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
I would say using the web"app" give a better user experience since you always have the latest version without the need for updates. Only if offline use is possible an app would be necesarry.

>>W3zzy+oS
There's no reason a website should be more up to date than an app. Could just as well be the other way around.

>>distan+IX
You need to update the app on your device. That's automated for a lot of users but not all. A web app should be maintained by the developers and should be updated to the latest stable version at all times. A web app shouldn't depend on your OS either so it would also run on OS'es that aren't supported anymore.

>>W3zzy+aX1
That's fair, but the number of people who don't have automatic app updates is clearly miniscule, not really relevant for this consideration.

I do grant that web is likely more up to date. But only because they can ship immediately, without the app store review process. Technically web could also be slower to release, nothing guarantees web freshness.

>>distan+E62
It's old stats and - coming from Android authority - the response group is literate when it comes to Android phones but from their 2020 survey 35% claimed to have auto updates of.

https://www.androidauthority.com/auto-update-apps-google-pla...

Then, on a worldwide scale, you can see that a lot of people are running unsupported Android versions.

https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/android

Yes, there is no guarantee they a web app is more secure or up to date but tge likelyhood is far greater as it's a developer's responsibility and not the end consumer.

>>W3zzy+jp3
To get any relevant number we'd have to check some popular app and see the versions their active users are running. That would give a good estimate of the number of people without auto updates.

Sounds like it would be higher than I expect, but I still claim it can not be more than fractions of a percent. Actively toggling a setting like is definitely esoteric behaviour even for a power user, never mind the large masses of smartphone users.

Unsupported Android version is not related to old app versions, Google Play will still work.

I do grant that web is more likely to be up to date than an app. Me claiming that it depends on the developer was just being pedantic: technically it depends on the developers and their release practices, but likely it's the web version that is more up to date.