One point is to not allow Apple to act as the gatekeeper to what applications can be implemented and used on iOS. A second is to not force implementors of a fun

One point is to not allow Apple to act as the gatekeeper to what applications can be implemented and used on iOS. A second is to not force implementors of a fundamentally cross-platform application where I care about the service rather than the technology stack to waste huge amounts of resources on reimplementing the app multiple times. A third is having the economic gains of the app go to the people who actually did the work, not to the middleman who has been resting on their laurels for 15 years, collecting their 30%. Native apps are good for Apple, web apps are bad for them. They've been using their full control of one of the world's most important computing platforms to cripple the web platform. If web apps really were that unappeling to users and developers, they wouldn't need to worry. Just stop the obstructions, and the market would decide in the favor of native apps. That they've been fighting this tooth and nail tells you that they have no confidence. And let's be clear, Apple never even needed to do the work themselves. They just needed to stop blocking competing browsers. Again, if notifications are so bad, surely the users would have staid in Apple's no-notification garden rather than ship to a browser with that feature. But again, they have no confidence in their users actually choosing Safari.