GP used hyperbole but was not all wrong. The issue is that most native apps could very well have been web apps. I appreciate that on iOS adding a web app to homescreen is possible, albeit obscure and not many use that feature. I hate that Firefox never really supported PWA for some unfathomable reason.

Exactly. But GP deliberately said all, not most or many.

GPs comment is something that people in politics would called sensational. Extreme rhetoric is great for upvotes because it stirs emotions but it’s not rational.

I think it’s completely justifiable, since it illustrates the core of the idea. Also, HN users, unlike voters, can see through the framing. If anything, it’s a great way to spark a debate.

Do you mean something like https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:VideoCutTool ?

I mean something like CapCut that has access to the phone camera for capturing video.

Browsers have camera and local file access if the user grants permissions, what do you mean isn't possible with the browser?

I think that the name browser is basically just what is putting people in the wrong track of interpretation. They have been fully fledged VM sandboxes, which incidentally happen to also embed html and pdf interpreter natively.

The commenter says about most apps. The use case you mentioned requires computing resources. You can do the whole thing on browser too but it is not efficient way . But in the case of delivery apps, finance apps, you don't need much compute as can work exclusively with APIs .

Performance is likely not a reason anymore - and if it is, then it is the platform that imposes it (rust was runs fairly fast in a browser).

No GPs says there are no apps, which is not most.