Only for certain things. A lot of web browsing is still pure information-consumption. The "native apps" are also turning into effective webapps, thanks to Electron and the like.
Even this site, which is interactive, doesn't require JS to use (it provides some enhancements, but the site is still quite usable without.)
[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/ar1qj1/_/egl52...
You can watch IO talks from Android, Chrome, Flutter where the presenter eventually throws some jabs at other competing stacks as if they aren't from the same employer.
Where I work, departments bill each other. Sometimes, two departments develop competing tools that are third department could make use of. Instead the third department use an off the shelf tool because the "license" for the internal tools is too expensive.
At these scales, companies are almost like states. A group of entities with shared services but otherwise working independently.
No it isn't. Competition with native apps is the completely wrong way to think of it. The web should complement native apps.
Drop those apostrophes - a web developer is a completely valid, skilled profession.
Web apps unequivocally compete with native apps, that is a fact. I prefer the Slack web client to the native version. I use Google Docs instead of Microsoft Word. I use Google Drive, iCloud, Google Photos etc. instead of my own harddrive.
To think that web apps don't compete with native apps is simply untrue.
Slack doesn't have a native version, does it? They have a desktop client, but that's just the web version wrapped inside Electron.
A web developer, doing what they know what to do on the web, is a legitimate developer.
A web "developer" that only knows webdev, doesn't have the skill or will to learn anything else but webdev, insists on splurging web crap as "apps" outside of the web—that's, to me, is not legitimate, and "dev" worthy.