Why does it seem that the Web Client still holds a large share abroad and the domestic Web Client basically stops changing?

The web client of many domestic websites (including major websites) basically stays the same as several years ago, referring to the major domestic manufacturers.

Of course, this is just to say the observed proportions, not all.

I hope everyone will express their opinions.

1

Both stop changing, but one is a unified set of responsive apps, or the client is a browser, and the other is a web page that can be used, and concentrate on the client.
Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon are all pioneers in setting up web pages, and the client has a bunch of BUG experiences.

2

There has always been an idea, from the Web, desktop applications, tablets, mobile phones, all platforms to a single set of code to achieve. In recent years, responsive layout, HTML5, CSS3, and scripting engines have brought about great changes. There are also several similar platforms such as Cordova, but so far no successful products have been seen to do so.

Nowadays it is popular to use native implementations for all platforms. It's not easy to make a good app. If the website also needs to do it, these are two workloads. As the landlord observed, for some products with more mobile portal traffic and higher benefits, simply not providing the Web is the best option.

Earlier, when writing the web, you also had to consider what the browser did not support scripting, so all form submissions supported the original POST / GET, and then added AJAX processing to improve the experience. VUE is now used to make single-page applications, who cares about heterogeneous scripts that do not support scripting.

For large factories, despite the abundant resources, this input-output ratio has to be considered. Therefore, the idle version of the web version of the fish, Taobao version of the iPad, in the end have become a joke. In addition, the APP can steal some privacy, evoke mutual protection, open screen ads, adjust the camera and microphone, pass a picture and set a place, it is much more convenient, and it is almost worth it. The other should be weakened, it should be cut off.

3

Because the mobile phone share is very high both at home and abroad, much higher than the PC.

In fact, many urban wage earners don't actually have a PC. After all, the machine is too large, and the price of books is not low. It is not as convenient as a mobile phone and you can take it with you. Therefore, the possession of the mobile phone is the battle for survival of the major manufacturers, as long as the PC side to keep it.

The PC side is changing, that is, some service websites for functionality.

4

One of the most important reasons why the web is bad is search and share.

1 Unless you want to actively block search engines at the level of WeChat or Taobao, most APPs are afraid to refuse crawlers, so you must have a web client.

2 If an APP user wants to share an interesting content in the APP and go out, how to share without a web link?

Based on the above two reasons, the web must be done. For manufacturers, the benefit may really be to divert APP.

5

Many foreign websites will also recommend you to use the App, but it will not let you see it without the App as you know (I have never figured out the courage of a website that eats by content), indicating that foreign companies also think Apps are better than the Web in terms of experience and collecting user data. As for why there are so many people in the country that completely resist the Web, it is estimated that there is statistical data to support it. You can lose no money by giving up this group of users completely, plus the lack of supervision.