[fpig]

What is good about web sites trying to force users to use their app instead? That itself one of the worst dark patterns out there.

Edit: If my comment looks confusing, the comment I replied to has been edited. "compelling first class experience" is really a more vague term for "web sites being able to push their app on users"

[dclusin]

While I agree this is a regrettable practice, the social media sites in question do the same thing too. The argument that Facebook is acting in users best interest by preventing websites from spamming users to use an app is incredibly self serving and not really all that believable.

I too wish it would go away, but both sites not having equal access the users in a similar way is anti competitive imo. Especially for businesses who increasingly need to participate on these platforms due to the fact that so many of their customers use their services.

[fpig]

I agree that this practice should go away - if you believe that, then the goal should be to eliminate this shady practice entirely, not try to make it more prevalent like you were suggesting before editing your comment.

[dclusin]

Agreed, sorry for editing after you replied.

[bogwog]

> What is good about web sites trying to force users to use their app instead?

If you're asking from the point of view of the social media site, the "good" thing is that a native app can steal much more personal information than a website.

[Xavdidtheshadow]

Also (at least on iOS), content blockers don't work in the in-app browsers that FB uses. It's coded differently than a SafariWebView (which _does_ get the content blockers). Being an ad company, it makes sense that they don't want users doing that.