Comment on Apple has REMOVED the ICEBlock app from the App Store due to “objectionable content.”
PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 day agoMost apps are a packaged browser that makes proprietary API calls over https. However there is nothing proprietary or valuable in the app itself, except possibly some key material for authentication of the app with the back-end.
Then depending on the user making various requests a middle-ware program will interact with the backend database and retrieve the results back to the user. The database is the valuable part and other then the specific query the user is making, nothing else is can be retrieved by the user. Normally the middle ware isn’t even downloadable either.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You’re just describing the MVVM design paradigm. That’s how everything that doesn’t benefit from locally hosted resources works. Host the database, shift processing to the user’s hardware (excepting hardware dependent tasks like LLMs or other compute heavy tasks). Websites, apps, even firmware can all use this – essentially anything that makes an API call in some way uses this basic structure. Even entirely local applications do it this way (albeit internally).
PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Yes. Hence my initial claim that apps are worthless, and shouldn’t be used if you can use a website instead. So the whole idea of Apple or Android being able to remove the “iceblock” app, shows that the app was ill-conceived to begin with. Or possibly it was even a honey-pot since apps do have much greater access to the parent device then a website.
Warl0k3@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
I’m not disagreeing at all that this should have been a website as a backup, but you yourself are making some really good points about how apps aren’t the same thing as websites and the benefits to using an app in this situation. Leveraging user hardware without the intermediate layer of a brower’s sandbox is good for performance and makes a site much more robust in the face of things like DDOS, and having locally-hosted resources with which the user can interact without requiring an active TCP connection (because for example: ICE has geoblocked connectivity at one of their “enforcement actions” - but you can still document what’s happening and the app will automatically-and-without-user-interaction upload what you’ve given it once connectivity is restored) is an incredibly important feature.
Offline websites, while potentially able to exhibit similar behavior, rely on extremely hacky workarounds and cached data to be able to do it - and an app is a much less volatile way to store that data than relying on your browser’s cache reintegration (which will often be dumped if you’re hit with bad a DHCP config).
I think your spirit is in the right place, but you’re missing enough of the technical nuance that it’s really undermining your ability to convincingly make your point. And again, I 100% agree that not having alternative access to this service is a critical loss.
PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 14 hours ago
Alright you’ve convinced me. The ability to store video’s within the app (for a non-technical user) is probably worth having an app. Of course a website could and should have the ability for a user to upload a video independent of an app, but I acknowledge that there are indeed some additional benefits that can only be realized with an app.
Of course I’ve never liked the wall-garden app store paradigm to begin with, and obviously if that wasn’t the only source of apps, then my entire point is moot. If any user could download the app from the digital ocean hosted iceblock website, and install it before going on scouting missions, then the app would be much more valuable, and the service more robust.