Market decisions don’t do anything to prevent the tragedy of the commons - is the general answer. I have mixed opinions on this specific case, but I absolutely see how this could make things worse. If everyone starts releasing their own versions, and not offering the apps in the App Store anymore, than the people who prefer the walled garden (for which there are good reasons to want) then they lose that choice. It’s possible that doesn’t happen - and allowing people that don’t want the walled garden should also have that choice, but you can’t simply boil this complex question down to “free market”. It’s intellectually dishonest, at best.
Counter-example: I don't want crappy ElectronJS apps, but I don't have a choice. Discord/Slack don't have an open API that would allow a good third-party client.
If I don't like PWAs but WhatsApp stops supporting anything else, how can I use WhatsApp without the PWA?
There are definitely too many crappy Electron apps out there, but at least WhatsApp have been working on a native macOS/iPad OS app for more than a year now. Last time I tried the beta, it wasn't really usable yet, but at least there is hope.
Nice! I'm always happy when companies make real native apps (in that case Electron can be kept as a fallback) :-).
What would be great would be for them to have some kind of API to let people write their own clients. Maybe there are big downsides with that (Loss of control? Having to keep backward compatibility?) but I don't really see them.
Because markets sometimes fail so it pays to be sure if that would or wouldn't happen. How many Android customers choose an app based on its API? What is the quality of the Android store? Why would it work differently for an Apple Store?
