News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on WebAssembly: Yes, but for What?. Parent comment

Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by msgodel on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @04:55AM (#44498288)
The problem with dedicated apps is that you often have to fight with the OS vendor for basic functionality in your app just to distribute it and these days you don't actually gain much with a dedicated app since modern sandboxing is so aggressive and web apis are relatively complete.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by meepmorp on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @09:26AM (#44499754)
IMO as an end user - aggressive sandboxing is a feature, not a bug
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by amelius on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @09:34AM (#44499825)
A browser is a sandbox.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by msgodel on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @10:01AM (#44500064)
Browsers already do this much better. If you don't trust something that's where it belongs, not as a local app.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by criddell on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @10:38AM (#44500409)
> you don’t actually gain much

Some of what you gain is pretty important though. For example, well written native apps integrate better with the platform’s accessibility features and they typically consume less power, storage, and memory.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:WebAssembly: Yes, but for What? by msgodel on Tuesday July 08, 2025 @11:40AM (#44501057)
I'd contest the storage point pretty strongly.

Well written web apps can be very accessible too and some companies do actually go out of their way to ensure this.

[ Parent | on HN ]