They are excluded by the fact that we have minimum wages. That provides a lower bar to the required value an employee creates. As we raise this lower bar, we exclude more and more people, generally in this lower intelligence bracket.
I have several family members that would love to be able to maintain employment but can't because they get pushed out by managers who think they can do better for the wage. And they probably can.
If my brother could keep a job for $4/hr it would give him the honor of work (which he wants/needs), and it would do society good to have more of these people around for us to interact with.
> There is no argument worth addressing. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist, he has no credibility, research, or study in this domain.
Credentials don't make an argument correct. Lack of credentials doesn't make an argument wrong. It's an intellectually dishonest argument to declare something unworthy because you don't like it. If you don't want to participate, then don't, pooping in the thread isn't helpful.
> For a SW person, heck, there is always something that must be mastered, and pronto. Unless a SW person can kick back and write COBOL all day, there is much more to learn and apply to problem solutions. SW is fundamentally more demanding.
The main difference are that the constraints of EE are a lot clearer than software. From the laws of physics to the lists of available parts and processes to pick from. Then manufacturability and cost.
With software, your instruction set and available system resources/hardware APIs are your only real constraints. Everything else is an abstraction which you can question and rebuild.
Turns out the "correct" way to do things fall out more readily when you have more constraints, particular because we humans are worse at constructing constraints and abstractions than the universe. You get a lot more rope to hang yourself with to use a metaphor.
There has been growing violence and intolerance. Ignoring the issues on your own side to blame the other is part of the polarization. Such positions are symptoms of what is coming.
I'm, unfortunately, familiar with hospitals. It's not as bad as you claim here, that anecdote seems wildly wrong.
What does happen is the hospital bills you $50 for what amounts to a bottle of Tylenol. The insurance provider says no, we only pay $8 for Tylenol, and the hospital relents and charges $8.
If you don't have insurance to call them on their inflated pricing you end up with the rather obscene bill. As an individual you have precious little pull other than, will you discount if I pay it all now? Which they usually will. This depends on having that ability, and 30% off doesn't make up for a 400%+ markup.
But hospitals have to pull a profit despite dealing with tons of regulations and non-paying patients they have to treat anyway. So as a result they bleed who they can, it's a mess.
> You're subtly conflating "native app" vs "app" by using slightly different terminology. For the purposes of being exact, I'll assume you mean "app" - regardless if it's a hybrid with a webview or pure native apis.
It's not a conflation, it's intentional because it is what the parent poster claimed. I agree that there is more to it.
> My local car wash now has an app and my wife promptly installed it, because of some vague rewards tracking.
Your wife's anecdote doesn't match industry trends
I can also match with anecdotes of users intentionally avoiding the app in favor of the mobile site for linked in, Reddit, etc, despite the constant intentionally of crippling the mobile web experience simply because the app is so invasive. Can I have access to your contacts for no good reason? Btw, we also snoop your clipboard. Basically, I want to take over your phone so you can see a message...
App store conversion rates are low. If you do get it installed many users only use it once. Most people just won't pay for apps, various reasons but the race to the bottom and feeding off user data and eyeballs has pretty much had a full cycle now.
If you are a company trying to get off the ground with a software product these are tough trends to fight.
> This doesn't explain why PWAs are still a rarity on Android though. You'd think that the ability to target both desktop (web) and Android (web/PWA) would've attracted more developer interest.
I can only guess, PWAs are like the hidden nugget of gold that devs poop on because it doesn't fit their preferred tools or experience or something.
The other reason that comes to mind is it is much easier to sneak in dark patterns of data collection and spying with native. Web is expected to degrade gracefully when denied permissions.
> PWAs/web was immediately discarded as an option because we didn't believe we could deliver the level of UX excellence we're targeting.
Seems odd. Web interfaces are very very good for pretty much any information display. They have their limits too. But unless you have a specific requirement that actually hits those limits this particular reason seems hollow to me.
> Nor did we believe that PWAs would be any easier to develop and maintain than two native apps.
This one is, frankly, deluded. Both app routes have significantly more upkeep than web. API churn and app store processes come first to mind. Not to mention three code bases vs one that could also be your website, which you need anyway.
> We're still considering React, but I feel like we're inevitability going to end up building a full native experience.
> Generally speaking, I feel that PWAs and the web have a long way to go in terms of tooling
Wow, I doubt you have any real experience with react native tooling, which is infinitely worse that web tooling. And even tries ( poorly) to replicate web tooling.
Seriously, a platform that comes with full debugging suite in "developer tools" in the browser has no equal in any systems I've built before. How many runtimes can you name that come bundled with full dev and inspection tools? Nicely separated out layout, code, and network. You can sit down to any dev, QA, or customer system and have the full inspection suite at your finger tips.
There seems to be a heavy pro native bias. Don't get me wrong, there are reasons to pick native, but I see very few people laying out good analysis behind their choices. Oh-well, competitive advantages for me.
> The majority of traffic is mobile and apps still rule that platform due to both a superior experience and better interfaces.
There is no evidence of your second claim in the link. Only that mobile, as a platform, is more popular than desktop. Nothing about "native apps" being the preferred way to interact with the platform. This is an oft proffered point with no solid backing. Rather the opposite. Users rarely, if ever, install apps, but they go to websites.
I'm very senior these days. Most of my job appears to be unsticking people. But even I get stuck plenty, and while I can quickly unstick most problems the other devs face I can't solve all of them.
Getting stuck still happens. The real difference between what I face now and early in my career is that I have developed a sense for when to plow through, when someone else might know the answer, and when to route around.
Plowing through usually means it's not worth interrupting someone else. Or when the business itself, or other teams are in the way.
Asking questions because you don't know requires humility and it's best to have it even as a senior. Just ask, and do it sooner rather than later. You will learn faster than banging your head on the wall - there will be plenty of other problems to do that for.
Some problems aren't worth the pain. I could solve this, but should I? It saves the business lots of money to occasionally route around the problem.
The web browser is the least closed most open distribution for software services ever. Anyone anywhere can publish and billions can access it without numerous gate keepers in the way.
It isn't the only solution out there. You can publish to the various app stores and abide by all their rules and regulations and upkeep requirements.
You can be confined to Linux desktop.
You can still get to the desktop via your own distribution. You can also side load Android and avoid the store.
Some developers and teams don't need the crutches. Type systems are also an encumbrance that comes with a non zero amount of issues. They slow development velocity down for a theoretical trade-off boon.
I've seen a type system take down a production system where a simple coercion would have functioned just fine. Literally the only thing wrong was the type defined and the code refused to run.
1) That's a totally different number... Apples and oranges. Conversation in this case is getting an icon on the users phone as opposed to sale. Mobile stores have really really low conversion rates.
2) Assumes facts not in evidence. This is not a universal opinion.
3) Still has the gate keepers, yet another platform to write for, etc etc. Lower friction might help vs PWAs, that's something at least.
4) Assumes facts not in evidence.
5) Showing your ignorance here.
Front end has been stable for a while. Old stuff still works if you prefer it. Lots and lots of sites still do.
The mobile shill is real... There are reasons to pick mobile over something else. But just shilling the tool and showing your tech bigotry isn't a good way to pick solutions. I'm out.
Ahh yes, the infamous Facebook failure. Anyone can write a bad app. That's not necessarily a technology failure. But it's easier to blame the tech than to admit they did something badly.
Everyone wants web apps to help sell hardware, right up until your app store grows into a money maker. Then the incentives are different.
Regardless, today's mobile systems are much better, web browsers are much better. It is much easier to write a web app that is functionally identical to native than it used to be.
Modern reality. Conversation rates for PWAs are higher than mobile apps because there is less friction in the installation process. Load times are often lower, which can be an overall superior experience. If I'm a small shop, trying to get on someone's mobile device, these items matter a lot. Also development costs are much lower when you can share code for your mobile app and your website.
The value add of being in the mobile stores is pretty minimal. Discovery is poor, search is poor, then there is constant churn in policies, submission process, APIs, development environments/languages, fees, etc. In contrast to this, the browsers hold very very high backwards compatibility. Churn will be in the support libraries or framework you adopt and not fundamental to the platform.
I'm curious, how does adding notifications effect security negatively exactly? Performance?
All this functionality is already available for apps including the security model. Nothing new is happening here. App security is an issue, but it's one big tech is already dumping resources into solving.
But, frankly, browsers have some of the best management features for culling analytics, telemetry, watching the traffic and requests being made. It's many times easier for me to see what a web app is doing on the network, and write something to stop it, as compared to a native app.
I have several family members that would love to be able to maintain employment but can't because they get pushed out by managers who think they can do better for the wage. And they probably can.
If my brother could keep a job for $4/hr it would give him the honor of work (which he wants/needs), and it would do society good to have more of these people around for us to interact with.
> There is no argument worth addressing. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist, he has no credibility, research, or study in this domain.
Credentials don't make an argument correct. Lack of credentials doesn't make an argument wrong. It's an intellectually dishonest argument to declare something unworthy because you don't like it. If you don't want to participate, then don't, pooping in the thread isn't helpful.