Lite apps are exemplary and should be accessible through Android

News Summary:

  • Many lite apps are currently only available in certain countries or regions. Others only work on mid-range or low-end devices. Especially when the option to make your app available to everyone is as simple as checking a few boxes on the Google Play developer dashboard, there’s not much rhyme or reason. It’s not the most talked about or controversial, but the lite app is exemplary and should be available to everyone.

  • The “Lite” app has been known for years but became popular with Android Go, an initiative to create low-cost, low-end phones for people in low-income countries. This initiative aimed to develop a lightweight app that works well on phones with little RAM and CPU power. This could have been a slimmed-down benefit for anyone with an Android phone. Unfortunately, the developers decided to work around it.

There are even situations where people in developed countries with high-end cell phones can access simpler, less resource-intensive versions of apps. You may be in between. Some people even travel to areas with poor reception. Let’s talk about why.

These apps have led similar lists over the years. As technology becomes more powerful, every major company wants to make the most of it by making their apps do more, use more resources, and consume more data. I’m here. These apps use more permissions than ever before, increasing the data collected.

When asked what you think are the apps on Android that require the most resources, you will probably mention the apps on this list. Those who don’t mind clicking can guess the culprit’s Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube, Instagram, and Snapchat. As you know, these are the most popular mobile app with the highest number of downloads.

The bigger the battery and the more influential the hardware, the more apps benefit.

This is usually not a bad thing. After all, more resources and overhead mean better performance. The problem is that the net benefit of buying new hardware is often wiped out as developers keep adding extra things to exhaust those resources.

The result is frustrating. Even low-end devices now had more resources available than a phone a decade ago, but low-end phones still feel slow when they really shouldn’t.

Facebook Lite, on the other hand, is less than 5 MB in size, does not pre-load feeds, and by default, does not automatically play videos unless you are connected to Wi-Fi. It uses about 25% fewer permissions than the full Facebook app. Yes, you lose a few other features, and scrolling feeds is a little slower, but at least you know when Facebook Lite is using your data. Facebook Lite just runs less frequently and uses less data when you’re not using the app. The trade-off is longer battery life, less background usage, and fewer running background tasks. It would be nice if these benefits were available on all phones, not just low-end phones.

What are the main differences? Facebook vs. Facebook Lite Most lightweight apps are not inferior to full-fledged apps like Facebook. Usually, developers value the wow factor more than usability. After all, they are trying to lure you to their app and keep you there as long as possible, even if that means draining your battery.

Lite apps are not just about better resources. They are physically easier to use and require less manipulation to access important things. Following Facebook’s example, most people want a complete guide on changing their preferences within the regular Facebook app. For example, see how to disable automatic video playback in your news feed. Click on your profile picture, then Settings and PrivacyClick to see the list of settings. Then click on your profile picture again to media and contacts to finally get there. In other words, five levels of menus for changing one location.

Complexity, storage, and resource usage are significantly higher for full apps than for lite apps. On Facebook Lite? Click on your profile picture, then set the option for automatic video playback is on a fairly long list, but appears after only two interactions, reducing the user’s effort by 60%. Optimizing for low usage often means developing more streamlined apps, which benefits everyone.

The point is that the difference between a lite app and a full app is not tiny. Complexity, storage, and resource usage are all significantly higher, objectively and measurably, for full apps compared to lite apps.