5 ms·

> they didn't even want to allow 3rd-party apps They had a "sweet solution" for 3rd-party apps! *drumroll* webpages!

• emodendroket 4y ago
  Arguably could have saved the world a lot of man hours if that vision had prevailed.
  • illiarian 4y ago
    Except all the man-hours that would be spent on trying basic things like animations in lists work.
    • emodendroket 4y ago
      Well you’d just use some library that solves that problem instead of every app having to do it twice.
      • illiarian 4y ago
        There are no libraries that solve that in a generic easy-usable way. Because animations shift layout
        • DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
          CSS has lots of non-layout-shifting animation techniques - obviously there’s stuff like only changing colours, images, backgrounds, and effects like box-shadow, but things like animating the transform: property are also “layout safe” and very high performance because they’re applied after layout: https://web.dev/animations-guide/ https://web.dev/animations-guide/
      • raydev 4y ago
        There would be no web-based option in 2007, especially on a mobile device, that could guarantee 60fps out of the box like Apple's APIs did.
  • sbuk 4y ago
    Except developers wanted an API and native apps - careful what you wish for! All the argument over progressive web apps could have been avoided, along with Apple being on board.