Help stop the spread of NIBS (Native is Better Syndrome)

<i>The logic here is simple. If you write an app with Objective-​​C/​CocoaTouch (does the same logic hold for JavaME (Android), C++ (various other platforms) and so on?) the user experience created is by that very fact better.</i><p>I believe that is the premise to his whole argument, and I find it disingenuous. That is, it's clear to me Gruber meant that a native app with an interface specialized for the particular device is more likely to be better than a web application <i>because</i> the web application cannot have a specialized interface for the device. He is not claiming that making an app native automatically makes it better.

A laundry list of technical reasons for/against native Apps doesn't matter. The market has spoken. Customers are buying Apps and making In App purchases.

But native IS better, at least considering:<p>- faster code (that allows you to implement something more complex or more demanding)<p>- better interfaces (allows you to have an app that is really "in the spirit" of the platform which does matter).<p>- significantly easier way for a customer to pay for the app.<p>Author's arguments for non-native and how I see them:<p>1) He can have the URL to different settings of the "web app." -- just please explain that to users that they need <i>that</i> and earn the money.<p>2) "already, and increasingly into the future, you’ll be able to develop with a single code base, and deploy to (ultimately) any platform" -- oh right, and everybody will use exactly the hardware you have, with the same resolution, same input mechanisms and the same controls.<p>3) "Distribution control: With 'native' apps, you must go through a third party, who owns the platform" -- this is the only significant argument, IMHO.<p>The third argument is really an important one. In some cases it can be a deciding one. But it alone can't be used as a proof that native apps aren't better in enough real cases, and that there's "a syndrome."

<i>Now, in order for this asser tion to be true, there must be not a single web app bet ter than a sin gle native iPhone app.</i><p>Right, and men aren't physically stronger than women, the United States isn't richer than Zimbabwe, and Mensa members aren't smarter than janitors.

Glaring error in the article: author thinks Android is JavaME.<p>Wrong.

His first point is incorrect, native iOS apps can be linked through custom URLs - <a href="http://www.handleopenurl.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.handleopenurl.com/</a>

so John Allsopp wrote this article as response John Gruber's article on how much better native apps are to web apps. Allsopp understands Gruber's argument to be as such: Native apps are better because they are written in native languages that use native APIs.<p>I read Gruber's article and Allsopp is so far off the mark it's not even funny.<p>As someone who write web apps for mobile devices and desktop applications, I know that every time we are prototyping a web app and we need more X, then more X is available by going native. want some examples?<p>speed (are you doing graphics? is there a network peak?) integration (can you tie other services to your devices?) computation load (video editing? on the web? for 5 simultaneous users? BANANAS!) accessibility (does your web app work offline? wah wah.) hardware (can you extend the usability physically?)<p>it's like people forget what "closer to the metal" means and have problems admitting to them selves that the web will never be cutting edge.<p>sure it's harder, and takes more time, but that's the price you have to weigh your decisions against. Is more X worth it?

"Founded in Australia in 2004, by long time web indus­try fig­ures Maxine Sherrin and John Allsopp, Web Directions con­fer­ences bring together the web industry’s lead­ing experts from around the world to edu­cate and inspire our attendees."<p>The article reminds me to "CDs and DVDs have a bright future" from the CDs and DVDs association or "the physical book is never going to die" from the print industry associations.

Comments on the thread are good -- here's the one that pointed me to the article in the first place: <a href="http://www.webdirections.org/blog/help-stop-the-spread-of-nibs-native-is-better-syndrome/comment-page-1/#comment-221668" rel="nofollow">http://www.webdirections.org/blog/help-stop-the-spread-of-ni...</a>

What are iPhone HTML5 games/applications making outside of the App Store / Android stores? If the answer includes "CPM" then native <i>is</i> better, and technical equivalence won't help.

Cons of native apps:<p>Everything listed in this article and the dozen more like it.<p>Pros of native apps:<p>I can get paid.<p>Native apps win.

this amounts to a bunch of whining over the fact that "at present, on various platforms, it’s true that the full capabilities of the platform are not exposed to web technology based applications, particularly via the browser"<p>will you have to write different code to make the best app for different platforms? yes, you most likely will. especially if you want to use platform-specific features. just get over it and get to work.