Yeah so native apps have some unique abilities to track you that websites do not.
On top of that, platforms like Reddit and Facebook tend to prefer native apps because it's easier to keep you within the app. Even if you click a link to an external website, for example, Facebook will open that link in an in-app browser (unless you find the opt-out). A few years ago, a researcher found out that these apps often inject their own javascript into that in-app browser. In theory, that means FB can track you even on external sites, even if you do not accept cookies for that website. You just brought your own tracker. Facebook then decided they should ship their own entire browser engine, giving them even more control.
I'm afraid it's the other way around. Browsers are (generally) better at sandboxing than OSs. Browsers are paranoid by default. They have to be, because visiting a website is just a click away (compared to multiple clicks/taps to install a native app).
For example, Chromium was able to mitigate Meltdown/Spectre within days, even if the OS was still vulnerable. (Chrome already had site isolation ready to ship, a feature that completely isolates websites into their own process). Even better, Chromium browsers tend to update themselves (or via Google Play) automatically.
Meanwhile, OS vendors were scrambling to ship an OS update.
(Also, worth mentioning that iOS users were vulnerable until Apple shipped an OS update, because every browser on iOS has to use Apple's WebKit)
> If it were just a website, you wouldn't have a little picture of their logo on your phone
You can install web apps on the home screen since iOS 1.0. The fact that you (and many, many others) don't seem to know this is a thing, says a lot about how effective Apple is at hiding that feature... :(
(Chromium browsers support an API where a website can show an install button if certain conditions are met, making it a one-click experience. But alas, for some reason Apple doesn't allow browser engines except the one they control :thinking: )
100% agree. Except it would be nice to have a notification, reminding you that the meter is running. And on iOS, you need to install a web app before it can send notifications, defeating the point of not having to install anything.
If the website is a PWA, it can be installed to the home screen and look and behave just like a native app. You just tap the icon on the home screen. It will remember your login.
And the upside is that you only have to develop one website (instead of a website and 2 separate native apps for iOS and Android).
Customer pressures. Don't want to pay for iPhones ('too costly'), and then for long very hard to optimize for Android ('why too slow?') (even native... wait if native why slow? Because they buy the worst, cheapest androids ever, then later buy androids that cost similar to iPhones, so it was a big switch cost for nothing at the end)
Eventually, it became nice because it worked to give the app a wider reach. Then I added an e-commerce front, so it made sense. But is it less costly than native? Not.
Hardware APIs:
There is of course a good reason why websites don't get unlimited access to those APIs (and why they can't access them in the background). But Bluetooth and USB are both available on Chromium browsers on every platform except iOS (because Chrome on iOS is Safari).
Example: When Google closed down Stadia, they offered a way to unlock the Stadia controller so you could connect it via BT to any computer and use it as a regular controller. You just went to their website, hooked up the controller via USB, and the site would update the firmware on the USB device.
But sure, there are many use-cases for native apps. Also, there are many native apps that should just be a website (you shouldn't even need to install it if you only need to use it once or twice).
A website can work offline, too. Service workers are a feature that any website (installed or not) can use to (pre)cache assets, etc. On iOS, that data will get evicted if the user doesn't visit the site at least every 7 days, though. Other platforms keep the data for a lot longer, but will evict at some point, too.
Part of the problem is that the websites need to "share" budget with the teams that build 2 separate native apps (or maybe they use something like React Native, but that still costs money that could've been used for a better mobile website).
Also, if a company has a mobile app, a bad mobile website is less of a problem. Take Takeaway.com. Their mobile site is terrible. But they have a pretty good mobile app, so why would they need to pour money into making the site any better?
But yes, (mobile) web also just needs to do better.
Service Workers do not require an installed PWA. Every regular website can have a PWA. I'm not sure who came up with this explanation for Apple trying to kill PWAs in Europe, but it makes zero sense.
On top of that, platforms like Reddit and Facebook tend to prefer native apps because it's easier to keep you within the app. Even if you click a link to an external website, for example, Facebook will open that link in an in-app browser (unless you find the opt-out). A few years ago, a researcher found out that these apps often inject their own javascript into that in-app browser. In theory, that means FB can track you even on external sites, even if you do not accept cookies for that website. You just brought your own tracker. Facebook then decided they should ship their own entire browser engine, giving them even more control.
https://webventures.rejh.nl/blog/2022/in-app-browsers-are-tr...
reply