在应用中体验更佳
“It works better in the app”

原始链接: https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2026/08/it-works-better-in-the-app/

作者对谷歌倾向于发布未完成、漏洞百出的应用程序深感挫败,这些应用甚至无法执行订阅 URL 事件日历等基本任务。这凸显了行业内的一个普遍问题:企业为了提高参与度指标而优先采取“应用优先”策略,最终导致软件粗制滥造,且往往最终还是将用户导回网页端。 文章指出,现代社会对应用程序的痴迷是误导性的。由于应用程序在不同硬件上的维护和更新极其困难,开发人员往往转而从远程资源提取功能,这实际上是在变相地重新发明一个效率更低的网页浏览器。作者指出,现代网页浏览器已经能够处理大多数“应用独占”功能,如离线访问和主屏幕快捷方式。归根结底,这篇评论呼吁科技公司要么停止强迫用户使用笨重、不完善的应用程序,要么就下定决心真正完善所开发的应用。

这场在 Hacker News 上的讨论凸显了用户对“App 优先”互联网模式日益增长的不满。许多用户开始抵制那些通过限制基本功能、使用侵入性设计模式,或将移动端网页仅作为诱导下载 App 的广告工具来强制用户安装 App 的公司。 讨论中的关键点包括: * **隐私与信任:** 许多用户将“App 内体验更好”视为危险信号,怀疑这些 App 的主要目的是绕过浏览器的隐私保护、收集位置数据,并更激进地追踪用户行为。 * **糟糕的用户体验:** 评论者对破损的移动网页体验(例如遮挡屏幕且无法关闭的弹窗)表示愤怒,认为这是公司为了迫使用户进入其“劣质化”应用生态系统而采取的蓄意手段。 * **支持 Web 的理由:** 许多人认为设计良好的网站(或渐进式 Web 应用)更具优势,它们提供了更好的可访问性、更少的臃肿,且无需频繁更新或授予侵入性权限,更易于管理。 * **机构性失败:** 参与者指出,科技巨头往往忽视核心功能,将“华而不实”的新特性或营销目标置于用户的基本需求之上,导致网页端和移动端的体验支离破碎且不可靠。
相关文章

原文

The monkey-punchers at Google never quite seem to finish any of their apps. There's always some useful bit of work left undone, or showstopping bug which remains unfixed, a thousand jagged edges as yet unsolved by the greatest minds of their generation.

I wanted to subscribe to an events calendar. I had a URl. I had my Google™ Pixel® phone running the latest Android© 17 with an updated calendar app. Is it possible to click on a calendar link and add it to my phone?

No.

Here's what Google has to say about the matter:

To subscribe to a new calendar, you must use a computer web browser. You can't subscribe to a calendar in the Google Calendar app for Android, iPhone, or iPad.

Really?!? I mean, fucking really????

This isn't the most complex software engineering task known to humanity. Add a + button. Pop open a text entry field. Validate. Save. Done. I'm sure even the shitty Gemini model can vibe code that in a couple of months, right?

Anyway, I opened calendar.google.com on my phone (using desktop mode), added the calendar, and it magically appeared in the app.

This is just pathetic.

In fairness, this isn't only a Google problem. Many companies want a permanent presence on your homescreen and think you're too thick to use your browser's bookmarks feature. Maybe they're right. Maybe an app is the only way to increase the engagement KPI sufficiently so Quinn in the leadership squad can hit their OKRs and get a bonus.

So they build an app. Or, rather, they half-arse it. I've lost count of the number of times I've been told "it's easier if you use our app" only to be unceremoniously punted back to the web when I try to do anything outside of the app's narrow strictures.

I was there in the early days of phone apps. I built stuff for Symbian, BlackBerry, even the bloody Palm Pilot! The central problem with apps has always been that they are hard to update. Every new bit of functionality - or even a new page - needs to be tested on a thousand devices. Once done, it takes an age to distribute to users. The only way to solve that is to have the app dynamically pull in new functionality from a remote resource.

At which point, you've reinvented the Web browser!

Sure, there are some things you can only do with an app (although browsers are catching up), and having an icon on the homescreen is useful (which is easy for sites to add), as is offline functionality (which, again, is possible on the web).

Oh.

If you want an app, fine. Do it. Just finish the job please!

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com