4 ms·

Firefox 85 Is Here, but Mozilla Is Killing PWA Features

11 points by oedmarap 6y ago

bryanrasmussen 6y ago
>“There is currently no plan for PWA support in Firefox,” Townsend finally blurts out in response to one complaint. I wonder if he really blurted it out, or if he just stated it.
al2o3cr 6y ago
a key tenet of modern web apps I don't see how something can be "key" if it's only ever been available via a hidden preference.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Chrome and Edge classic never needed any hidden preference.
testesttest 6y ago
It makes me sad Mozilla is on the tail end of it's lifespan. Most of their funding comes from Google and their always playing catch up. Just look at their blog, it is nothing but politics. They have little focus on what their users want these days.
oarsinsync 6y ago
From another commentor[0] about a ~month ago when this came up then: > Progressive Web Apps are not a standard. Rather, it is the idea that a an application - presented through a web browser - can use additional features provided by browser _if_available_. The term is based on the concept of "Progressive Enhancement". > Everyone's pet feature - service workers, single site browsers, offline mode, push notifications, video codec support - gets branded "PWA" in their rant that such and such browser is not keeping up. However, writing your web application to require a feature that not all of the common browsers support means fundamentally your application is _not_ written for progressive enhancement. > The reality is that the term "Progressive Web Apps" was coined by Google as they started pushing harder for web apps to perform like native apps - but at the time they had a strategic initiative to have web apps instead of native apps (ChromeOS and the ChromeBooks, pre Android support). None of the other browser or OS platform vendors have that level of strategic investment in supporting web apps as a new 'native' format - especially considering the security model is usually different than that of the native platform. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25590897 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25590897
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Actually that is not true. Microsoft has their own WinJS framework for UWP, and shortly after PWAs were announced they jumped into it, replacing WinJS goals by PWAs on Windows. When using classical EDGE, it even offers UWP APIs, when the PWA is packaged as application. https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2018/02/06/welcoming-progressive-web-apps-edge-windows-10/ https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2018/02/06/welcoming-pro... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/progressive-web-app?view=aspnetcore-5.0&tabs=visual-studio https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/progress...
phillipseamore 6y ago
This really saddens me. I do understand that with Mozilla's increasingly limited resources and ever decreasing market share it is a hard for them to put those resources into supporting PWAs. However, this just brings us one step closer to being at the mercy of the walled-off gardens of app stores (Apple, Google, Microsoft). I would like to see more competition and diversity in adding more powerful APIs and features to browsers, so we can bypass those app stores. Strangely enough only Google seems to be working on it. Anyone worried about deplatforming of apps should focus on demanding PWA support from browsers and OS, especially Apple (who vigorously defend their walled garden). Requiring greater support for PWAs is a better short-term and long-term solution to deplatforming than any ideas about changing laws.
m-p-3 6y ago
Too bad, I was looking forward to this as it would have allowed me to get rid of some Electron-based apps :(
- pjmlp 6y ago
  https://simplabs.com/blog/2020/06/10/the-state-of-pwa-support-on-mobile-and-desktop-in-2020/ https://simplabs.com/blog/2020/06/10/the-state-of-pwa-suppor... Firefox is just making its existence harder by not supporting PWAs.

11 points by oedmarap 6y ago

>“There is currently no plan for PWA support in Firefox,” Townsend finally blurts out in response to one complaint. I wonder if he really blurted it out, or if he just stated it.

al2o3cr 6y ago

a key tenet of modern web apps I don't see how something can be "key" if it's only ever been available via a hidden preference.

pjmlp 6y ago
Chrome and Edge classic never needed any hidden preference.

testesttest 6y ago

It makes me sad Mozilla is on the tail end of it's lifespan. Most of their funding comes from Google and their always playing catch up. Just look at their blog, it is nothing but politics. They have little focus on what their users want these days.

oarsinsync 6y ago

From another commentor[0] about a ~month ago when this came up then: > Progressive Web Apps are not a standard. Rather, it is the idea that a an application - presented through a web browser - can use additional features provided by browser _if_available_. The term is based on the concept of "Progressive Enhancement". > Everyone's pet feature - service workers, single site browsers, offline mode, push notifications, video codec support - gets branded "PWA" in their rant that such and such browser is not keeping up. However, writing your web application to require a feature that not all of the common browsers support means fundamentally your application is _not_ written for progressive enhancement. > The reality is that the term "Progressive Web Apps" was coined by Google as they started pushing harder for web apps to perform like native apps - but at the time they had a strategic initiative to have web apps instead of native apps (ChromeOS and the ChromeBooks, pre Android support). None of the other browser or OS platform vendors have that level of strategic investment in supporting web apps as a new 'native' format - especially considering the security model is usually different than that of the native platform. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25590897 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25590897

pjmlp 6y ago
Actually that is not true. Microsoft has their own WinJS framework for UWP, and shortly after PWAs were announced they jumped into it, replacing WinJS goals by PWAs on Windows. When using classical EDGE, it even offers UWP APIs, when the PWA is packaged as application. https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2018/02/06/welcoming-progressive-web-apps-edge-windows-10/ https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2018/02/06/welcoming-pro... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/progressive-web-app?view=aspnetcore-5.0&tabs=visual-studio https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/progress...

phillipseamore 6y ago

This really saddens me. I do understand that with Mozilla's increasingly limited resources and ever decreasing market share it is a hard for them to put those resources into supporting PWAs. However, this just brings us one step closer to being at the mercy of the walled-off gardens of app stores (Apple, Google, Microsoft). I would like to see more competition and diversity in adding more powerful APIs and features to browsers, so we can bypass those app stores. Strangely enough only Google seems to be working on it. Anyone worried about deplatforming of apps should focus on demanding PWA support from browsers and OS, especially Apple (who vigorously defend their walled garden). Requiring greater support for PWAs is a better short-term and long-term solution to deplatforming than any ideas about changing laws.

m-p-3 6y ago

Too bad, I was looking forward to this as it would have allowed me to get rid of some Electron-based apps :(

pjmlp 6y ago
https://simplabs.com/blog/2020/06/10/the-state-of-pwa-support-on-mobile-and-desktop-in-2020/ https://simplabs.com/blog/2020/06/10/the-state-of-pwa-suppor... Firefox is just making its existence harder by not supporting PWAs.