
Help stop the spread of NIBS (Native is Better Syndrome) - tswicegood
http://www.webdirections.org/blog/help-stop-the-spread-of-nibs-native-is-better-syndrome/comment-page-1/
======
scott_s
_The logic here is simple. If you write an app with Objective-​​C/​CocoaTouch
(does the same logic hold for JavaME (Android), C++ (various other platforms)
and so on?) the user experience created is by that very fact better._

I believe that is the premise to his whole argument, and I find it
disingenuous. That is, it's clear to me Gruber meant that a native app with an
interface specialized for the particular device is more likely to be better
than a web application _because_ the web application cannot have a specialized
interface for the device. He is not claiming that making an app native
automatically makes it better.

~~~
dxq
I agree. The author misses the fact that writing a native app for the iPhone
(usually) means taking advantage of the well-designed UIKit. If developers all
had to develop their own GUI, we'd see way more crappy native apps. It has
nothing to do with language and everything to do with the tools Apple has
provided to create beautiful apps.

------
pkaler
A laundry list of technical reasons for/against native Apps doesn't matter.
The market has spoken. Customers are buying Apps and making In App purchases.

~~~
maxharris
Exactly! I'm one such customer, and I buy apps for my iPad and my iPhone on a
fairly regular basis. And I'm better off for it, too. It's much easier to get
the weather through an app than it is to visit any of the weather websites.
One of the reasons for this is that apps are _faster_ and _more responsive_
than waiting for the browser to load and render the page. Those extra ten
seconds really matter when I pick my iPad off the bed and decide what kind of
pants I need to put on for the day. (Not to mention all of the ads and extra
clicks I need to perform just to get a detailed forecast from a browser!)

------
acqq
But native IS better, at least considering:

\- faster code (that allows you to implement something more complex or more
demanding)

\- better interfaces (allows you to have an app that is really "in the spirit"
of the platform which does matter).

\- significantly easier way for a customer to pay for the app.

Author's arguments for non-native and how I see them:

1) He can have the URL to different settings of the "web app." -- just please
explain that to users that they need _that_ and earn the money.

2) "already, and increasingly into the future, you’ll be able to develop with
a single code base, and deploy to (ultimately) any platform" -- oh right, and
everybody will use exactly the hardware you have, with the same resolution,
same input mechanisms and the same controls.

3) "Distribution control: With 'native' apps, you must go through a third
party, who owns the platform" -- this is the only significant argument, IMHO.

The third argument is really an important one. In some cases it can be a
deciding one. But it alone can't be used as a proof that native apps aren't
better in enough real cases, and that there's "a syndrome."

------
dasil003
_Now, in order for this asser tion to be true, there must be not a single web
app bet ter than a sin gle native iPhone app._

Right, and men aren't physically stronger than women, the United States isn't
richer than Zimbabwe, and Mensa members aren't smarter than janitors.

------
mahmud
Glaring error in the article: author thinks Android is JavaME.

Wrong.

------
mtholking
His first point is incorrect, native iOS apps can be linked through custom
URLs - <http://www.handleopenurl.com/>

~~~
mahmud
Android streamlines this, and provides it out of the box, backed by the full-
confidence of the OS :-)

For data, you can use ContentProvider:

[http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/content-...](http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/providers/content-
providers.html)

You can also use capabilities of other applications, including UI and logic by
reusing their Intents :-)

[http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/intents/intents-
fi...](http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/intents/intents-filters.html)

Smalltalk and Lisp gray-beards must wet their pants every time they read up on
Android. It's pretty much the epitome of a clean, extensible, user-oriented
system. Fast, open, garbage collected, gorgeous and just _clean_. How on earth
did they get some many things right, out of the box?

------
ramy_d
so John Allsopp wrote this article as response John Gruber's article on how
much better native apps are to web apps. Allsopp understands Gruber's argument
to be as such: Native apps are better because they are written in native
languages that use native APIs.

I read Gruber's article and Allsopp is so far off the mark it's not even
funny.

As someone who write web apps for mobile devices and desktop applications, I
know that every time we are prototyping a web app and we need more X, then
more X is available by going native. want some examples?

speed (are you doing graphics? is there a network peak?) integration (can you
tie other services to your devices?) computation load (video editing? on the
web? for 5 simultaneous users? BANANAS!) accessibility (does your web app work
offline? wah wah.) hardware (can you extend the usability physically?)

it's like people forget what "closer to the metal" means and have problems
admitting to them selves that the web will never be cutting edge.

sure it's harder, and takes more time, but that's the price you have to weigh
your decisions against. Is more X worth it?

------
forgottenpaswrd
"Founded in Australia in 2004, by long time web indus­try fig­ures Maxine
Sherrin and John Allsopp, Web Directions con­fer­ences bring together the web
industry’s lead­ing experts from around the world to edu­cate and inspire our
attendees."

The article reminds me to "CDs and DVDs have a bright future" from the CDs and
DVDs association or "the physical book is never going to die" from the print
industry associations.

------
tswicegood
Comments on the thread are good -- here's the one that pointed me to the
article in the first place: [http://www.webdirections.org/blog/help-stop-the-
spread-of-ni...](http://www.webdirections.org/blog/help-stop-the-spread-of-
nibs-native-is-better-syndrome/comment-page-1/#comment-221668)

------
benologist
What are iPhone HTML5 games/applications making outside of the App Store /
Android stores? If the answer includes "CPM" then native _is_ better, and
technical equivalence won't help.

------
shalmanese
Cons of native apps:

Everything listed in this article and the dozen more like it.

Pros of native apps:

I can get paid.

Native apps win.

------
bhiggins
this amounts to a bunch of whining over the fact that "at present, on various
platforms, it’s true that the full capabilities of the platform are not
exposed to web technology based applications, particularly via the browser"

will you have to write different code to make the best app for different
platforms? yes, you most likely will. especially if you want to use platform-
specific features. just get over it and get to work.

