[pullo]

Reading through the comments I am glad I am not the only one who finds over the top profanity upsetting. Yes , the author is free to make his/her point any way they want to. and No, not everyone who thinks that this profanity is undue is a prude. and I dont think it is fair to make a culture or age characterization based on a user's response. Extreme or sometimes, any profanity changes the tone of the article. that alone is a good reason to avoid over the top proclamations. IMO the author comes across as loud and noisy , and not strong and forceful. Just like a stand up comedian, who says 'fuck' for every joke.

As to the point in discussion: yes, it can be extremely annoying at times when companies prompt you to download their app. they have good reasons to do it too.

a) you spend good money to build an app, you want to drive users to the app instead of the site

b) many times , the app can be more functional than the site

c) one of the harder things for companies to do , is to retain user engagement. ex, if you have a firm that delivers stock quotes for users, you want to modify the users behavior to use your firm instead of a yahoo finance, or google. by making the user commit to download your app , in a way you get the users commitment to use your service.

d) you get a piece of users mental space , when you get their phone's screen space.

I personally think, having a small, disappearing toolbar to remind the user an app is available is the best way to go. Since every business with a website, also trying to get a mobile presence, a dual strategy of mobile web and app, seems to be the norm.

p.s I usually upvote the stories that I find interesting enough to comment. I choose not to do it this time.

edit:p.s

[click170]

I think it's interesting that you find the author's use of profanity to be strong and forceful. I found it to be comical and colorful, and extremely relatable.

They (companies) may have reasons, but their motivations are not parallel with my own.

a) It's very nice that you spent a lot of money on your app, but please don't pester me at every pageload to use said app. I'll choose my own medium, thank you kindly.

b) I understand that the app can be more functional than the site. This is often why I intentionally use the site instead of the app, to prevent sites like Facebook and LinkedIn from messing with my address book, as they have both demonstrated they will do at their convenience. This is unacceptable to me.

c) I completely understand retaining user engagement, but my point is that by pushing and shoving me towards your app when I have already assessed both and chose the website will simply drive me away from both. Good job.

d) This is why I don't want your app on my phone. Your app isn't important enough to me to deserve said mental space, and until I decide that it is, you don't deserve it.

I agree with you that a small toolbar would be sufficient, and I'm disappointed that more sites don't do this, but I would add that I think it's important to have an option tucked away in the user preferences so that I can disable said toolbar if I choose to use the website.

I'm up-voting your comment not because I think you're correct, but because you have interesting arguments which could foster good discussion. And I would do so regardless of your use of profanity.

[qu4z-2]

I would argue that most of these aren't "good" reasons.

a) "Throwing good money after bad", see also "Sunk Cost Fallacy"

b) If the functionality the user wants is "Read the fucking article in piece without having to deal with app stores and downloads and installing and finding my article again once I've got the app installed", then the only reason your site is not functional is 'cause you're pushing the app.

c) This one is probably an acceptable reason if you don't care about the people who are driven away from your site by the stupid pop-ups, and only about the small percentage who download your app and actually start using it instead of better sites that just give you the information you need. It may make business sense, but it's still sketchy.

d) Point D is actually the biggest issue for me: I have a limited quantity mental space, and I don't want sites I don't give a fuck about to take it up. No-one but you cares about your "brand". Be good at answering my questions and I'll prefer your results in my searches. Nag me to install an app, and I'll avoid you.

[ralfn]

>Reading through the comments I am glad I am not the only one who finds over the top profanity upsetting

It upsets you? Do we need to call a doctor? Millions of people are dying from war, but this upsets you? Some people hate others for the color of their skin, but this upsets you?

You do realize that morality only has value in reality, not in symbolism? That words are just characters that express either ideas or emotions? That to be upset about symbolism, means you dont understand the difference between being nice and acting nice? The differce between having empathy (for example by allowing somebody to express themselves) and being a sociopath?

I hope this concept upsets you.

[wnight]

Considering you're brushing off everything he said and trotting out tired justifications nobody asked for maybe you're just using any excuse - the profanity will do - to justify ignoring him.

Besides, those good reasons aren't.

a) You spent good money, but did you make it a good experience for the user?

b) But usually the app is trash compared to a web browser, and offers a far worse experience.

c) Retaining user engagement is hard when you pop up unrelated nag screens instead of making the user's task easier on your site than your competitors'.

d) I want a website, you want to implant a brain worm.

This is exactly why I would agree with the poster. Tons of entitled nonsense justifying making your users' experience worse - for them.

What sites are you affiliated with?

[pullo]

Wow, the hostility!

"trotting out tired justifications nobody asked for maybe you're just using any excuse"

I never asked you to respond to my comment, but you still did! I am part of the discussion , the same way you are. and to take a step back and think why things are the way they are, IMO is very good thing. billions of app downloads happen for a reason. I was not justifying the the practice. in fact i did say "I personally think, having a small, disappearing toolbar to remind the user an app is available is the best way to go"

there are enough apps to draw an example for every case discussed (good mobile app, bad thick client vice versa..)

a) linked in does b)fb, the app is way better than the mobile website c) I agreed with this. "yes, it can be extremely annoying at times when companies prompt you to download their app" d) this is jsut hyperbole and i have nothing to say to this.

I agreed with the poster too. I had trouble with his tone like many others. with app downloads not slowing down, it is important to understand why things are the way they are. this might also help to predict the winning strategy.

and it is not just big firms that prefer an app over a website. piggy backing on my previous example, a search for stocks brings up an entirely different list of services in the apple App Store than google. the mechanisms in play are different when it comes to mobile apps. As a coder, i prefer rich mobile websites to app's whenever possible. But, I am unsure about the trend ( as it seems many business are..) and that is a discussion I look forward to have.