Do you know PPK and his work? He's been at the cutting edge of web-standards and implementations for at least 12 years if my memory serves me correctly.
>And you'll get exactly what you want. //
If he wants to avoid the web being badly negatively effected by short term views of current browser companies and standards bodies then he won't get what he wants by sticking his head in the sand and ignoring the direction he sees things going.
If this were the writing of a small time web-dev (like myself) then I think your comment would work; but I'm assuming PPK is coming from a position of experience that's given him an almost unique overview of the direction of browser and standards development vs. the historic "feel" and integrity of the web.
PPK is doing the equivalent of saying "let's stop and ask for directions [on our car journey]" and you're saying "no, let's just keep driving I'm sure we'll get to where we want to go".
He's up against it as, to my mind, cautious development doesn't serve the needs of corporations and so won't happen.
>"We’re pushing the web forward to emulate native more and more, but we can’t out-native native." (OP) //
I find it funny that web pages are trying to be native apps and many mobile apps are shipping when they're ostensibly just web pages.
tl;dr I think the OP has more to say, and that it's more important, than you're giving credit for.
> PPK is doing the equivalent of saying "let's stop and ask for directions [on our car journey]" and you're saying "no, let's just keep driving I'm sure we'll get to where we want to go".
Just because one person is lost doesn't mean everyone else in the vehicle is. Those who know where they are going don't need to stop and ask for directions. Don't force them to.
You have a valid point, not everyone is lost but obviously everyone seems to be digging in the same ship just for the sake of it. If you try to understand more of what OP is trying to say, then you will know that there are more problems created than solution.
It's getting more difficult for beginners to catch up or even were to start from (see lots of those questions on Quora), perhaps we need to reexamine things rather than building 4million cars a day only to realize we have global warming.
Holding back technology so others can catch up is foolish. Where would we be if we followed that philosophy. We have long passed the ability of the human mind (at least unaugmented) to keep up with technology.
Sure, there are problems for some. But they are insignificant problems for others. I'm generally of the opinion that you should give people the freedom to choose rather than forcing things on them that are against their interest.
The fact that PPK did a lot of good work on web, doesnt mean this article is good. Any genius can create crapwork. So did albert einstein. I once saw a presentation from PPK where he proposed JSON over SMS....(http://quirksmode.org/presentations/Spring2012/bigm.pdf)
IMHO that presentation was technically not very strong.
The post is neither good or bad. You just happen to disagree with the author.
I for one have been bitching (my colleagues know all about it) about the state of affairs in web dev for about year, and so far most people tend to agree. And my current project (mostly heavy Javascript) just reinforces that view, it's a total mess for little real gain.
because SMS has inherent costs in some countries, because SMSs are tiny (I'm pretty sure his example json structure was larger than a SMS max size even), there is already a mechanism in place (to see all SMSes), which would have to be hijacked (to not display what would be practically garbage to the end user)
push notifications already existed 3 years as a thing before this talk
Whatsapp, twitter, etc, all existed before this talk as mobile services (and twitter via a SMS interface, which is the far more reasonable way of using SMS uniformly across all phones)
It was a talk 3 years too late, data plans already existed, push services already existed, implementing such a thing via SMS would only lead a company to get ~6 months max use, wouldn't be as easy as other methods (receiving a push / making a web request, vs receiving a possibly fragmented SMS, and then having multiplatform hiding of this message), etc etc etc. I personally have to wonder if the talk was comedic (the part about how app stores make it impossible for people to find your app, makes me wonder this as well)
> I find it funny that web pages are trying to be native apps and many mobile apps are shipping when they're ostensibly just web pages.
Which provides some insight into what's missing from the web. It's almost good enough for most companies. They just need a little something extra so that they can "own the experience." But soon the browsers will catch up and then websites will be able to own your experience, too.
What if I don't want corporations to own my experiences? An information-driven web with a document model is robust and can work with many different user agents. An experience-driven web with an application model is very fragile and will only be available to sighted, hearing, Mac-using people running a big 4 browser.
Who needs flash when we can have 15 competing application frameworks for the web that all just abuse the canvas as their medium, so we aren't even authoring HTML/CSS anymore?
Prevalent? I don't know. I do think it's just a matter of time before some companies leverage this by providing a super simple web page developer tool a la Frontpage Extensions.
Photography studio webpage that just wants a carousel and music playing? Check.
Small companies that freak out about people stealing their inventory list? Check.
Vendor lock in for the poor souls that fall for this? CHECK.
Funnily, iOS offers much better accessibility support than web. And I'd argue that many more apps use it (also Apple recently promoted apps with good accessibility support) compared to modern "web apps".
Then you're SOL, because web-delivered applications that own the experience will happen. Hopefully someone would come up with a better user-respecting user agent by then.
From a tech standpoint, yes. There are some pretty powerful interests that don't want to see the open web on mobile. Google and Apple get handsome cuts of all the revenue on their semi-closed platforms. Consumer demand may shift that, but I'm not holding my breath. The open web was an historical anomaly: historically the large information infrastructures have been nearly monopolized (telegraph, phone lines, cable/broadcast).
The web is an anomaly yes, but it has broader reach than any other platform in the history of mankind. Thinking that native apps will kill the web is to miss the forest for the trees. None of these proprietary platforms have the reach of the web. No computing device maker can release a credible device without web support. It doesn't matter how much money you have, you can't make your proprietary platform cross the chasm the web has crossed. Apple can't do it, even open-source Android can't do it, because Android is runtime, not a standard.
The common narrative of PC app -> Web app -> Mobile app is only superficially accurate in terms of where the tech hype was at different points. But in terms of long-term life cycles, mobile apps are much more like PC apps, and the web is something else completely different, which we've never seen before, and mark my words, it will not disappear or be superseded anytime soon.
The web ten years ago was indeed different when clean markup, separation of concerns, accessibility meant something.
Nowadays it is just a mess, cannon fodder in the battle nobody asked for.
It "meant something" for a tiny fraction of web developers. The vast majority of developers in 2005 was probably either using Flash or creating something that only worked in IE (with its 85% usage share).
Yes, I totally miss the good ole' days of bitching about IE getting the CSS box model wrong, despite the fact that it was the better implementation and as soon as the standards gods deigned to bless us with 'border-box' everyone kind of pretended those threads on css-discuss never happened... Or endless bickering over the best unit to declare font-size in, because of course it made absolute sense to leave accessibility to site designers, not browser implementations... Or posturing over why 'float' was actually a valid layout concept for anything besides a block of paragraphs with images interspersed... Or the endless clearfix or image replacement hacks... Ahh yeah, the good ole' days...
Once again, what so special about mobile? Somehow I don't see webtech proponents rallying for wining the desktop or winning the smartwatches.
This obsession with winning the mobile is plain stupid. Instead of wasting time implementing half-baked features which will never catch-up the native offerings and stuffing more crap into already multi-megabyte web pages how about doing some spring cleaning?
No they won't, because it would kill the web. That little bit is ownership: branding and control. There's no Adblock for their app. Their app isn't called Firefox it's Company Name. There's no dev tool for the app, so less chance to find out all the insecure ways it siphons my data. They control updates, so their ActiveX-style monstrosities are always going to be displayed the same. Get the idea?
Perhaps the choice lies outside of the actual functionality of the web itself but instead in the OS and browsers.
Consider someone who ships their iOS app that is basically just a web page instead of using a web page. For doing this, they get two benefits that are not really related to the web. One, they get an icon to tab from the home screen to launch their app, instead of going to Safari and then going to their webpage. Two, they get to avoid having to go through Safari, which one could speculate is something Apple was already wanting them to avoid as it allows Apple to create a better walled garden (not to say Apple is the only one who does this, I'm only pointing them out because I used iOS in my example).
How would a change/upgrade in web standards allow for the web app to compete with the iOS app housing a web app on these two fronts?
I've spent A LOT of time trying to get my site's appcache functionality to the point where it's barely usable. Probably more time than all of its users would have spent downloading the resources it was supposed to cache. It has more gotchas than anything else I've ever experienced.
I really don't want them to "own the experience." I want their brochures to stay nicely sandboxed in a browser where they don't invade my computer and try to tell me what I can do with it.
Right, I meant it as something of an insult. I'm fine with documents on the web. I'm fine with interactive documents on the web. I'm not fine with "web apps" that try to jump out of the browser, opening windows, redefining control-key sequences, breaking bookmarks, "open in new tab", and the back button, and otherwise interfering with my ability to control my own experience on the web.
I'm very familiar with PPK. I lifted my first 'getElementsByClassName' function directly from his site well over a decade ago. That doesn't mean that he hasn't descended into troll-level talking head status, generating controversy to drum up speaking appearances. Plus, we have MDN and caniuse.com now - he's irrelevant.
>And you'll get exactly what you want. //
If he wants to avoid the web being badly negatively effected by short term views of current browser companies and standards bodies then he won't get what he wants by sticking his head in the sand and ignoring the direction he sees things going.
If this were the writing of a small time web-dev (like myself) then I think your comment would work; but I'm assuming PPK is coming from a position of experience that's given him an almost unique overview of the direction of browser and standards development vs. the historic "feel" and integrity of the web.
PPK is doing the equivalent of saying "let's stop and ask for directions [on our car journey]" and you're saying "no, let's just keep driving I'm sure we'll get to where we want to go".
He's up against it as, to my mind, cautious development doesn't serve the needs of corporations and so won't happen.
>"We’re pushing the web forward to emulate native more and more, but we can’t out-native native." (OP) //
I find it funny that web pages are trying to be native apps and many mobile apps are shipping when they're ostensibly just web pages.
tl;dr I think the OP has more to say, and that it's more important, than you're giving credit for.