The Tyranny of Apps
Apps have burrowed their way into seemingly every aspect of our lives and there are lots of reasons why companies are pushing us to use them. With an app, it is often “one click and you’re in”, rather than having to faff around online finding the website and remembering passwords. It is also for the “push notifications” that mobile apps send to grab our attention and get us to buy stuff. Many tech experts also argue that apps are generally more secure than websites and allow banks and others to carry out sophisticated ID verification using face, voice and fingerprint biometrics.
But millions of people who cannot afford a smartphone or have an older device that does not support some services are increasingly being locked out of deals, discounts and even some vital services, say digital exclusion and pro-cash campaigners.
They are missing out on everything from savings on their weekly shop, to some of the best interest rates for their cash. And not signing up to the app revolution is making activities including paying for parking and going to concerts increasingly challenging.
I do have a smartphone, so I can run the apps, but I don’t like it when they could have just been Web sites. Having a large number of these limited-use apps takes up a lot of space: in phone storage, on the home screen, and in the App Store’s list of updated apps. Sometimes an app will have lower quality images/maps than the Web site or will refuse to function, right when you need it, unless you install an update. They’re often less reliable, worse at remembering logins, or require an e-mail magic link dance.
Coming with iOS 18.4 and iPadOS 18.4 in April, Apple News+ subscribers will have access to Apple News+ Food, a new section that will feature tens of thousands of recipes — as well as stories about restaurants, healthy eating, kitchen essentials, and more — from the world’s top food publishers, including Allrecipes, Bon Appétit, Food & Wine, Good Food, and Serious Eats.
With the new Food feature, users will be able to find stories curated by Apple News editors, as well as browse, search, and filter tens of thousands of recipes in the Recipe Catalog — with new recipes added every day.
I think Apple News would have a better user experience with a Web site and an RSS feed than as an app.
Previously:
- An Abridged History of Safari Showstoppers
- U.S. Sues Apple Over iPhone Monopoly
- Apple News You Can’t Use
- News Is Not a Normal Mac App
- Rejected for Being Too Similar to a Web Site
- Smartphones: a Single Point of Failure
- The Apple Services Experience Is Not Good Enough
- Does Apple News Track You?
- Funneling Into Apple News+
- The New York Times Pulls Out of Apple News
Update (2025-02-28): Nick Heer:
If you do not have enough money for a smartphone, you might be locked out of discounts for basic goods. My local supermarket is currently offering a dollar off eggs if I use my personalized coupon — but it is only available in the app.
Even for those of us with smartphones — a majority of people in Canada in all under-75 age groups, for example — we might not want to install software to get grocery coupons or park their car. These apps are often clunky experience, and seem to usually be a website in an app wrapper. Web apps are not treated as mainstream citizens on iOS, in particular, so these bad apps are all we get.
Apple News is not only a mediocre app experience, but its existence also causes regressions on the open web.
Stories in Apple News have a permalink, like anything else on the web. However, unlike just about any link you have seen from a mainstream publication for the past, say, twenty years, these links are inscrutable. Instead of being in a format containing the source of an article and its title, all Apple News permalinks are something like
https://apple.news/Ayls8UZCzQnWfFNRugL3tPA
.[…]
In MacOS browsers, I am prompted to open Apple News to view the article; if I decline, I have no next steps.
Update (2025-03-04): P. Martin Ortiz:
The smartphone boom changed everything. Suddenly, apps were everywhere, connecting people, solving problems, and entertaining us. But for a while now, they’ve started to feel more like a burden than a blessing. In today’s web-first world, most native apps feel redundant, cluttering our phones unnecessarily. With how far modern web technologies have come, it’s time to rethink if we really need them.
This is all true. But this post from John Gruber is equally true: One Bit of Anecdata That the Web Is Languishing Vis-à-Vis Native Mobile Apps[…]
[…]
Ten or fifteen years ago, the gap between the web and native apps on mobile was entirely technical. There were certain things that you just couldn’t do in web browsers. That’s no longer the case now. The web caught up quite a while back.
But the experience of using websites on a mobile device is awful. Never mind the terrible performance penalties incurred by unnecessary frameworks and libraries like React and its ilk, there’s the constant game of whack-a-mole with banners and overlays. What’s just about bearable in a large desktop viewport becomes intolerable on a small screen.
This is not a technical problem. This doesn’t get solved by web standards. This is a cultural problem.
Via John Gruber (Mastodon):
There are mobile web proponents who are in denial about this state of affairs, who seek to place the blame at Apple’s feet for the fact that WebKit is the only rendering engine available on iOS. But WebKit’s limitations have nothing to do with the reasons so many websites suck when experienced on mobile devices. The mobile web sucks just as bad on Android.
[…]
And the app experiences from the same companies (whose websites suck on mobile) are much better.
We must be using different apps. The apps-that-should-have-been-web-sites that I see are mostly just wrappers over the same Web-based content. So we end up with the bloat of the app plus the bloat of the JavaScript libraries, and the end result is slower and less reliable than just going to Safari.
Update (2025-03-05): Marc Kalmes:
I’m starting to notice worse eyesight and increased the font-size on the iPhone. There are not many apps adhering to this change and websites-inside-container-apps are definitely not among them.
11 Comments RSS · Twitter · Mastodon
Apple News seems to exist to be the opposite of everything Apple is doing to improve the user experience of ordinary web sites. Where I can hide distracting items (great feature) or use content blockers on a web site, on Apple News, I'm stuck with whatever hideous ads and horrible layout they inflict on me. I'm sure the combination of these two opposite movements is no coincidence. Undermine ad buys on the regular internet and try to drive people to buy ads on your own locked in system.
The thing that gets me most is how badly laid out and horribly designed the ad experience is in News app. But maybe they have data showing that obtrusive and ugly ads get more attention?
China has turbo charged this with WeChat and AliPay. As a foreigner it's really hard to get anything done without having at least one of them hooked up to a credit card, and then a data plan obv.
I find it really annoying that I have to order my coffee in an app, especially since I can't read chinese but speak it well enough to order a mid sized cup of hot coffe with no mil or sugar.
I solved it by handing my phone to the person at the desk, telling them what I wanted so that they could enter the order in my app and hand the phone back so that I could pay. Absolutely ridiculous.
ON the other hand there are a bunch of apps I really like. My banking app, my eID, my commutercard, the app that automatically unlocks my front door when I get home.
Isn't it the same tyranny where websites require the latest version of Google Chrome to display a page with just a "hello world" (and do not inform the user about this requirement when they are unable to display it on a good old browser)?
I recently had to approve the release of a research paper at JAMA (as one of many, many, authors). It is not possible to do this on Safari, because when you go to the URL to log in to approve, there is an overlay of some kind of privacy message. In Safari, this does not display, and there is no way to dismiss the overlay. There is no message — just the overlay background. I've complained about this several times, and the only response I get is "use Chrome".
And then you did and you could sign the document? Or did you try Firefox? Or turn off apples security measures for that site?
Meanwhile me and my wife can buy a grocery bag filled with yesterday's bread and pastries for 4usd. Something our 86year old former neighbor would love (she told us when we visited) but first she would have to buy a smartphone because Too Good to Go only works with the app.
There is no alternative for her. And when of she got the phone she would have to learn how to use it.
The bigger issue with Chrome is how Google jag learned from Apple that they can notorise plugins as a way to remove ad blockers.
So all of a sudden I got ads on YouTube. Then I switched to Firefox.
Apps are so much worse than the web.
What kills me is that even if you install the app, it’s mostly just a wrapper for a web page that doesn’t work in the first place. My wife and I were at Safeway last weekend, and there was a “digital only through the app” coupon for soup. I expressed disappointment, and would have walked on because I refuse to install those pieces of 💩, but my wife was game. She installs their app, logs in with her Safeway account, and scans the barcode. No discount found, can’t even locate the item (because frigging Campbell’s soup is so uncommon…?). The label on the shelf says the day it expires, and it’s not for several days. She scanned half a dozen things across the store, and not a single one triggered an actual discount. It’s like the bad old days of clipping physical coupons, except that the coupon is a lie and they’re selling your personal information on the side.
> She scanned half a dozen things across the store, and not a single one triggered an actual discount.
When I talk about the computer industry falling apart, this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. This kind of experience is now universal and endemic. So much is just fundamentally broken, and now the general expectation -- at least among all the people I'm in contact with -- is that nothing will work the way it's supposed to.
It doesn't seem to matter whether it's a web page or an app...
> it’s mostly just a wrapper for a web page that doesn’t work in the first place
...and this is largely the reason why.
Another annoyance is devices that can only be operated using an app. When the app is inevitably sunset and stops working due to gratuitous API changes in OS updates, you end up with an expensive doorstop.
"I solved it by handing my phone to the person at the desk, telling them what I wanted so that they could enter the order in my app and hand the phone back so that I could pay."
That's also how a lot of Chinese people do it, so you're using it as intended.
"When the app is inevitably sunset and stops working due to gratuitous API changes in OS updates, you end up with an expensive doorstop."
I've also had the experience that perfectly working apps can't be installed on my phone because the store thinks they're no longer perfectly working apps, or that they won't work on my phone. Fortunately, on Android, I can at least download the APKs and install them myself.
Nearly all of the above examples could have been QR code links to a simple website.
But I don't know whether developers just aren't taught to do that anymore, or the incentives are for personal data monetization above all else.
Installing the app gives them instant user data, usually followed by a flood of permission prompts on first open to give them even more.
"Features" are added that just so happen to require Bluetooth access, precise location, local network scanning, microphone, camera, and above all push notifications for background tracking.
Once all that is implemented, nobody ever got around to actually testing the functionality of the website. It doesn't matter whether the user actually gets the coupon. We'll deal with that later. We've already gotten way more value out of the user even if they don't buy anything from the store.