Slashdot Mirror
Apps Are Devouring the Open Web (businessinsider.com)
Rob Price, writing for Business Insider: Apps are eating the web. Over the past decade, there has been an inexorable movement from the open internet to the walled gardens of apps -- and this trend just hit a major milestone. According to new data from ComScore, more than half of all time Americans spend online is spent in apps -- up from around 41% two years ago. It's a stat that will be discomfiting to advocates of the open web, as well as companies whose core business is built around it -- notably Google. As content that was once freely available and indexable on websites becomes silo-ed away in closed-off apps, it makes it harder to search and link to content. This is, of course, the cornerstone of Google's original business.
Really. Discomfiting. That just ...
Sigh.
On topic, how much of this information is actually siloed away, and how many of these apps are just a browser wrapper a la the Facebook app?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Apple, Goolge, Microsoft... Really need to improve their browser to run these rich websites fast and efficiently reserving apps to things that needs specialized hardware Or can work offline.
I know many slashdoters wants the web like it was in the 1990's. However it has became a major use for Application deployment.
However right now we get these apps just because they use less data or perform better.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
What's the problem here?
... on the web then its probably still there. Any data & content specific to apps probably never made it to the web in the first place.
Whether walled gardens are good or bad is a big discussion, but from a technical point of the view the web is an utter dogs dinner with HTML, javascript, CSS and a host of other bits of glue keeping a website working along with bloated, buggy browsers and thats just the front end so I can understand from a *technical* point of view why some companies think "To hell with it, lets just write a client app in Obj-C, Java, C# and be done with it".
Really its just goint full circle back to the 80s and 90s when various bits of the internet were (and still are) accessed by seperate clients.
Index-ability is not the issue. The issue is we have managed to take a decentralized Internet, where govt has been forced to adapt its ideas toward freedom due to the infeasibility of endorcing their usual anti-freedom views on their role in speech, commerce, etc, and say: no thank you, I would like to interact with the internet via apps from 5 govt-partnered large corporations.
I know! Let's have the FCC create a new rule banning such apps. In the name of "net neutrality" or some kind of "equality".
And we'll denounce those opposing such a rule as being a corporate whore and a crazy Libertarian.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
That the article just before this one is about a porn website forum getting hacked.
Maybe people are just tired of poorly coded websites that leak their information.
Pretty much makes sense since more people are using mobile devices to access information on the internet and lets face it the web experience for mobile (pointing at phones) it pretty much completely unusable most of the time.
If not, the kluge that the Web has become will do for now. It may diminish, but it need not die. Even gopher has not entirely vanished.
I'm very much for freedom, but I understand that implies permitting others to throw their own freedom away if they so choose. Let them handle the consequences. Just as long as freedom remains an option, meta-freedom is a reality - and that's fine for me.
I value others' privacy enough not to demand access to their walled gardens. I value the network effect enough not to want to be in a walled garden myself. Just leave me that option.
Apps are just small limited capability programs that spy on you.
It's probably more of a Chrome issue than a Slashdot issue, but when I navigate to Slashdot with the Chrome browser on Android, it appifys Slashdot. The Chrome browser screen morphs into an 'app' format where the URL and the surrounding widgets of the browser disappear and I am in a sort of a Slashdot Ap. This happens on a number of other sites, presumably the ones that are 'well integrated' and 'mobile.'
It's kind of frustrating when you want to, for instance, save a link by simply cutting and pasting the URL, or even when you simply want to examine a link.
Waiting on the opinion of the Ludite Apps guy - he's /.'s expert on this matter so we should abstain to further comment until he gives us the insight :)
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
Nearly every large website have apps that are only thin web shell wrappers around their sites. And when you visit their sites you're constantly reminded about downloading their awesome apps. The reason for this is obvious - to avoid ad blocking. This is especially true on platforms where ad blockers are only available within the browser, which means all of iOS and also most Android devices that aren't rooted.
Most apps don't serve malicious drive-by exploit injecting ads. There are of course those apps that just wrap html5 in a container/canvas but I stay away from that crap. It is easy to recognize- tens of megabytes so they can include all the frameworks they need to render that, instead of being couple of megabytes and reading their data though binary
There was a time where I thought the open web might actually yield useful replacements for apps. The world had finally weaned itself off the idea the "Internet Explorer" was synonymous with "The Internet" and we enjoyed a huge level of compatibility (and power) between browsers. Sadly, that's all gone backwards in the last 2 years, and now I routinely use any of 3 different browsers depending on their compatibility with different sites and services. The web is looking more and more like a fragmented mess.
If only humans weren't subject to it. But, that low hanging fruit is so tempting.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
According to new data from ComScore, more than half of all time Americans spend online is spent in apps -- up from around 41% two years ago. It's a stat that will be discomfiting to advocates of the open web, as well as companies whose core business is built around it -- notably Google.
This is why Google offers Android free to hardware manufacturers. Does Google benefit from this trend? They are no longer competing on an open playing field, they now provide the playing field. Their core business of targeted advertising would seem to benefit.
Advertising and tracking is! This can be done nearly perfectly in all kinds of apps.
Internet searches are not the same as "time" spent. I don't doubt that the top few time wasters get most of the time. And of course Google knows all about YouTube anyway.
is spent in the browser app, Firefox.
ad blocking? The run of the mill bank app wants access to your camera, contacts, and anything else it can reasonably get away with whereas the mobile site needs none of that.
That article would be a lot more useful if they had broken down exactly which apps are responsible for the majority of the traffic. I suspect that just a handful dominate, such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. In assessing the seriousness of the threat, or assessing if there is one, It would be helpful to know who has what market share.
More than half of the time people spend online is on Facebook, for better or worse.
But I'd say walled gardens in general, with apps being one type of walled garden, and of course the overwhelming majority. Sucks.
Its all private, you need accounts, you need to pay, you can be banned, furthermore not all websites are indexed or wanted to be indexed, my website can only be found on who.is.
Lock Screens are eating the web. Over the past decade, there has been an inexorable movement from the open internet to the Lock Screen -- and this trend just hit a major milestone. According to data from common sense, more than half of all time Americans spend with their phone it is on the Lock Screen.
You had one job, appy app troll guy. You have failed! The one time your damn posts would have actually been close to topic. No, it's too late now.
Hypercard lives!
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Lot of people use mobile devices a lot more. Apps work better on those devices with smaller screens.
Honestly I am not a fan of web apps as a whole. For web pages it is just fine but I like native code running on my cpu and the data can be in cloud when needed. Why should I need to have a network connection to look at my appointments?
Sure sync then to a sever but keep them local as well.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Unfortunately most "apps" are little more than the website wrapped in a webview with the ads glued into the app interaction so you can't block them. Not that you should block the ads in the first place but if you absolutely have must have your butthurt and block the ads, don't use anyones apps.
What I hate more than Apps that access content that is also accessible via web sites are Web Sites that look and feel like Apps.
Or web sites that force me to load the mobile version (even after I several times manually fixed the URL), luckily there is a trick on Chrome at least to force them to deliver the desktop version.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
....is every rational person's productivity advance. If apps are a "walled garden" compared to the web, then a web browser is a maximum security prison compared to the verable UNIX command shell.
Alternatively, calling apps a "walled garden" is stupid.
The number of people on the Internet has grown hugely. If half of them remain surfing actual websites, that's still a huge number of people. The web is fine. Apps have appeared. Some people use them. Meh. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
So now a near-universally deployed platform that you can target for real development. Should it be a surprise that we do so?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
My, how we forget history.
When Apple first launched the iPhone, they did not include the App Store, or any other sanctioned way to run apps besides the defaults. They originally tried to sell people on the idea of HTML5 browser-based web apps as the future. And everyone, including Slashdot and the rest of the tech press, threw a collective hissy fit over it. This, of course, is what launched the jailbreaking community and the Cydia store. The people having spoken, Apple launched a revised iOS plus the App Store with the iPhone 3G. And Google, having watched from the sidelines that first year, launched Android with the Android Marketplace, their own version of the App Store.
You don't get any legitimacy complaining about "apps devouring the open web" when that is exactly what you asked for... demanded even... in the first place.
Imagine all the people...
They're talking about the web of hyperlinked resources over http/https versus walled gardens. That an app uses the internet doesn't make it part the WWW.
malicious trojans to be distributed before activating them for a BIG botnet, i sure hope Google Play Store does thorough security sweeps often,
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Trying to solve everything with Javascript was a recipe of failure. The work to make a unified byte code (WebAssembly) is great but should have happened a few years ago. People wanted more robust, fast, and dynamic content which these "gated" apps filled the void of.
Does anyone know of an app that has useful information that isn't on the web?
Most people are locked into their apps playing games, youtubing, or facebooking. They aren't out creating content. There is nothing useful being lost. If anything the quality of stuff available on the web is improving.
Some people still want to be famous, some still want to help others, some want to show off their talents/skills, stores still want to reach the most people. So the "open" ability to find information will exist .. because humans will want their stuff to get maximum reach. It may be that an app like facebook is where people put their content, but you can be it will be searchable easily. People will demand it, and that's where the money will be. We may ditch the web for facebook, but only when and if there is content more easily available on there.
It's lazy in that they are trying to make one crapy app that works on everything. Instead of making multiple good apps that are tailored to the platform they are running on.
If you use a Mac as your primary computer:
Would you rather have web apps, which run on all major platforms, or Windows apps, which run only on a PC with a Windows license?
Otherwise:
Would you rather have web apps, which run on all major platforms, or Mac apps, which run only on a Mac?
If your answer is "Then make five apps, one for each major platform":
If the web app was available without charge and the five native apps, one for each major platform (Windows, macOS, X11/Linux, Android, and iOS), were paid in order to recoup platform-specific engineering costs, would you buy one of the five native apps?
I agree that having an app for banking is if not stupid at least restricting your ability to do banking from the device of your choice.
Other than through an app that can access a device's rear camera, how else is the banking interface supposed to scan the front and back of a paper check in order to deposit it to your account? I occasionally receive personal checks from family members not technically inclined enough to set up PayPal, and for years, I received payroll checks from an employer that was for some reason incapable of direct deposit. Or are you instead recommending biking to an ATM that takes deposits?
... The run of the mill bank app wants access to your camera, contacts, and anything else it can reasonably get away with ...
That's just icing on the cake. They can generate extra revenue from gathering and selling user data like every other app does. The whole mobile ecosystem is completely fucked.
Without camera access, a bank's app can't scan the front and back of paper checks you receive to deposit them to your account. I don't know about contacts, but that might be related to a "Send Money to Friend through ACH" feature. Or should features that need specific permissions be delegated to specific other apps that the bank's main app launches, such as an app that only makes check deposits or an app that only sends an ACH?
There are many benefits to the open web as we know it. However, technology and usage always change and its' about adapting, not wishing people weren't using apps. Ideally almost all info would be on the open web. But the open web has drawbacks that cause people to prefer Apps - until this changes we will continue to see the traditional web decline. The open web needs to improve at the pace of apps or faster if it is to survive. How far has HTML and other related tech come since the release of HTML5 (started in 2008 - and wasn't a finalized spec until 2014) ... how far have phones and their apps improved since then?
It feels like we are in the 90's, when each browser was so different that websites needed to be optimized for one browser or another - now we have apps that render web content in incompatible ways and hides the data to boot. Web browsers are better now, but things still don't render the same way in every browser... this should not be an issue still.
The web was never designed for the modern things we are doing with information - yes web technologies have evolved, but its all built on a system that started only with text and hypertext. Everything else after that was tacked on (CSS and Javascript), and although we can do amazing things with today's web - apps were built from the ground up to handle multimedia and complex interactions in a more straightforward, elegant, and sophisticated way. Yes, there are many examples of building complex application like experiences like GDocs or web-based photoshop alternatives - https://pixlr.com/editor/ - but these are less appealing and capable than native apps.
Flash used to cause the same problems for SEO and hiding info from the world - and it sucked for many reasons, didn't evolve much over the years, but it did more than the web could for years because it was built to do something the web couldn't' at the time - provide immersive experiences that were not limited by the confines of traditional web technologies. Lest we forget plugins existed because they filled the gap left by the web.
There are many reasons why the web as we know it today is failing users
http://arstechnica.com/informa...
It sucks that Apps will hide data that ideally would be open - for uses today - and for posterity in the future. I will never argue the ideal that the open web should prevail. I'm not sure what the solution should or could even be - nor will I try to come up with one that will never come to fruition. The whole point of this post is to say that the average person does not care about these issues. They want slick, fast, engaging experiences that fit their needs - the open web isn't doing as well as Apps are at doing just that.
If web standards evolved faster - we wouldn’t be talking about this. I love the open web and the benefits it provides for humanity. I have lost a lot of hope in the pure implementation many of you speak f though. Web browsers should be platforms upon which the world operates - and in many cases, they are just that - indeed, thats what Chrome OS was created for. As we speak Chromebooks are rolling out that now run Android apps natively. This is at odds with the original goals of the Chromebook concept.
But think about this:
Mobile devices usage has surpassed desktops a while ago:
https://searchenginewatch.com/...
Android is the most widely used mobile OS
https://www.netmarketshare.com...
and Android apps can now stream to your phone
http://www.pocket-lint.com/new...
Google is now able to search within apps
With the paradigm of the dynamic forum, I see similarities. There is no anonymous option for posting. Some are public but actually require registration to show attachments or even profiles (!)
Forums have been around long but I find myself seeing them less and less on google results (compared to stackexchange, wikipedia and word definition sites), and were the logical step beyond the guestbooks and shrines of the nineties. I realized a decade ago that my first decade of internet bookmarks was evaporating.
Webrings, random individuals' independently hosted blogs (and the other end of the spectrum with xanga or geocities pages) would just drop off the face of the planet. It is saddening when I am doing cleanup and find some old url is gone, leading to a 404 (or since domains are no longer just "gone" anymore, domain parking).
What I really came to say is that forums tend to lose pages a few years down the road. Sometimes it's database crashes. A problem is having pages with no distinctive tags and URLs that are numeric identifiers --eventually you can't even tell what title to search for to try and see if it was just moved. The likes of, um, Big Hosting have ensured [legal] content rarely disappears and have largely caused visitors to refuse to sign in on local forums (Facebook, Youtube and even Yahoo's Tumblr and Microsoft Live).
Actually non-forum comment sections are another future timebomb. When the likes of Disqus and Livefyre bite the dust, site owners will realize that they were storing all the visitor generated stuff into a black box. Sites dealing with even temporary glitches don't seem to have a way around the issue and migrations of your data when they switch providers tend to lose user ids and profile information. The free and open web of the past is gone. Things are bleak.
For years, companies wanted, but struggled, to generate revenue on the web. They couldn't. There was just too much friction for the average user in pulling out a credit card, typing in details, then remembering logins and logging in over and over again, not to mention tracking all of their subscriptions to various services.
Apps and in-app purchases are the "micropayments" that were talked about for so long. User provides billing information once, then is able to conveniently pay for content (whether the app or in-app purchases) with a tap or two. All payments and subscription information are centralized and run through a trusted (to the user) provider.
This is why companies have gone there. Because it's where they were finally able to generate sufficient user acquisitions to sustain an online purchase/subscription model, for the most part. Companies go where the money is, and it wasn't on the web.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
If you need to contact someone, just use facebook messaging. Or possibly imessage if you (and thus your friends) have i gadgets.
Instant messaging, blogging, voice and video chat have already been effectively siloed. Email for business will live for a while due to inertia, but not for personal use.
My kids only use various apps to contact their friends.
Like I need an app for every frickin site I visit?? hell no!
Do I need to maintain apps and a responsive site for every company I do work for?? HELL NO !!!
I've just made it a habit of shooting down every company's app idea unless it has serious cause (gps) to use an app. Otherwise, it's a responsive site and we're done..
How much are these apps are Facebook and games. Since the metric is "time spent" games take up an inordinate amount of time and aren't conducive to people searching, browsing and shopping. So, to say that people are moving revenue-generating activities away from open web to apps would be incorrect, right?
No, I didn't demand this, but you're right, far too many did. Apple caved way too easily, and the last great hope of web apps as first-class citizens died with HP's knifing of PalmOS, where *all* apps were web apps, meaning it was even possible to replace the dialler, address book, etc...
Damn, I miss Palm - there's no question that the basic capabilities of Contact Management, Scheduling, and integration with my PC (through Palm Desktop, which was actually quite good) was far better on my Palm Pilot in the mid 90's than it is with the latest iPhone and Android phones of today.
Waiting for someone to reinvent this stuff yet again, which won't happen on today's "we own you" platforms...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Starting in ~2013 I worked 18 months developing several apps for android and kept thinking, "Holy hell this app model is so fucked." I kept pushing for responsive frameworks in the browser instead of iOS/Android app ports that consume double (triple!) the amount of resources, but nope, all three companies were unanimous in having an app.
This data just blows my mind. I've been away from it for over a year and thought it would decrease.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested