Farcaster Devs

If we made normal frames more like composer actions (i.e. Telegram-style mini-apps), what would you build that you can't with frames today?

The argument against is most people don't want use fully-featured apps in a squished window vs. in a separate app. When frames work well, it's because they are constrained with a clear call to action and meet users in the feed where they are spending time.

Also have never found the in-app browser in a crypto wallet to be a good UX (mostly because the websites don't seem well-optimized for mobile).

this, simplicity of frames make them easy to build in, since you don't need to optimize UI. (though the images one needs to nail :D )

Farcaster Product Studio @ https://dTech.vision 💜 in love with tech 🤓decentralization, fitness and oldschool rap 😎

Creator of @harmonybot @yoinker /bot-or-not | /blitkin | /orange-dao | IRL: Building spatial computing for construction @ Resolve YC W15

deep link into mini app (composer action) and we have them in feed imo. easy experiment vs engineering them right in and needing even better responsive design for small frame views

+1 I think frames have their place as simple apps. Render fast(ish), consistent, and easy to build.

intersend.io | via sequence. pimlico. poap. polygon. consensys. paxful. flipside crypto. dash. bridgewater. darpa. secdef. navy. dia. linktr.ee/alexanderchopan

one thought to ponder.

Why have the app load directly when you could just have a frame that links to the mini app and render that as starting screen. user presses button, then open app?

still is accessible from social feed but doesn't require all the engineering work right up front to have them as embedded as frames

limited as fuck for a real experience so much more one can do ala mini app. and yes most do suck but most tg apps aren’t build by the crews we have here. bring it on i say