[rnovak]

My definition of a native app excludes applications that are mere wrappers for 90% of the application code. If the majority of an application is written in JS/HTML/CSS, which I have no problem with, then don't call it native, because it's not.

Why would you use a tool if you're not going to make extensive use of it? It may not say that it has to be run exclusively through webview, but if you're only putting 2% of the application through it, why wouldn't you just configure your own web view control?

A native application means the entire application executes on barebones hardware. Web Browers are native, since they don't actually comprise of the web-pages that they run, the web browser is limited to the actual native code that interprets, executes, and renders the HTML/JS/CSS.

[callum85]

I think it's fair to say there is more than one definition of 'native'. When discussed in a performance context, it usually means "compiled not interpreted", as you suggest. But in a different context, it just means an app that you have in your Applications folder, as opposed to something you access by visiting a URL in your web browser. Whether you like it or not, this latter definition is what a lot of people mean when they use the word native. It's certainly how I read the word on the MacGap site - I never thought for a moment that they are claiming to somehow 'compile' HTML into machine code. So I don't think it's false advertising.

[pdpi]

How do you feel about things like EVE Online then? IIRC, the game client is mostly python, with the performance-critical bits written in C++ (or is it C? I forget).

[rnovak]

Edit: In the context that they're using the word to mean "An Application Available in their Applications/ Folder," I really have no problem with that (as Pointed out in a response to this comment).