zlacker

>>foxfir+(OP)
At AutoTempest we resisted making an app for years, because anything that a hypothetical app could do, we could do with the website. And in my opinion, when searching for cars, it's more convenient to be in your browser where you can easily open new tabs, bookmark results, etc.

And for years, it was our most requested feature, by far. We had instructions for how to pin the site to your home screen, and would explain to users how the website does everything an app can do. Still, constant requests for an app. Finally we relented and released one, and very quickly around half our mobile traffic moved to the app without us really trying to nudge people at all.

People just really like apps! I think it suits our mental model of different tools for different uses. We've also found that app users are much more engaged than website users, but of course much of that will be selection bias. Still, I can see how having your app on someone's home screen could provide a significant boost to retention, compared to a website they're liable to forget. For us now, that's the main benefit we see. Certainly don't use any additional data, though I won't argue that other companies don't.

>>tempes+xJ
At the last company I worked for we wanted to shut down our app to save expenses. The idea being that most people would just the website if we removed the app. It seems like you didn't gain anything by making an app, you just created more expenses and complexity.

>>o_m+VN
but did the idea pan out? did the users switch to the website or did you lose em?

>>oc1+HO
Too many people were "working" on the app (mainly non-developers, like marketing), so we got too much push back. I learned that a lot of gen-x love saying they are working on an app, even if they don't do design or programming. There was no reason for the company to have an app. This was for an industry that has too little supply with too high demand, so users would have no problem going to the website, especially with their strong brand.

Piece by piece all of the app was replaced with web views for the website, and keeping the native tab menu at the bottom. No money was saved, but at least they didn't have to update the native parts of the app as features stopped working because of legacy systems being shut down. They kept the native mobile devs and fired some of the web devs instead to save money. Even though the website now needed a browser version and a slightly modified app-friendly version. No biggie, but it complicated the testing, as the responsibility for most of the app was moved to the web teams.