Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want you to use it

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by JohnFen on Sunday June 19, 2022 @10:07AM (#31799497)

A lot of people I know will simply not use a service if the only way to do so is through an app, due to the dumpster fire that is security and privacy in apps. I understand that such people are a small percentage of the population, but I really do sometimes wonder if companies are even aware that they have a pool of potential customers that they've excluded from even trying their product out.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by manigandham on Sunday June 19, 2022 @10:42AM (#31799845)

They are, but they're also aware of the effort vs return on dealing with a "small percentage of the population" as you admit. Sometimes its worth it, often it isn't.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by yellowapple on Sunday June 19, 2022 @04:10PM (#31802957)

Except that it literally takes more effort to exclude them than it does to not do so. Bolt is the prime example here: they already have a working web app, and they go out of their way to block people from using it instead of the smartphone app, seemingly only in locales where they believe most people have smartphones. Why? What does that accomplish?

It'd be understandable if the smartphone apps came first and the developers decided a web app wasn't worth it, but a lot of these smartphone-app-only developers use PhoneGap and other tools wherein one already has to write a web app.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by manigandham on Sunday June 19, 2022 @10:41PM (#31805748)

This thread is about web vs apps in general. I don't know why Bolt does what they do, but generally it's a lot of effort to maintain both interfaces for mobile users, often with entirely different teams, frameworks, language stacks, deployment models and more just to end up in the same place.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by yellowapple on Sunday June 19, 2022 @11:42PM (#31806068)

Like I said: it's understandable when it's actually a native mobile app. It's far less understandable when it's something like Uber or Facebook or Reddit that's very obviously just an HTML/CSS/JS site in a "native app" wrapper.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by manigandham on Monday June 20, 2022 @08:46AM (#31809688)

Uber and Facebook are not HTML apps in a wrapper.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by yellowapple on Monday June 20, 2022 @04:43PM (#31815676)

Ah, right, forgot that Facebook invented React Native... in which case my point still stands, since one of the very selling points of React Native is to use the same code for both "native" and web.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bolt has a cool web interface and they really don't want ... by skinnymuch on Sunday June 19, 2022 @01:23PM (#31801349)

There’s probably more people who won’t use something on their phone if there isn’t an app for it. If it’s for a bigger activity. Not that either population is that big.

[ Parent | on HN ]