than what we
have today, at least on a technical standpoint and could have evolved into
something truly great.

~~~
dtech
I.i.r.c. Chrome Apps are compiled binaries specific for Chrome (NaCL), they're
more like Flash, Java or Webassembly applications.

~~~
throw_m239339
Chrome Apps are more like sandoxed Electron apps which do not require the user
to install the same runtime every time for each app installed, unlike
Electron. No need for NaCL, they can be written in Javascript.

------
nova22033
_When Google first announced all the way back in 2016 that it would end
support for Chrome apps on Windows, macOS, and Linux, it said approximately
one percent of users on those platforms were actively using packaged Chrome
apps._

The move was announced in 2016. Apps are used by 1% of users.

~~~
throw_m239339
That's still a shit load of users.

Chrome claims it has 1 billion users, thats 10,000,000 users of chrome apps,
1/6 of the french population.

Of course I myself never used them, I learned not to trust any Google product
to begin with. These are the kind of decisions that will damage Google on the
long run. I've heard that Stadia is not doing so well...

------
g105b
Chrome Apps were Google's idea of packaging websites as self-contained apps.
They only worked within the Chrome web browser.

Now, we have Progressive Web Apps, and Google have decided to promote using
open standards to achieve the same goal, rather than offering a Chrome-only
solution.

PWAs can be used to "install" applications on your desktop or Chromebooks that
are almost identical in capability to Chrome Packaged Apps. In my view, this
is a highly responsible move by Google in moving the web forwards via
standards.

Google have even released a migration guide (in 2016, when this was first
announced):
[https://developers.chrome.com/apps/migration](https://developers.chrome.com/apps/migration)

------
wazoox
Typical Google move. I have a Chromebook. It was listed on the models that
would support Android app, this support never came (it's still "planned", 2
years later...). Support for Linux apps didn't come, either.

So now I suppose my Chromebook will be soon a useless brick. Thanks, Google.
Got the message, I'll never use any product with your badge again.

~~~
Kaiyou
You say that, but you got a Chromebook despite everything Google did in the
past. If people had gotten any message they'd have abandoned Google back in
2008.

~~~
taneq
Was Google anywhere near as bad in 2008? I don't recall anything particularly
awful back then.

~~~
ianai
No, I think that was around the launch of the first android, right? There was
some serious interest in a Linux (!!!) based phone. They were seen as a savior
of sorts, as I remember it. Now they’re a place where novel ideas go to die.

~~~
taneq
That's how I remember it - they were starting down their current path in
privacy terms but hadn't hit the moral event horizon yet, and they were still
in that unbridled optimism phase where they were launching moonshot projects
rather than churning through web service offerings. I didn't get seriously
concerned about them until later (around 2014-2015 iirc) and it took until the
start of 2018 for me to completely de-google myself.

------
dindresto
Note that Chrome Apps != Progressive Web Apps, which you can still install on
desktop Chrome and the new Edge and hopefully will gain more traction.

~~~
arendtio
I just wish apple would finally support push notifications for PWAs:
[https://caniuse.com/#search=push%20api](https://caniuse.com/#search=push%20api)

A lot of use-cases like e.g. chat apps, depend on that kind of technology.

~~~
rpastuszak
This will happen as late as possible as it’d provide an alternative to a large
chunk of native apps (so no way to charge the Apple tax).

~~~
avalys
The Apple tax is what exactly, in this case?

~~~
yohannparis
The 30% cut when selling on the Apple App Store.

------
Twisell
Please excuse this naive question, but what is the point of
ChromeOS/ChromeBook then?

If everything is now WebApp what's the point of an OS that can't run native
App vs any other OS that can do both?

I must be missing something???

~~~
trevordixon
Security and simplicity. Such a low-maintenance system. When I sign in to any
Chromebook, my wallpaper, shortcuts, and settings are just as I left them. For
example, I may never have to find the setting to maps caps lock to escape ever
again if I stick to ChromeOS.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
To be fair, Windows 10 does this.

~~~
riku_iki
Somehow I have troubles finding lightweight win10 laptop with comparable
price.

------
ArmandGrillet
I developed a few Chrome apps while I was in uni and what a pleasure. The APIs
were easy to comprehend, the creation of an app running on any desktop OS only
took a few minutes, I loved it.

The lack of documentation from Google was already noticeable 4 years ago thus
I'm not surprised about that move.

------
spondyl
> You probably aren't using Chrome apps anyway

My coworker sitting to the left of me still uses the Chrome App version of
Postman because it works, and hasn't stopped working.

It has had an orange banner for the last year saying to upgrade but I'm pretty
sure he never will, until it actually stops working.

I think in his mind, the Chrome version is fine and ultimately, he'd be going
through the install process then potentially moving his saved requests to what
is essentially an identical copy of the exact same application

~~~
somehnguy
I still use the Chrome app of Postman too.

Reason is that I'm just used to it and it works perfectly fine for every use
case I've had. I did install the new version but they changed the UI around a
bunch and it kinda ticked me off because I was just trying to do some work,
not relearn an app because they wanted it to be shinier looking.

------
est
That's too bad. Chrome Apps allows TCP/UDP communication and it could create
interesting apps.

~~~
Jyaif
+1

I'm still using JSTorrent
([https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/jstorrent/anhdpjpo...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/jstorrent/anhdpjpojoipgpmfanmedjghaligalgb?hl=en)).

It's impossible to implement the BitTorrent protocol using a webapp, which
means that once Chrome Apps are gone I'll have to revert to using a native
client, which I don't trust one bit.

~~~
ambrop7
It could be done with a local TCP / UDP <=> WebSocket gateway, especially if
it's written in a safe language like Rust.

~~~
kevingadd
Why use a webapp AND a local native gateway instead of just a native app? If
your goal is to just not open any native win32/cocoa/etc UIs for some reason,
there are existing native torrent clients with web interfaces served over http
and those have been available for like a decade plus.

Webapp + native gateway also means that the torrent traffic ends up being
suspended/throttled if the tab isn't foregrounded or if you close it,
something you wouldn't have to deal with if the native gateway was just a
native torrent client. Chrome Apps had a background privileged context that
could keep running even if no tabs were open (though Google naturally
discouraged this unless the app needed it), something you can't really get
with a PWA currently (though Service Workers come close if you keep the tab
open, I think? Maybe?)

~~~
ambrop7
One benefit would be to protect yourself from security issues in the main
torrent code. Anyway it was just an idea, not a serious proposal.

------
factsaresacred
Probably as good a place as any to highlight how broken the Chrome extension
approval process has become over the last month or so.

Updates that would take an hour now take up to 10 days, including minor
updates like a change to an extension's description.

Having your deployment date be determined by one of Google's algorithms is
ulcer-inducing.

And the support is...well, see for yourself:
[https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!forum/chrom...](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!forum/chromium-
extensions)

They can fix this. G Suite support is fine. I would pay for this process not
to suck.

------
flokie
Does anyone commenting on this thread even use a chrome app that's not just a
wrapper on the site or a pwa? Just curious.

~~~
pier25
I worked in edtech for a couple of years and we had our own Chrome app.

------
thrower123
I want to think that Postman was one of these, at least at one point. There
may also have been a SQLite browser that I used briefly.

Otherwise... yeah, I can't say that I remember using any of these.

I think I'd rather have all of the Electron apps that I use now share a
version of Chrome rather than each package the whole shebang themselves
though.

------
Shaddox
It's a shame, really. I used to play Granblue Fantasy with their Chrome app.
It was very convenient and accessible.

~~~
hombre_fatal
I mean, it's right here:
[http://game.granbluefantasy.jp/](http://game.granbluefantasy.jp/)

------
somesortofsystm
I've bought a few Chrome apps over the years, but I don't like it. They've all
disappeared, or no longer work.

Its a worse user experience than plain ol' apps, imho. Definitely _not_ good
value for money when you can't even use the apps a year or so later ..

------
djohnston
imagine relying on google to maintain a product in 2020

~~~
darkwizard42
Not really appropriate here. They announced this change to an open
standard...in 2016.

------
thinkloop
Any idea if this means they will also get rid of:

"more tools" > "create shortcut" > "open as window"

I use this exclusively and chromium is the only browser left that supports it.

------
chadlavi
I learned about the existence of these today, from this thread.

------
nilsandrey
I'll miss GetPocket app, despite what the article said it works offline on
Desktop. Anyone known about an alternative?

------
SahAssar
Tip: theverge (like medium, etc.) is one of those sites that is better without
JS.

------
offmycloud
I believe that Authy has both a Chrome app and an extension.

------
Yuioup
What does this mean for the Outlook "App"?

~~~
close04
I imagine the functionality will be passed back to a browser tab. Most Chrome
apps were basically just that.

------
shecklestein
Does this include Apollo client devtools???

------
shecklestein
What about apollo dev tools?

------
gd2
I have Chromebooks.

I'm now concerned and confused. The implications are not adequately explained.

------
jdlyga
This really goes to show that if you're buying something for the potential of
it, you're not always guaranteed to be an early adopter of a hot new trend or
technology. Sometimes you are, but not always. You have to love what you're
buying for what it can provide you right now.

~~~
jamesgeck0
This philosophy doesn't exactly work in this context; the devices are losing
applications provided right now.

------
funnygrass
Is this just a marketing move? Why is Google doing this? I also wonder how
will this affect Chrome's market share. I think a lot of people appreciated
the apps, especially the adblockers.

~~~
pauletienney
Google kills Chrome Apps, not Chrome extensions.

~~~
funnygrass
You're right, my bad. Sorry for the confusion.

------
screye
It is such decisions from Google that make me question if they will continue
supporting GCP down the line.

How will google pivot away when entire companies are dependent on their
service staying up ?

Sometimes I think Google should simply spin off less than super profitable
ventures into a small company and host it under alphabet.

As long as the service breaks even with employees working on Google wages, it
can stay up. Once it goes into losses, the company can file for bankrupcy or
move employees back to google.

~~~
what_ever
You should read the rest of the thread if this move makes you question Google
supporting GCP.

Disc: Googler.

