It's just that the bar to make web apps is a billion times lower than it is to write native code.
What do you mean by that?
To make a web application, you can own any brand of computer. To make a native application for OS X or iOS, you have to own a Mac in addition to whatever computer you might happen to already own. And I can cite statistics that there's over a 90% chance that this computer that you already own happens not to be a Mac.
If every good native application in the iPhone app store, Google Play store, and Windows App Store has an equivalent web app version
With WebGL disabled in Safari for iOS, good luck replacing every good native game with a good web application. And good luck being able to use a device's camera to take a picture in a web application.
I don't need to download & install a program on to my laptop to bank online.
In your opinion, should one have to download and install a program to take photographs and upload? Say you want to deposit a check. You can ride the bus to an ATM, ride the bus to a branch, ride the bus to the post office and mail it to the bank, or take a photo of the front and back of the check and upload the photos to the bank. Guess which of these is the easiest to do if your bank is in another state. Banks tend to require a native application for this because support in mobile browsers for photography is lacking.
I don't need to download & install a program on to my laptop to read the news.
In your opinion, should one have to download and install a program to play a video game that isn't turn-based? Safari for iOS doesn't allow web applications to display 3D graphics.
Do you have any complaints about it that don't boil down to "I hate dynamic languages"
Why should such boiling down be shameful? Fully dynamically typed languages impose substantial runtime overhead and require manual creation of even those test cases that would be implicit in a language that has even an option for static typing.
consumers are resistant to installing new stuff. They don't like to clutter their mobile device screens with icons
A bookmark of a web application is an icon.
Installation period: web app, PER page download time. native app, application download.
For one thing, this applies only if your web application uses a "page" model, not an AJAX model. For another, most of a web application should stay cached for weeks on end.
Approval process: Yes there absolutely a web app is more flexible. So much more flexible that if your site is hacked everyone gets the corrupted version instantly.
The same thing can happen if your native application's version control server or backup server gets hacked.
Meanwhile on iOS they don't use "real" money to pay you, just iTunes.
If iTunes isn't real money, then why is PayPal real money?
Net's down? Web app: Welp, you're SOL, son - Native app: Net? What net. Winner, native app.
Web applications can include an offline version using application manifests, IndexedDB, and an IndexedDB-compatible shim around the SQLite included in WebKit. Native applications can display an alert box and close if they fail to connect to the Internet service to which they were designed to connect. For example, good luck using the Facebook or Twitter application offline. Advantage neither.
Your data leaking due to hackers or court subpoena? Web app: Just cross your fingers and pray it doesn't happen. You probably won't know until too late, anyways - Native app: At least your data and its protection is in your own hands.
The court can just subpoena the server used by the native application's remote backup feature.
Whut, you thought setting up payment system for your site is that easy, requires no expenses to maintain and has no transaction fees?
Stripe, Authorize.Net, PayPal, and Dwolla charge transaction fees. Apple, Google, Microsoft, OUYA, and the like charge bigger transaction fees.
I think you have a poor understanding of the difference between [various components of the X11/Linux stack]
Then let me translate #44584359:
Sorry, but the X11/Linux stack seen in Linux distributions still sucks for gaming, no other way to put it. Not only do most of the new games still ONLY come out on Windows, but you would have to flush most of your existing collection down the crapper, as Wine still only runs about 2 out of 5 games. I own a few hundred PC games; most of them are non-functional in Wine and the few that work are very quirky and behave oddly.
The only thing i like about X11/Linux is the Xfce desktop (makes the Windows desktop look obsolete). Other desktop environments for X11 seem to be getting as slow as Windows these days and otherwise more or less behave like Windows. Now whether that's Windows trying to act like X11 DEs or X11 DEs trying to act like Windows I don't know.
You are suggesting that people use the thing that does what they want it to do the best?
That is excellent advice!
I agree, if money is no object. But a lot of people can afford either a gaming PC or a console. So they have to choose either the thing that does "console" things best or the thing that does "PC gaming" things best, not both.
The only keep it alive because certain PC games just don't work in a console setup yet. Steam does everything better
On the other hand, certain console games just don't work in a PC setup yet. For a fighting game or a cooperative platformer, sure you can plug four Xbox 360 controllers or HID joysticks into a USB hub, but it's hard to gather four people around one desktop or laptop monitor. Steam's Big Picture Mode is a step toward that, but Valve doesn't yet have an affordable, attractive, pre-made box designed to sit next to a TV. Come December, it'll be Xbox One, Steam box zero.
The major content creators (Viacom, Disney, Fox, etc) force cable companies to bundle their offerings, so if you want something popular (say, Nickelodeon) you also end up with the second rate crap or worse (Nick at Nite, CMT, etc). It's very anti-consumer, but no politician wants to get on the bad side of media.
If each provider wants to package its own channels, then why can't people subscribe to, say, just the Turner package (TBS, TNT, TCM, CNN, HLN, Cartoon Network) or just the Disney package (ABC Family, Disney, Disney Junior, ESPN, ESPN2)?
Also, to pull us gently back in the direction of the topic, sports leagues are selling streaming apps.
And then proceed to make exclusive contracts with cable networks that result in games being blacked out on the streaming apps.
Building translators is good clean fun. -- T. Cheatham