Google and Apple have web browsers, and they can be used to build quite a bit. Presumably, Apple and Google browsers won't block a website. The Web is probably the most open and permission-less ecosystem there is, among the widely deployed ones. And it supports more and more features that let you replace native apps: Push Notifications (engagement)
Web Payments (monetization)
Contact Picker API (virality)
WebRTC (peer to peer data, files and video)
ServiceWorkers (caching and more)
Crypto (peer to peer encryption, auth)
PWAs (add to home screen)
Wordpress has been a smashing success for indie Web 1.0 (with tons of hosts and their one-click install). We also have Drupal, Joomla etc.But what about Web 2.0? There has to be a sort of "operating system" of reusable components the same way that MacOS did buttons and menus and windows. We have amazing hardware. But we rent our software from Zoom, Facebook, Telegram. Why? Because it's very hard to replicate everything we've come to expect from Facebook today, and not in 2004. Well, there are projects out there on the front lines doing it. Like Inrupt (née SoLiD) from Tim Berners-Lee. I met most of these guys and teams over the years. We started before everybody, in 2011, so we have had a bit of a head start. Nearly 10 years and over $700K spent from our revenues. I'm not proud of how long it took. But it has been a long slog. But yes, we want our platform to be the next Wordpress and liberate the Web from Feudalism to a free market: https://github.com/Qbix/Platform (Here is the larger vision, not realized yet: https://qbix.com/QBUX/whitepaper.html#Distributed-Operating-...) |
Similarly, despite the fact that the user's data can be hosted on their own computer (ex: name service), I find it hard to believe that any major site hosted with Qbux would not still have sign-in pages and de-anonymize their users. Doesn't this defeat the purpose of the on prem data / distributed approach?