Literally 99% of the people we talked to did not notice or care
Or they've decided there are better things to do than try to convince someone who's got a vested interest in defending their current tech stack. The text rendering problems with e.g. Github are something even a blind person could see – yet you're dismissing them as highly arcane things that only a developer would notice.
Actually, a blind person would also likely notice your non-native app because it almost certainly doesn't integrate well (if at all) with operating system accessibility features.
We didn't have a "vested interest" in any tech stack, this was all preliminary testing before we built out anything. If you want to take any evidence of what people empirically care about as being somehow a bias or flaw in testing methodology on our part, then do your own user testing and likely come to the same conclusions as us.
You've reduced the problem from something apparently everyone can readily see to now the blind (again, blind who? Blind developers). Accessibility is important which is why every cross platform framework of note has accessibility solutions, the web is not the only user interface that implements accessibility. This says nothing about how much people who are able-bodied care, which, again, is the vast majority of people who simply do not care. Just because one observes some problem to exist does not mean that everyone else feels the same, however much one would like to be vindicated of their experience of the problem.
You're greatly overestimating how willing people are to take the effort to complain. At the end of the day non-native toolkits have lowered folks expectations to the point that (save for the occasional "why are computers so fast and apps so slow" comments) they're quite likely to accept a low quality app.
If you've got 99% of any group agreeing on anything subjective there's a problem with your measurement.
Sure, that's an egregious example, maybe GitHub did mess up, I won't deny that, but that one example is not indicative of the entire class of cross platform frameworks being useless.
> If you've got 99% of any group agreeing on anything subjective there's a problem with your measurement.
Okay, do your own testing and measure it however you want, then get back to me about methodological errors. Because as far as we can tell, most users do not care. In fact, we received messages about how happy they are with the apps and how slick the UX and UI are. You can make good and bad apps in any framework.
Actually, a blind person would also likely notice your non-native app because it almost certainly doesn't integrate well (if at all) with operating system accessibility features.