
I don't want to download your app - dnewcome
http://newcome.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/i-dont-want-to-download-your-app/
======
dkarl
The Delta iPhone app saved my ass and let me check in right before the cut-off
for flight I needed to make, while I was stuck in traffic in a cab outside the
airport. However, downloading the app was preceded by ten minutes of trying
desperately to check in using the Delta web site on my iPhone. I was stymied
by a combination of strangely sized fonts (which forced me to zoom way in on a
huge page in order to locate and click on tiny menu titles at the bottom of
the page), mysteriously placed menu pop-ups (as in I clicked a button to open
a menu, and then had to pan around the page trying to find where the menu had
appeared), and other problems that I never figured out.

I downloaded the app out of sheer desperation to check in on time for my
flight. In any other circumstance, I would have given up, gone to a
competitor, and filed the company and brand name in my brain under "fuck you."
(Actually, I did that last part anyway.)

Nagging me to download an app is bad enough. If you took the time to build an
iOS or Android app but didn't put any effort into mobile usability for your
web site, then you presumed you could make me install your app. You presumed
too much.

~~~
jrockway
> In any other circumstance, I would have given up, gone to a competitor, and
> filed the company and brand name in my brain under "fuck you." (Actually, I
> did that last part anyway.)

This is why I never want to own an airline: _you_ get blamed when your
customer leaves his house too late to be at the airport on time.

~~~
viraptor
Why the hate? He said "check in right before the cut-off", so he was on time.
This could just as well have happened at any other location any other day and
be just as annoying/time-wasting. For example if you tried to check-in from a
hotel where the mobile is still your only internet device the situation
wouldn't change.

The situation doesn't change the fact that the UX for mobile users is/was very
bad.

------
photorized
Worst part is, most of these apps are essentially browsers. There is no
additional content or interesting extra functionality being offered... just
same old content, only formatted differently.

So, this concept of installing a new browser every time I visit an unfamiliar
site, really is ridiculous.

This is almost as bad as "here's a mobile version of our site, opened
automatically for your convenience".

If your site is designed peoperly, my iOS device can browse your "full" site
just fine, thank you.

~~~
krickle
They want to have push/local notifications. It's like getting ahold of an
email, but moreso. I've turned off Javascript to avoid them asking, now I
constantly get "turn on your javascript" black overlays from Wordpress sites.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

~~~
photorized
Oh, their motives are clear... It's the fact that they are doing absolutely
nothing to entice the user to go through the inconvenience.

This won't last.

~~~
krickle
I certainly hope it won't last! But there isn't a large downside to angering
the few of us that were just passing by.

My dream is having some AdBlock-style filters for misbehaving websites, run by
tens of thousands of people. Then we could nip these practices in the bud.

~~~
nwh
There's not much stopping you from making exactly that. The main issue is that
iOS devices won't allow users to install that sort of modification, and it
doesn't look like newer iOS devices are going to be jailbroken any time soon.
Older devices though, sure.

------
mark_l_watson
+1 Right on. At least we should have something similar to a global opt out
list for nagging to install apps. Most companies have become much better at
making it easy to opt out of emails after you have done business with them.
Web portals should learn the same lesson with nags for app installations.

I am firmly in the HTML5 camp on rich web apps instead of custom apps. A
tangent, but: our purpose in life is to make life better for those we love and
also the world in general. Assuming that you are producing good content, do
you feel like you better serve people with a universal web + mobile HTML5 web
app, or some custom Android and/or iOS app?

One of my projects for the new year is to take my old cookingspace.com hack
and add "AI" for suggesting alternative recipes, generating recipes based on
ingredients on hand, etc. Yesterday I started to flesh out a simple UI in an
Android app, basically just having fun. This morning I had one of those "what
was I thinking" moments, and then saw the linked article which I agree with.

~~~
LnxPrgr3
You know what's funny?

I like native apps for a lot of things. They feel and act, well… native! Maybe
I just haven't seen enough well executed HTML5 apps, but every one I've used
so far is a far cry from what a native app can be. It's often pretty obvious
when a "native" app is just a glorified Web view.

But… I don't want to download an app to access your Web forum or read your
news articles. I don't need a new app for every freaking Web site I visit. My
phone has a perfectly capable Web browser, and I'm not afraid to use it. It
works surprisingly well even on a lot of sites that obviously weren't designed
for it.

"I do like having the option of a higher-fidelity experience if I want it. If
you provide a lot of value, I’ll grab the app on my own accord and enjoy it
that much more, thanks."

Exactly! For sites I access super frequently, and where the app actually makes
it easier to use, I'm all for it! But with rare exceptions, I just don't spend
enough time on a given news site or forum to warrant downloading an app for
it, no matter how amazing that app is.

HTML5 is a fine medium for content delivery. Please get out of my face and let
me browse your damn site!

(On a related note: sites pretending to be iPhone apps in the browser are…
usually more irritating than useful. I know Apple did it with their iPhone
manual, but I think even their attempt is kinda lame. If you look like a
native app, I start expecting your UI to respond like a native app, and I'm
usually very disappointed.)

~~~
mje__
What's even worse is when you get to a website pretending to be an iphone
app... using an android device.

------
bloaf
I think there is a fascinating split personality to the internet these days.
On the one hand, there is a big drive to move traditional desktop application
functionality into the web browser (e.g. google and microsoft's office web
apps, photo editing, and even some computation in the case of Wolfram Alpha.)
On the other hand, there is a big drive to push traditional internet content
into standalone apps, as this author outlines. Currently it seems that the
vast majority of the apps in the Windows 8 store fall into this category.

~~~
dmix
The long term push is towards html5 mobile apps period. The only problem is
performance (which is improving), immature javascript programming
libraries/communities and poor adoption of HTML5 mobile features by the OSes
(such as being able to use datepickers and other essential APIs for building
apps).

That's why native apps are still important. Once the above is figured out, I
highly doubt companies will want to pay to develop on 2-3 different codebases
in different programming languages than their website, to support native apps.

But iOS/Android make their money from native apps so I doubt they're
particularly motivated to make mobile HTML5 apps the standard.

~~~
codeka
_> That's why native apps are still important. Once the above is figured out,
I highly doubt companies will want to pay to develop on 2-3 different
codebases in different programming languages than their website, to support
native apps._

But that's the thing: we're talking about forums and news sites here. Mobile
browsers are _perfectly_ capable of rendering news, blogs and forums as fast
as you'd ever need. Companies aren't building these kinds of native apps for
the performance.

~~~
fusiongyro
A better explanation is that apps are simply the fashion right now. Everybody
and their brother doesn't need a web page any more than they need an app.

~~~
kijin
Another possibility is that companies think it would be easier to monetize
apps than web pages.

If you take ads from a typical ad network and put them in a mobile web page,
the page probably will look terrible, and a lot of people have ad blockers in
their browsers anyway. (Mobile Firefox recommends AdBlock in its home screen.)

A lot of mobile apps, on the other hand, have ads that cannot be removed
except by rooting your phone, and even then, many ads slip through. (I use
Android with AdAway.)

Also, people are more used to paying $0.99 for apps than they are to paying
for web pages.

~~~
fusiongyro
I doubt very seriously that ad blockers diminish ad revenue significantly.
Mobile Firefox is the default browser on which devices? Defaults count for a
lot.

I think we're both right: companies probably do believe they'll be better able
to monetize an app than a web site, but they're probably wrong, and they
probably think that for faddish reasons.

------
dangrover
The irritating part is that, even if I decide I want the app, I still have to
use the website to see the particular piece of content I was linked to. Most
sites just tell you to get their app, they don't deep link _into_ the app when
you do have it.

~~~
mverwijs
Even worse: I can't recall the number of times I've clicked 'No thanks' on a
'Download our app'-page, only to get redirected to the homepage, instead of
the page I was originally supposed to view.

Server attention span is still terrible, as explained by XKCD:
<http://xkcd.com/869/>

------
jburwell
Amen. To borrow a quote from Alton Brown, "I hate unitaskers." -- applies to
apps, as well as, kitchen tools.

~~~
baddox
I guess he wouldn't much like the Unix philosophy as summarized by Doug
McIlroy.

~~~
dredmorbius
Unitask tools of the Alton Brown stripe are leaf nodes, not pipe nodes.
They're roach motels, not highways. You check in, you don't check out. Design
is typically monolithic, not atomic.

The Unix philosophy is for small, atomic, pipeable utilities that do a single
task (more properly, subtask) _in conjunction with other tools_.

There are exceptions. including, say, web browsers. But where a browser is one
level of monolithic app, it's generalized to that particular information
purpose. A site-dedicated application is worlds worse.

------
cryptoz
I avoid this problem by instantly boycotting any site that does this. They
clearly have absolutely no interest in serving me content or helping me do
what I want to do, and there is _always_ an alternative.

~~~
jeremyjh
There is really no alternative to Linked In - there is other software that
does the same thing but since no one in my network uses it, that would be
worthless to me.

~~~
edoloughlin
> There is really no alternative to Linked In

Since I moved to Android and saw the permissions their app wants (access to my
phone calls and calendar, among others), I've found a great alternative: they
can wait until I get to my desktop, if I bother remembering.

~~~
reinhardt
Thanks for the heads up, I had no idea; just uninistalled the app.

------
Cowen
I once had an idea for an "app-aggregating app."

I realized that a lot of apps that I get prompted to download have effectively
one-off usage patterns and I'd delete them immediately after downloading and
using them. This app would've essentially just allowed for very basic
functionality for layouts, buttons, and form input from however many companies
built these basic interfaces. That way I wouldn't have to download any more
super-special apps, I could just load up the interface and work with that.

As I started thinking about this app more, I realized it was called a "web
browser." I wish more companies put stronger emphasis on their mobile site.

------
alpb
I find this an unnecessary flame. That’s why Apple introduced Smart App
Banners for iOS and they work just fine. The problem is just with those
redirect you to a separate app download page. [http://david-
smith.org/blog/2012/09/20/implementing-smart-ap...](http://david-
smith.org/blog/2012/09/20/implementing-smart-app-banners/)

~~~
nicksergeant
I hate those things. They drastically reduce the viewable height of the actual
content I'm trying to look at.

~~~
Yhippa
When I visit the Call of Duty Elite website there's a smart banner telling me
to download the app. I went to the website because their iOS app is limited.
When I click on the "x" to close it it takes me to the iOS app instead of
removing the banner. I lose real estate like you mentioned. Real annoying.

------
ghayes
The worst for me was a site (forget which one) which asked me to download the
app, and then redirected me to their homepage when I declined (as opposed to
the article I was trying to read). That was an unfortunate user experience.

~~~
Shank
This, so much this. I think Gawker is one who does it - if you change from the
mobile version to desktop version you lose the page you were on.

~~~
omarchowdhury
Looking for that page again means more ad loads.

------
olefoo
My theory is that organizational politics are what's driving many media
companies to push their 'app' over their website.

Building native apps means that new people with new training need to be hired,
a new team with a new manager needs to be formed. And once the budget is there
for the new shiny; it must be spent, to do otherwise would be wasteful!

Never underestimate the power of a bureaucracy to make things more complex so
that actors on the inside can justify their existence.

~~~
rhizome
_Building native apps means that new people with new training need to be
hired, a new team with a new manager needs to be formed._

I think it's more that existing employees want to amp up their resumes, and/or
Mortgage-Driven Development. That the apps (and their CTAs) routinely suck
tells me it's Mr. Learned-Rails-In-24hrs doing tech-lead.

------
forgetcolor
I feel the same way about sites with special iPad interfaces. Every time I
visit one I start to see/read the content as it loads and then the site goes
blank while some heavy and slow annoying swipe theme finally comes up. when
this happens I just leave.

------
TeMPOraL
Just an example of people thinking profit-first and value-to-users-second.
Unfortunately very common, and while in many cases it could be justified, I
still think many products would improve if their authors thought a little bit
more about maximizing user value before their own profit.

~~~
rhizome
Does it really result in profit, though?

~~~
TeMPOraL
I guess not, but explain it to them.

------
scrrr
I think Apple has recognised the problem and they are now supporting some
HTML-meta-tag that will simply insert an App-Store banner when you visit a
site that has it with iPhone's Safari.

------
peterhunt
I think the big reason for this is to unlock the engagement goldmine that is
push notifications. I bet they've crunched the numbers and would prefer a few
users having push notifications to more users not having them.

------
Nursie
Not just IOS devices neither, I'm getting fed up of shooing away the same
stuff on android.

------
glesica
Yes! This frustrates me to no end. A surprising culprit is (or was, I stopped
using them because of this) Hipmunk. I would think that a new, web-savvy
company would have a reasonable web site. But they don't. Their web site is
complete garbage on a mobile device and the solution is to download their app.
Sorry guys, not gonna happen.

------
diziet
The culprit often is "Tapatalk", a forum app that pops up a notification on
every iOS device for a lot of forums.

~~~
AskHugo
Tapatalk is still completely opt-in though. Those forums have to include
Tapatalk software within their own.

~~~
monochromatic
It's opt-in for the forum admin, but it's opt-out for me... opt out every
single fucking time I visit a forum that has opted in.

------
dendory
I blogged about that a while back. It's particularly bad on iOS since it seems
more sites have iPhone apps. And many of them don't even just put a small
link. Many, like Techcrunch, put a full page modal ad. Then there's sites who
don't even ask you and redirect to an AppStore link. Stupid.

~~~
YeahKIA
This is not just about a single purpose app by any website. I think the
problem is that apps in general have been isolated silos. That's one other
area where windows phone kicks ass IMO. It has neat app contracts that lets
one app talk to other thus making it more connected and hence more useful

------
McKittrick
I recently put all my apps into the cloud. I now access them through a single
app I call a "browser."

------
brudgers
The idea of using an iPhone app to browse a particular website reminds me of
AOL keywords like "www.cbs.com".

Every time I see an "Ask HN: what app do you use for HN?" I wonder why people
don't just use the browser. What is the allure?

~~~
__david__
Hacker News is usable on mobile Safari, but it's not as good as it could be.
Try using Alien Blue to browse reddit on an iPhone (and especially an iPad).
It is a superior experience to using the plain web site (even m.reddit.com). I
very much wish there was an equivalent for Hacker News.

~~~
prophetjohn
Hacker Node works pretty well, but doesn't support voting, commenting or
submitting.

------
hnriot
I noticed that coincidentally maybe to this, google news has stopped nagging
me to save to the home screen with an annoying nag.

I'd like to say I would boycott a site for its a noting nag screens but I
don't think that's a very mature way to handle it and all it hurts is me.

For me the most annoying thing is that sometimes I already do have the app and
there's no good hand off. For example, I have the yelp app, but when google
takes me to a yelp review and the nag screen says install the app, I would
expect it to transition my current page view to th app equivalent. Sadly this
is not the case. Ditto for LinkedIn

------
pacala
But we want:

1\. To spam you. 2\. To track your every move.

------
arn
I don't think the easy answer is "all such things suck". You spend the time
and money developing an app, and you want your visitors to know about the app.
The prime candidates are those who visit your site on that device. So, the
targeting is right, but the execution is what typically sucks.

From my own personal experience, if I'm visiting a specific article on the
site, my immediate interest is getting the information from the article.
Downloading an app is not going to take priority, even if I do ultimately want
the app.

We had mocked up a "email me a link to this app" link for our site, in order
to give the reader an option to email themselves an iTunes link for later,
without taking them outside of the scope of reading the specific article they
are looking at. In the end, we switched over to Apple's HTML banner thingy,
which gives the opporutnity for people who have already installed the app the
ability to open the specific article in the app itself.

~~~
notatoad
> You spend the time and money developing an app, and you want your visitors
> to know about the app

The problem is that you're thinking about what you want, not what your users
want. Your users want to view whatever content they came to your webpage to
view. stop getting in the way of that with your wants. the answer really is
that all such things suck, your position just seems to be that you don't care
how much they suck because you have an agenda to push.

~~~
arn
Here you are just projecting your own underinfomed feelings about it on
everyone else.

Is there no situation where you see an app as being superior to the website?

For AppShopper.com, yes the app is the superior experience to the mobile web.
There were overwhelming requests for an app. We made the app to serve our
users. Our goals and user goals are not always mutually exclusive.

~~~
notatoad
If you maintain an app that offers the same core functionality as the website,
and the user can accomplish their Immediate goal on the website, _adding the
unnecessary step of transferring over to the app is never a superior
experience_. Simple as that. The only valid case for prompting a user to open
your app is when their goal can't be accomplished on the web. Anything else is
promotion serving your goals, not the user's.

~~~
arn
Again, I agree. Read my original post.

------
jiggy2011
Sadly this is probably a business decision and not a user experience decision.
If I know I'm going to have my website there every time you tap to your
homescreen or do a search on your phone I know that I'm probably more likely
to convert you.

~~~
artursapek
Users aren't going to convert because they want to do you a favor. These
"download our app" prompts feel like a beg for a favor.

~~~
Evbn
You underestimate the gullible sheepishness of mass media consumers.

~~~
artursapek
You overestimate the commitment, and therefore value, of mass media consumers.

------
fpgeek
On Android, my personal pet peeve are apps that don't bother to handle their
own links. Fine. You've made a special mobile app for your site and
"convinced" (i.e. nagged) me to download it. If your app is so gosh-darn
wonderful, why the fsck can't I use it whenever I'm using your site? Third-
party app Twitter apps can figure this out. Why not you? Hint: The answer
probably is that your app isn't nearly as wonderful as you think it is.

~~~
AYBABTME
Bhe, Github handles all the github.com links. Yet, when it's not something
supported by their app (like 95% of the links I stumble upon), they simply
redirect the handling to a browser.

The result is:

\- Click github link.

\- Prompt menu : which application do you wish to use? List of browsers and
the github app.

\- Click on github.

\- Github loads, then...

\- Prompt menu : which application do you wish to use? List of browsers.

I could use the 'Always' option, but then the github app wouldn't recognize
the links it actually handles.

~~~
Evbn
This is a problem in Android OS. App have to handle all URLs with a certain
prefix (or maybe for a while domain?), not a regex pattern they want. Google
itself got burned by this, and they didn't even bother building a workaround
like github did. It was just mostly impossible to shop for a Nexus device on a
Nexus device, since Play hijacked all play.google.com links and then failed to
actually show content, since Nexus devices weren't in the native Play Store

------
NameNickHN
Believe it or not but there are heavy user on all of those websites who
probably love those apps. They are the target audience for those apps (even if
the app publishes don't realize that). Only because those websites are less
famous than e.g. reddit or HN, it doesn't mean that they shouldn't offer their
own app.

The real issue here is how they inform you about this app. The less intrusive
and obnoxious they do this, the better, obviously.

------
hindsightbias
news.google.com on safari/ipad always pulls up a "install this app..." popup
that blocks the entry field. Anyone know how to disable this?

~~~
hub_
When they don't put the "Download Chrome" banner every time you go visit a
Google property.

------
notatoad
This is one of the best advantages android has over iOS - you don't have all
those goddamn app nag screens all over the internet.

~~~
chops
That's not my experience at all. I get that "Install our app" popup on Android
when loading many forum/discussion-type sites.

And it's really goddamn annoying.

~~~
notatoad
ah, i use firefox as my browser on android, which may also be mitigating some
of this. Anybody who uses an alternate browser on iOS want to let us know what
your experience is with the nag screens?

~~~
MartinCron
Chrome on iOS I still get the nag screens. Sadly.

------
ruswick
This is especially problematic with companies like Quora, which coerce you
into downloading their app. They literally obfuscate all answers and tell you
to download the app, which is absurd.

Here is the actual wording:

<http://cl.ly/image/1n3P0e072m0F>

~~~
hub_
But Quora has also had a douchey attitude wtr to login and things like that.
If you are logged out you almost get coerced to log back in. And it does not
behave the same if you were never logged in.

------
SiVal
Are there any web templates, frameworks, libraries, or whatever that are
carefully crafted to look exactly like the native app UIs on major phone
platforms? If more developers used them, more users might develop a preference
for web apps over native apps as a default policy.

------
stesch
Most of the time I just visit a site from my phone because somebody posted a
link on Twitter. I visit the site for the very first time and won't see it
again. Why bothering me?

Make an ad in the sidebar but don't open a fucking confirm window!

------
noinput
The irony of it all at the bottom of the post:

Now Available! Download WordPress for iOS

------
muratmutlu
A collection of bad mobile web experiences (app download blockers etc) are
showcased here <http://wtfmobileweb.com/>

------
ohwp
Company X reads in a magazine they really really needs an app to keep up.
Developer X sees money and ofcourse builds the app.

Just don't install the app and the hype will soon be gone.

------
vojant
Agree, I prefer browser than apps. I always use many tabs - its just faster
than goin from app to another single-purpose app.

------
hayksaakian
The problem is that mobile browsers are especially bad, not that dedicated
apps are somehow better.

(Regarding most CRUD native apps)

------
g2e
What about the whole Objective-C > HTML5 thing though?

------
drivebyacct2
Fscking Tapatalk. I will _never, ever, ever, ever, ever_ install your app,
even if it scratches my back. Ever; just because of your incessant, annoying
spam on every god damn forum I ever go to. Give me a global opt-out.

I _can't wait_ to get over this hard-on for native apps.

ABC, you too, for god's sake, I clicked on a random news story, I don't need
your app.

~~~
zalew
> just because of your incessant, annoying spam on every god damn

sent from my iphone. sent from my ipad.

yeah, because I care what device you sent me an email from.

sent from my desktop computer using firefox.

~~~
sachingulaya
Many people do care. It gives context to short emails or emails with errors.

~~~
RyanZAG
Then change it to 'Sent from my phone.' - changing it is a couple clicks, and
anybody advertising a product in every message they send deserves any derision
they get.

~~~
zaidf
Knowing which device they are on helps me in small ways I don't even
consciously remember. For example if someone replied and I knew they are on an
iPad this moment, I know that I probably can't expect them to easily sign the
PDF agreement I'm about to send and if I really want it. Ack urgently, I
should provide an iPad-friendly method to sign and return.

This becomes crucial when you are doing back and forth between potential
customers.

~~~
subsection1h
If knowing the user agent is seriously crucial for you, you shouldn't rely on
"Sent from <user agent>" messages that can be disabled. Instead, you should
use an email client that provides functionality similar to the Display Mail
User Agent extension for Thunderbird:

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
us/thunderbird/addon/display-m...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
us/thunderbird/addon/display-mail-user-agent/)

