Hacker News Reader

Comment by 43920 | Hacker News Reader

The problem with early 2000's-style software delivery wasn't that you could choose which software to install, it was that there was no separation between programs, so that any random program you installed could add toolbars to your browser, steal all your passwords, etc. If iOS or Android made it easier to install apps outside the store, I highly doubt you'd see anywhere near the same level of problems, since everything is so isolated from each other.

View on HN

I would find it acceptable if side loading apps was allowed by default but sideloaded apps are blocked from the dangerous permissions like device admin and draw over screen. Apps that really do require this have to be checked by a maintainer or require the device to be in developer mode.

This way almost everyone is happy because most apps don't really require anything other than internet, camera and GPS which can be denied by the user.

Isn’t that what native web apps are for, where you Share > Home Screen and they store themselves in local storage in the browser cache?

Web apps can't use GPS like an app can

Im generally not a fan of web apps but this is incorrect.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Geolocation

can't see anywhere mentioned geofencing.

That also applies to the comment I replied to.

fair enough :D

The comment you replied to mentioned :

> use GPS like an app can

that means high resolution location, background updates, geofencing, etc ...

Geofencing is just conditionally acting depending on a location. All you need for it is a location.

If we want to show users permission dialogs and that let them make good decisions, there's a need for finer grain APIs to allow finer-grain permissions.

For example, for a smart home app asking 'precise location constantly even when not using the app' is sufficient to perform geofencing - but asking for a more limited 'know when you arrive home' is much more likely to get user approval.

The correct time to ask for the permission is when the user attempts to set up geofencing, at which point the phone OS should present a geofence picker that stores the fence in the OS and notified the app on entry/exit. The app itself has no need to know what the geofence coordinates and radius are, so by implementing the geofence at the OS level you can optionally as app author decline to care what its coordinates are — and thus have no need to request location access at all.

You also need to be able to run in the background

I should have been more specific but my app needs to record GPS with the screen off and with the app not focused which web apps can't do.

I don’t trust sideloaded apps with background access to both my location and the Internet, so it gives me no sadness to hear this.

I guess your app is Android only - I can't imagine this working well on any iOS device, regardless of being a native app.

Hm, I'm not sure how iOS apps do it. My app is a fitness app that records activities, the app has to remain running in the background so the recording isn't interrupted.

It's the background part im not sure about. You can e.g. start Runtastic on an iPhone and it won't close if you switch to Music or messages or whatever but I don't know for sure that it'll be allowed to run in the background for extended periods of time.

This. Google and Apple should make it easy for computer literate people to use something more advanced. Have the unwashed massed version sure, but then let us override it in a graceful manner instead of having to jump through hoops. Would lead to all kinds of free innovation etc. that they could then take over and profit from. Use the computer literate! WE WILL FIX IT FOR YOU

The problem with this is that waaaay too many people consider themselves computer-literate.

What? It's already possible for the "computer literate" to sideload apps on Android. That's literally what this whole thread is about?

And everyone says they are an above average driver.

> it was that there was no separation between programs, so that any random program you installed could add toolbars to your browser, steal all your passwords, etc.

And for Linux or Windows this is still true.

I believe it's not true for UWP Windows Store apps?

True, but nobody uses them and there are few examples of useful UWP programs. App-Store on macOS isn't a success story and rightly so.

macOS = useful; iOS = nope

Reply on news.ycombinator.com