1. xravishx's Avatar
    I think it's partly because of Apple and is propagated by Android and everyone else. Apple's whole "there's an app for that," in my opinion is a huge bane on the entire smartphone industry.

    When you sit at your computer, what are you doing? It's going to be either work, play, or simply leisure. For work, you might be typing emails, creating presentations, editing and creating pictures and video. Work stuff. For play, obviously, you'll be playing games. For leisure, chances are you're browsing around on the internet.

    When you're on you're phone, chances are you're doing the same things. The difference is that nearly every thing you do is completed using an app on the phone while on the computer, most of that stuff can be accomplished through the web browser.

    Granted, there are some things that might be better to have a program for than a Web app, but those things are dwindling. You can now access MS Office from online at least on your computer, websites are able to make use of webcams and microphones, tons of sites these days want your location and are able to access through the website... what exactly does having a separate app benefit?

    Or games. Of course, most of the crap games that pass through any app store could be played in a browser anyway. Any games that truly make use of the hardware will not benefit being a Web app.

    I know this song has been sung before, but the likes of Netflix, Instagram, Snapchat, Skype, any news/forum app, most mobile and thus crap games, navigation, etc... all could be web apps. Unless you need something offline, what's really the point? Most of this stuff is useless without a connection anyway.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 01:50 PM
  2. early2bed's Avatar
    Native apps are always going to have more features (customized to the platform) and will be more fluid. Just look at how many people use Tapatalk or some variant to access this very forum even though the web interface would work just fine. When you're in the app business then the more robust user experience will usually win. A web app is acceptable only if there isn't any other alternative. If you don't provide the best experience for your users than someone else quickly will.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    04-16-14 02:00 PM
  3. vgorous's Avatar
    I wondered this too especially if html5 is going to be the new standard.

    Posted via CB10
    04-16-14 02:14 PM
  4. app_Developer's Avatar
    Native apps are always going to have more features (customized to the platform) and will be more fluid. Just look at how many people use Tapatalk or some variant to access this very forum even though the web interface would work just fine. When you're in the app business then the more robust user experience will usually win. A web app is acceptable only if there isn't any other alternative. If you don't provide the best experience for your users than someone else quickly will.
    Our company, like some others, is planning no new HTML5 mobile development for 2014 and most of our existing mobile HTML5 components and apps will be going native.

    The numbers (transaction volume, engagement, satisfaction scores) all show a huge advantage for native code over HTML/JS. It's really not even close for companies like us who have both options out there. So our customers, at least, have spoken. Especially our higher end customers and our younger customers, which are two very important groups that both seem to agree on this.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    04-16-14 02:22 PM
  5. xravishx's Avatar
    I can see that. However, I can't see that for everything. Forum apps are kind of a different breed of app. People want to view things offline, bookmark things, respond to things while researching and browsing and such. There are lots of complexities that may be best translated as a native app. Other apps, like Netflix, are simple: browsing for something to watch, then watching in this case. There shouldn't be a whole lot of work that is involved there.

    I do understand the need and desire for complex activities to be in a native app, but I believe for the most part, others can be accomplished through a web app since most of the apps serve really only a few functions anyway.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 02:30 PM
  6. xravishx's Avatar
    Our company, like some others, is planning no new HTML5 mobile development for 2014 and most of our existing mobile HTML5 components and apps will be going native.

    The numbers (transaction volume, engagement, satisfaction scores) all show a huge advantage for native code over HTML/JS. It's really not even close for companies like us who have both options out there. So our customers, at least, have spoken. Especially our higher end customers and our younger customers, which are two very important groups that both seem to agree on this.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Interesting. I wonder if this is possible because most mobile browsers are pretty much junk.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 02:34 PM
  7. app_Developer's Avatar
    I can see that. However, I can't see that for everything. Forum apps are kind of a different breed of app. People want to view things offline, bookmark things, respond to things while researching and browsing and such. There are lots of complexities that may be best translated as a native app. Other apps, like Netflix, are simple: browsing for something to watch, then watching in this case. There shouldn't be a whole lot of work that is involved there.

    I do understand the need and desire for complex activities to be in a native app, but I believe for the most part, others can be accomplished through a web app since most of the apps serve really only a few functions anyway.
    But if you open the netflix app on an iPad and compare it side by side with the browser experience, you see that the app has a better, significantly smoother, navigation, right?

    It also tends to use less life than the browser, and restart the video less often.

    And then for financial apps like I work on, we have many more options for security than we have in HTML, which allows us to make a smoother experience and offer some things we wouldn't dare do on the web.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    04-16-14 02:34 PM
  8. early2bed's Avatar
    It all depends on what you are looking for. If your perspective is - "I wish we had more apps" or "I wish that app was available for my device" then you would be happy to have access to a web app. However, if your perspective is "Which app is better?" or "I wish that app worked better" then you are looking for the best native experience.

    The vast majority of smartphone users fall into the latter. They have access to all the apps they want and are looking for the best and are looking for frequent feature updates.
    app_Developer likes this.
    04-16-14 02:40 PM
  9. app_Developer's Avatar
    It all depends on what you are looking for. If your perspective is - "I wish we had more apps" or "I wish that app was available for my device" then you would be happy to have access to a web app. However, if your perspective is "Which app is better?" or "I wish that app worked better" then you are looking for the best native experience.

    The vast majority of smartphone users fall into the latter. They have access to all the apps they want and are looking for the best and are looking for frequent feature updates.
    I think you're exactly right. So let's say we focus on making a webapp experience that allows us to capture the long tail of alternative OSes. Our competitors will instead focus their attention on the 95% of the market that use the primary two platforms in the world. They'll build a highly optimized experience for those two platforms using all the tools that the native SDK's offer.

    There just aren't enough users out there who don't have at least one android or iOS device now. Even with our BB users, our surveys show the majority of them also own an Android or iOS device. So they can reach our native apps anyway.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    04-16-14 02:58 PM
  10. xravishx's Avatar
    I think you're exactly right. So let's say we focus on making a webapp experience that allows us to capture the long tail of alternative OSes. Our competitors will instead focus their attention on the 95% of the market that use the primary two platforms in the world. They'll build a highly optimized experience for those two platforms using all the tools that the native SDK's offer.

    There just aren't enough users out there who don't have at least one android or iOS device now. Even with our BB users, our surveys show the majority of them also own an Android or iOS device. So they can reach our native apps anyway.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    All very true. I even grudgingly carry around an Android device simply because there are apps that I can't or won't use on my BB.

    I don't like to think of myself as the type of person that thinks "I need more apps!" I'm thinking more along the lines of how I use my computer. Some functions I use a particular suite of programs, but for the most part, I'm in the browser. I check my financial in my browser, browse forums, do research, all from the browser. Additionally, I can do all of those browser things I from any computer no matter what OS it's running. All of those functions I see as being hijacked by apps on phones that people refuse to make for anything but iOS or Android (for the most part).

    Now, maybe I'm just the odd man out, but I figure that my smartphone is essentially a mobile computer, not as functional, but as close as it can get and getting better and without being this honkin' laptop I need a backpack to haul around. Am I just expecting too much out of phones?

    Also, security-wise, why wouldn't a web browser on a mobile platform be very secure? I know nothing about this, but I would think that it wouldn't matter if you have a secure app or a secure website.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 03:18 PM
  11. app_Developer's Avatar
    All very true. I even grudgingly carry around an Android device simply because there are apps that I can't or won't use on my BB.

    I don't like to think of myself as the type of person that thinks "I need more apps!" I'm thinking more along the lines of how I use my computer. Some functions I use a particular suite of programs, but for the most part, I'm in the browser. I check my financial in my browser, browse forums, do research, all from the browser. Additionally, I can do all of those browser things I from any computer no matter what OS it's running. All of those functions I see as being hijacked by apps on phones that people refuse to make for anything but iOS or Android (for the most part).

    Now, maybe I'm just the odd man out, but I figure that my smartphone is essentially a mobile computer, not as functional, but as close as it can get and getting better and without being this honkin' laptop I need a backpack to haul around. Am I just expecting too much out of phones?

    Also, security-wise, why wouldn't a web browser on a mobile platform be very secure? I know nothing about this, but I would think that it wouldn't matter if you have a secure app or a secure website.
    The desktop or laptop comparison is interesting. There was a time when people bought applications to do everything on their computer. I remember loading disks to use the Dow Jones News Retrieval Service back in the day. Now that would be a website.

    But I think that's because app development and distribution was too hard on PC's. It's not hard at all on Android or iOS. Also browsers on PC's are more powerful, obviously, they tend to be used on more stationary networks, and most users don't expect them to last all day on one charge.

    So that makes the phones inherently different.

    On security, the issue is that layering our own protocols under (or over) the standard web stuff is cumbersome and very slow. With native apps, we have full control over what encryption we want to use for different purposes. And then we have full access to the CPU and GPU to make those algorithms work quickly and, again, use as little of the user's battery as possible.

    Why do you think BBM is a native app for Android and iOS? Security may not be the only reason, but I would bet it is part of it. Even BlackBerry chose native development when a webapp would have given them windows 8 and even desktop immediately.

    And even BlackBerry chose iOS and Android first and then worried about the smaller platforms like WP8.

    Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk
    04-16-14 03:49 PM
  12. xravishx's Avatar
    The desktop or laptop comparison is interesting. There was a time when people bought applications to do everything on their computer. I remember loading disks to use the Dow Jones News Retrieval Service back in the day. Now that would be a website.

    But I think that's because app development and distribution was too hard on PC's. It's not hard at all on Android or iOS. Also browsers on PC's are more powerful, obviously, they tend to be used on more stationary networks, and most users don't expect them to last all day on one charge.

    So that makes the phones inherently different.

    On security, the issue is that layering our own protocols under (or over) the standard web stuff is cumbersome and very slow. With native apps, we have full control over what encryption we want to use for different purposes. And then we have full access to the CPU and GPU to make those algorithms work quickly and, again, use as little of the user's battery as possible.

    Why do you think BBM is a native app for Android and iOS? Security may not be the only reason, but I would bet it is part of it. Even BlackBerry chose native development when a webapp would have given them windows 8 and even desktop immediately.

    And even BlackBerry chose iOS and Android first and then worried about the smaller platforms like WP8.

    Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk
    That makes sense and is reasonable. I'm wondering if things will change when the power of the hardware reaches the point where it won't matter as much how little battery you consume with your app. If I go with your explanation of things, then maybe not since security is a growing issue and battery life troubles seem to be something that isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

    Of course, we have another view where browsers on mobile platforms become much more comparable to those on desktops. I think HTML5 is something of a precursor to the future (as if I understand a bunch) in that web browsing is a much more secure and versatile activity and developing for browsers might actually be more worthwhile in that developers won't just hit most of the people out there using some kind of device, but will instead hit ALL people. I figure hardware still has ways to go for anything like that, but my guess is that when it's there it's not going to be as much about making a better experience (if the experiences are comparable of course), but instead targeting as many people as possible.

    Buuuut, that all hinges on battery life. So, my wonderful fantasy will probably stay fantasy until we can come up with a better means of powering our devices than lithium-ion.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 04:29 PM
  13. early2bed's Avatar
    Mobile devices are always going to be more constrained than PCs in terms of screen area, memory, power consumption, bandwidth, etc.
    04-16-14 04:34 PM
  14. xravishx's Avatar
    Mobile devices are always going to be more constrained than PCs in terms of screen area, memory, power consumption, bandwidth, etc.
    Totally true. However, I do think that many core activities a person does such as email, chatting, multimedia, and web browsing don't see much improvement as far as functionality goes. They simply become more efficient or higher quality. Which means that most of the stuff we do on the computer we'll eventually be able to do on our mobile devices, just on the go.

    It's not outside of the realm of possibility to have a fully functioning computer experience straight from our phones. We can nearly do that right now with BT keyboards and mice and HDMI connections and WIFI screen sharing. The raw power isn't there, but it will be eventually. So will battery power.

    Of course, all that equipment means portability issues. But, with things like projection keyboards, 3D spatial recognition (ie MS's Kinect), and projection screens, carrying tons of equipment may not be an issue in the future. Who's to say you can't jam-pack all that kind of stuff into a mobile device? It may not be plausible or possible now, but if I can imagine it this easily, someone else can too and might have the wherewithal to make it happen.

    Years and years down the road, I know, but hey, I'm a dreamer.

    Nifty Foods! C003262E5
    04-16-14 06:15 PM
  15. nabil114's Avatar
    Facebook does not like HTML 5.
    04-16-14 06:18 PM
  16. app_Developer's Avatar
    Facebook does not like HTML 5.
    I've talked to people at FB about this. They saw very similar data to what we see. Given a choice, most actual users prefer native.




    Sent from my iPhone 5S using Tapatalk
    Rolf Hed likes this.
    04-16-14 06:34 PM

Similar Threads

  1. Why? Why use a BlackBerry in 2014?
    By goku_vegeta in forum General BlackBerry News, Discussion & Rumors
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 04-19-14, 07:49 AM
  2. Help with Contacts App Please
    By drfever in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-17-14, 08:09 AM
  3. Updating Side Loaded Android Apps
    By cornhuskur in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-16-14, 02:25 PM
  4. How long does it take to develop an app
    By coolbold in forum General BBM Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-16-14, 01:45 PM
  5. Data Usage up a lot since upgrading from OS 7 to OS10..Why?
    By blackberrydiehard12 in forum BlackBerry Q5
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-16-14, 12:58 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD