@LuoSays: I disagree. Let me challenge each point: > Most features can be achieved on the web. Yes, they can be, but it often involves unnecessary steps, severely degrading the user experience. For example, in a camera filter app, would users really need to take photos with the native camera, open a website, upload photos, wait for processing, and then download them back, all while paying the same price? Let me give another…

X AI KOLs Timeline News

Summary

This is a debate about whether native app development is still necessary, discussing the pros and cons of web apps in terms of user experience, cost, and distribution.

I disagree. Let me challenge each point: > Most features can be achieved on the web. Yes, they can be, but it often involves unnecessary detours, severely degrading the user experience. For example, in a camera filter app, would users really need to take photos with the native camera, open a website, upload photos, wait for processing, and then download them back, all while paying the same price? Another example: a fitness or sports app, how can a web page obtain real-time heart rate, step count, or GPS trajectory? These are not isolated cases; I could list many more. > It can bypass Apple's commission. Have you considered that to save that 15%, the additional costs you incur for customer acquisition, trust-building, distribution, and the loss in user psychological expectations might not be worth it? > It allows for instant updates. I guess what you mean is 'hot updates,' without waiting for app store review. This is the biggest advantage of web development, and I can't argue against it. But I believe that what truly slows down the pace is often not the review itself, but product decisions, design, testing, and operations. > The difficulty of making money is the same for apps and web; if you can't earn with web, don't expect apps to make money. The value of a product is independent of the form it takes. Some needs naturally lend themselves to the web (tools, low frequency, search-driven), while others require a foundation of 'high-frequency usage + strong presence' to be viable. For the latter, if you only do web, it might fail validation from the start. It's not that the need doesn't exist, but that you used the wrong medium. Let's have a rational discussion, Brother Wei, please don't mind.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 08/22/26, 05:29 PM

I disagree. Let me counter each point:

Most functions can be realized on web pages

Yes, they can, but it often involves roundabout methods that significantly compromise user experience.

For example, a camera filter app—would users really take a photo with the native camera, open a website, upload the image, wait for processing, download it, and then pay the same price?

Another example: a fitness or sports app—how would a web page access real-time heart rate, step count, or GPS tracking?

This isn’t just an isolated case; I could list many more.

It can bypass Apple’s commission

Have you considered whether saving that 15% is worth the extra costs you’d incur in user acquisition, trust building, distribution, and the loss of user expectations?

It can try updates

I think you’re referring to “hot updates,” where you don’t need to wait for app store reviews. That’s indeed the biggest advantage of web apps, and I can’t dispute that. However, I believe what truly slows down progress is usually not the review process itself, but rather product decision-making, design, testing, and operations.

Making money through apps and web pages is equally difficult. If web pages can’t earn money, don’t expect apps to.

The value of a product isn’t tied to its format. Some needs naturally lend themselves to web platforms (tools, low-frequency use, search-driven interactions), while others rely on high-frequency engagement and strong presence to succeed. If you try to address the latter only via web, you might fail from the start—not because the need doesn’t exist, but because you’re using the wrong medium.

This is just a rational discussion—no offense intended, Weige.

Weigi (@imwsl90): I think these days, there’s really no need to build apps.

Most functions can be realized on web pages, and you can bypass Apple’s commission while also trying updates.

Some friends might say apps make more money, but I’m quite skeptical of that.

Making money through apps and web pages is equally difficult. If web pages can’t earn money, don’t expect apps to.

Whatever your idea is, start by building a web version to validate it.

Similar Articles

@imwsl90: I really think there's no need to make apps these days. Most functions can be implemented with web pages, and you can also bypass Apple's commission and try updates. Some friends might say apps are more profitable, but I'm skeptical about that. The difficulty of making money with apps and web pages is the same; if you can't make money with web pages, don't expect to make money with apps. What are your thoughts, go and make a web...

X AI KOLs Following

The tweet argues that there's no need to develop apps now because web pages can handle most functions and bypass Apple's commission, suggesting to start with web verification.

@CycleDecoded: This tool just launched, and paid typesetting software is sweating. No need to download a client—just open a browser and work. It's an open-source project hand-crafted by Chinese developer nicejade, already with 3.7k stars on GitHub. Simply put, with just a browser, whether you're writing articles, drawing charts, or previewing multimedia, this all-in-one has you covered.

X AI KOLs Timeline

Chinese developer nicejade open-sourced an online typesetting editor. No installation required; write articles, draw charts, and create multimedia content directly in the browser. It has already received 3.7k stars.

@XAMTO_AI: 35 hidden gem websites you should bookmark now—don't say I didn't warn you. Seriously, the internet is full of underrated tools. Most people still use expensive and clunky software simply because they don't know there are better alternatives. Today I've rounded up 35 for you, covering everything from bypassing paywalls to AI photo editing, from automation workflows to free assets—all genuinely useful.

X AI KOLs Timeline

The author compiled 35 practical website recommendations covering categories such as bypassing paywalls, AI photo editing, automation workflows, and free assets, helping users replace expensive or clunky software and boost productivity.

@vista8: Open source, open source! Tired of AI-heavy web design and monotonous layouts? Qiao Bangzhu tested and compared 8 mainstream design Skills, absorbed the strengths of each, and open-sourced his own design Skill: qiaomu-design. Features: 1. Style Fitting Room: Generate four design demos from a single sentence, preview and confirm before development.

X AI KOLs Timeline

Qiao Bangzhu open-sourced the design Skill qiaomu-design, offering features like Style Fitting Room, anti-AI-style design, self-evolution mechanism, and references from mature websites, supporting GLM or Claude models.

@Cander_zhu: This is another article worth reading carefully: "How modern browsers work". After reading it, I had two strong feelings: 1. Browsers are actually the most undervalued "operating system" of modern times. 2. If front-end/Agent developers still treat the browser as a black box, they will only fall behind. From a product and...

X AI KOLs Timeline

A tweet summarizing reflections on the article "How modern browsers work", emphasizing the value of the browser as a modern operating system, and providing 5 key insights for front-end and Agent developers, including multi-process architecture, JS engine compilation pipeline, performance optimization, etc.