Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Technically best doesn't always win the market. I'd love not writing 3 versions of every piece of functionality.


How's that working out when there's more than one browser you have to account for? What's the difference between polyfill or some framework, and something like Qt or SDL?

Or I suppose we could just all use chromium, but we could also just all use Windows.


> What's the difference between polyfill or some framework, and something like Qt or SDL?

As a user, I usually can't even tell when they're using a polyfill on the web (except when they stop, like GitHub did with type=date). (As a developer, I often can't tell the difference, either. Some of them are that good!) So long as you generate HTML/CSS/JS, it doesn't matter to me how you do it. That's as 'native' to the web as you can get.

I can spot Qt a mile away. A lot of the visuals look wrong and a lot of the controls don't behave right. It's frustrating to use, and I always slow way down and double-check my work because, e.g., popup menus show the 'accept' animation even when you cancel them.


> I can spot Qt a mile away. A lot of the visuals look wrong and a lot of the controls don't behave right.

You mean it has no respect for your native toolkit... just like the web?


"just like the web"

How true is that? I was under the impression that for Android and iOS, Chrome used the native widgets for most things.


How many SPAs use native controls with minimal styling?


I have to write it for the web already. Writing a native Android and a native iOS app is additive if the web version is "good enough".

There's no scenario where I only have to write two native apps. Perhaps there is for other people.


Consider that maybe there are uses for software where the web isn't necessary and isn't even the first choice.

You're a hammer, so everything is a nail. The reality is that the web is a horrible choice for a whole lot of things. It's a document platform with parts of an application platform shoe-horned in and bolted on, and the result looks like a garbage fire to people who come from the land of native software.


I'm not sure I understand why browsers getting closer to native apps ruins anything for anyone else. You're still able to hammer your nails however you want.


I'm sure it's nice for you, but users like me aren't happy that every mouse move and page load is cataloged and studied and shared with partners. At least with a native app I can add a firewall rule to restrict it's ability to use the internet.


Users like you represent a tiny, tiny minority. The majority of people couldn't care less about google tracking their mouse movements.


The majority of people are not aware that someone is tracking their mouse movements.


I'm guessing you don't live in the EU.


You're just externalising the time you save as a cost to your users.


It's equally possible you're doing the same thing by forcing users to download a native app. It's kind of hard to talk about in the abstract. Some things work better in an app, for other things it adds nothing notable.


> not writing 3 versions of every piece of functionality.

React Native and ReactJS are a move in the right direction.

I wonder if we'll get React NativeJS


Not sure exactly what you mean by React NativeJS but perhaps React Native for Web (https://github.com/necolas/react-native-web) is along the lines of what you are thinking?

Works remarkably well. It’s already used for Twitter’s mobile site


Have you tried Angular+NativeScript? one piece for all (minus UWP).


wxWidgets would help with that.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: